this post was submitted on 23 Feb 2025
4 points (100.0% liked)

math

134 readers
12 users here now

founded 2 years ago
4
If something halves every 4 years how much does new supply shrink per day if it is progressively smaller? (lemm.ee)
submitted 16 hours ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
3 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

I have an interest in bitcoin and am trying to understand the supply shrinkage effect on price, Im trying to figure out if somethings new supply halves every 4 years how much does new supply shrink per day, if it is getting progressively smaller?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

This is a great, simple explanation.

It's with adding that the "rewards" is question do not directly affect current supply or value. They affect how much miners are awarded when they mine new blocks. Theoretically, at some point the reward becomes so small, so fractional, that mining itself isn't cost effective. It may not stop miners, but let's look at a hypothetical:

  • bitcoin is hovering around $100,000 per coin.
  • the reward after the 2024 halving to mine a block is 3.125
  • at the next halving, in 2028, the reward will be 1.5625
  • it uses approximately 6,400,000 KWh of electricity to power the computers to mine a single block.
  • There is a maximum number of BTC that can possibly exist, set by design: 21M. Over 19M have been mined, leaving about 1.5M left to be mined.
  • approximal 18 BTC are mined per hour, globally

So, right now, if you live in the W. Europe, it will cost you 1.5x the current price of BTC to mine. If you own a giant solar farm and electricity is cheap, it'd still be a better deal to sell the electricity on the market and buy your BTC. However, if you live in the Middle East, it's quite profitable: you could turn $1 of electricity into $200 of BTC.

In 2008, in the US bitcoin will halve again, and a miner will received only 1.5625 coins for a block. If nothing else changes - the price of electricity, the value of BTC - it'll cost $3 in electricity to mine $1-worth of BTC.

I think there are 5 halvings left, so in 2044 the reward for mining a block will be 0.1 BTC. At that point, either electricity will have to be extremely cheap or BTC extremely expensive to make mining profitable.

There are so many variables:

  • Electricity could become really cheap, like post-scarcity cheap. This is not a fantasy scenario; all it'd really require is for us to put solar arrays in space.
  • Electricity could become vastly more expensive. We're going to run out of coal on the planet before 2044 and if we're not completely off of it by then, that'll spike prices. This is something that will happen - running out of coal.
  • Quantum computers become consumer products. Mining coins suddenly becomes really fast and far more energy efficient. All 21M BTC would be mined before we hit all 5 halvings.

My guess is that the third thing will happen before we hit all of the halvings or mine all the coins - at the current rate, and with the halving schedule, it'll take until the mid-2100's before all the blocks are mined. I suspect quantum processors will be more common long before then. Heck, the advent of consumer-grade quantum processors might render BTC valueless; I don't thing the blockchain cryptography is quantum resistant, is it? Which would b make it hackable by quantum computers; at the very least, it'd present a huge threat to the public ledger, and prices could plummet.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 hours ago

Mining coins suddenly becomes really fast and far more energy efficient. All 21M BTC would be mined before we hit all 5 halvings.

This doesn't happen, because Bitcoin has difficulty adjustments. When computing power rises enough, the difficulty adjusts up to maintain an average block time of 10 minutes. If quantum computing scaled it up so drastically, then the difficulty would rise just as drastically until it was back to an average of 10 minutes.

I don’t thing the blockchain cryptography is quantum resistant, is it?

Not really, no, but that's more of an issue with the public-private key systems we use to verify ownership of wallets than it is about mining, per se. It would make sense for there to be a hard fork to a quantum-resistant algorithm to make sure the actual state of blocks remain small, but that's a different issue. The primary change would need to be a switch to quantum-resistant cryptography for public-private key pairs to ensure nobody can steal anyone else's assets using a quantum computer.

Theoretically, at some point the reward becomes so small, so fractional, that mining itself isn’t cost effective.

Remember fees. People pay to have their transactions included. The goal for Bitcoin is to have these fees pay the miners instead of the block reward, which is effectively just a temporary subsidy.

As of now, fees don't usually make up more than a few percentage points of the block reward, so it's looking unlikely that they will ever actually maintain the same, or higher rate than the current subsidy.

If you wanted a blockchain that was closer to being sustainable in terms of fee revenue funding monetary policy, you'd want Ethereum with its burn mechanics.