[buzzin_]

No, total dollar amount of electricity expenses spent on mining does not depend on the price of electricity.

Today, miners are getting paid about $1.5 billion per month. If they like money, they will keep adding new miners and run them until they all in total spend less than, but close to that amount.

So, $1.5 billion per month of fresh money needed to offset this pressure on Bitcoin price.

There goes the argument that Bitcoin is a good "store of value."

[dmichulke]

> total dollar amount of electricity expenses spent on mining does not depend on the price of electricity

I agree. As far as I understood the issue was not with the money spent on energy but with the energy spent, no?

> So, $1.5 billion per month of fresh money needed to offset this pressure on Bitcoin price.

If I understand correctly, you're saying that BTC inflation is a problem and I believe this is true, both in the economic and ecological sense.

But there was no way in 2009 to foresee the optimal inflation rate (halving every 4 years isn't too bad actually) and modifying it now defeats the founding principles of BTC, so it'd be a big no no. So it was kind of a trade off and will continue to be, every 4 years a bit less though unless we hit hyperbitcoinization.

From an economic point of view the investment into bitcoin is only ever relative to other assets and most of them inflate far more (relative to their mcap).