Further discussions and policy implications are provided in the relevant sections of this study. The asymmetric causality shows causal effects from the positive shock of Bitcoin demand, negative shocks of Ripple and Ethereum demands to positive shocks of environmental degradation. The Fourier-augmented Toda-Yamamoto test results show causal effects running from Bitcoin and Ripple to environmental degradation, whereas no causal effect runs from Ethereum to environmental degradation. The Toda-Yamamoto and bootstrap-augmented Toda-Yamamoto test results reveal Bitcoin and Ethereum (ETH) excluding Ripple (XRP) have causal effects on environmental degradation. Here, this study examines the nexus between cryptocurrencies and environmental degradation by employing standard and asymmetric causality methods. However, the environmental effects of cryptocurrency demand have been ignored. Besides, the possible effect of BTC and other cryptocurrencies on either financial markets or transactions has been widely discussed. When Bitcoin (BTC), the first pioneering cryptocurrency was released in 2009, it was considered as an apolitical currency.
A consumer decision-making environment largely devoid of energy information and incentives suggests a need for targeted energy efficiency programs and policies in capturing these benefits. This corresponds to a potential savings of approximately 120 TWh/year or $18 billion/year globally by 2020.
Savings of more than 75 % can be achieved via premium efficiency components applied at the time of manufacture or via retrofit, while improving reliability and performance (nearly a doubling of performance per unit of energy). Although they will represent only 10 % of the installed base of gaming platforms in 2020, relatively high unit energy consumption and high hours of use will result in gaming computers being responsible for 40 % of gaming energy use. Based on projected changes in the installed base, we estimate that consumption will more than double by the year 2020 if the current rate of equipment sales is unabated and efficiencies are not improved.
#Best gaming desktops 2014 Pc#
While gaming PCs represent only 2.5 % of the global installed PC equipment base, our initial scoping estimate suggests that gaming PCs consumed 75 TWh/year ($10 billion) of electricity globally in 2012 or approximately 20 % of total PC, notebook, and console energy usage. The more intensive user segments could easily consume double this central estimate. Based on actual measurements of five gaming PCs with progressively more efficient component configurations, we estimate the typical gaming computer (including display) to use approximately 1400 kWh/year, which is equivalent to the energy use of ten game consoles, six standard PCs, or three refrigerators. However, underlying the importance of empirical data, we find that measured peak power requirements are considerably lower than nameplate for most components tested, and by about 50 % for complete systems.
Measured performance of displays varies by 11.5-fold. Large performance-normalized variations in nameplate power ratings for gaming computer components available on today’s market indicate significant potential for energy savings: central processing units vary by 4.3-fold, graphics processing units 5.8-fold, power supply units 1.3-fold, motherboards 5.0-fold, and random access memory (RAM) 139.2-fold. Gaming is the most energy-intensive use of personal computers, and the high-performance “racecar” systems built expressly for gaming are the fastest growing type of gaming platform. One billion people around the world engage in some form of digital gaming.
0 kommentar(er)
