Bitcoin Forum

Hello everybody!

The world of digital assets stems from the act of crypto mining wherein ‘miners’ solve complex mathematical problems to add blocks of transactional information to the blockchain. They are rewarded with bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies as an incentive for maintaining the network. However, to do all this, miners consume significant amounts of energy that lead to environmental concerns.

As more people take interest in the world of cryptocurrency and how it works, the demand for crypto mining increases as well.
What type of impact does this have on the environment in terms of energy consumption? Let’s find out.

How does crypto mining work?

To understand the effect of cryptocurrency on the environment, you should first know how crypto mining works. Here’s a step by step guide on how the mining process works:

Step 1 - Verifying transactions using nodes

There are two ways to mine cryptocurrency: using your own hardware or software or through a cloud mining service. Miners first verify the transactions using nodes to make sure they are legitimate, then they move on to the next step.

Step 2- Creating a new block of data

The next step is when blocks are added to the blockchain. When the transactions have been verified, these are added into a block of data where they can no longer be altered or changed.

Step 3 - Additional information and hashes are added

Hashing or using mathematical processes takes place next. When the new blocks of data have been added, hashes and other information are included. To generate the hashes that will serve as each block’s ‘fingerprint’, miners verify or solve mathematical problems to complete the process.

Step 4 - Verification

Once the new hash is verified by all members of the network through a consensus, the block is then successfully added to the blockchain. The miner who was able to solve the problem first will then receive a set amount of cryptocurrency as a reward.

Why does crypto mining require so much energy?

The process of mining demands large energy consumption, reaching up to 120 Terawatt hours every year, which is equivalent to around 1% of the world’s energy consumption.

Experts have compared this level of energy consumption to the likes of small countries like Greece, Argentina and Chile who use fewer amounts of power annually. But why exactly does crypto mining require so much energy?

Cryptocurrency blockchains are public and decentralised so the upkeep of the entire network is left in the hands of its community that consists of computers all over the world. Part of this community are miners who play a huge role in ensuring that the network is secured and immutable. To do this, they use high-powered mining equipment that consumes a lot of energy.

The environmental impact of cryptocurrencies

With the mainstream adoption of cryptocurrency, it’s important to understand the impact of crypto mining on the environment. One of the biggest effects it has on nature is carbon emissions. Due to crypto or bitcoin mining, the amount of carbon emissions on the planet has increased by 40 million tons just over the course of two years.

E-waste is also another result of crypto mining. As crypto becomes more in-demand, miners will have to upgrade their hardware to make the mining process more effective. Over time, the outdated machines are turned into e-waste that is considered useless and non-recyclable.

Overall, e-waste and carbon emissions both affect climate change. This means that they contribute to the breaking of the ozone layer that results in global warming and other environmental concerns.

The future between cryptocurrencies and the environment

The next step to take for most cryptocurrencies is to go with more sustainable options. If miners use renewable energy instead of fossil fuels, this could turn the situation around for the better.

The carbon footprint of crypto mining would decrease dramatically if it weren’t for the ‘proof of work’ process since it requires all miners in the network to solve cryptographic problems, which means expending a ton of energy.

In fact, there are now cryptocurrencies that don't require mining at all. Some of the more sustainable options like Cardano, Ethereum and Bitgreen use ‘proof of stake’ to validate their transactions. In the proof of stake process, only validators that have ‘staked’ their coins or have already processed transactions can verify transactions and be incentivised.

There are other steps being taken to mine cryptocurrency quickly and use less energy while doing so. For example, the government in El Salvador has recently adopted Bitcoin as their legal currency on June 9, 2021. These are mined using the energy from nearby active volcanoes to promote a more sustainable process.

When other digital assets follow in these footsteps, it will lead the world of crypto to a more eco-friendly future wherein cryptocurrencies and mother nature can co-exist peacefully.

Thanks for reading. If you have some thoughts, feel free to leave a comment.


Cheers,
Karl


Source: Bitcasino blog

So far, while there is a lot of speculation that cryptocurrencies are bad for the environment, but there is no evidence to show the damage caused by crypto mining. in fact it is not harmful, because if you compare the mining of gold then you need to reflect on the statement that mining crypto is much more effective and efficient, than mining gold, coal, natural gas, etc.

just because it uses a waste of electricity that requires high power? okay, let's see how much it costs Bitcoin mining and electricity costs? I think a lot of speculation is exaggerated so that those who are interested in mining Bitcoin think again.

You should have prepared better if you were already going to try to explain to someone how much energy Bitcoin mining actually consumes - so according to research by the Cambridge Center for Alternative Finance (https://hbr.org/2021/05/how-much-energy-does-bitcoin-actually-consume) it is 110 Terawatt Hours per year - which is again about 0.55% of global electricity production.

Furthermore, it is twice less than what only one hydroelectric plant in China produces (Yunnan dams 250 TWH), of which as much as 95 TWH was wasted.
If you want the right information read it here - > Debunking the "Bitcoin is an environmental disaster" argument (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5325350.msg56613804#msg56613804) posted by @fillippone.



Ethereum (https://ethereum.org/en/developers/docs/consensus-mechanisms/pow/) is POW, and the rest I won't even comment on, this is a board for Bitcoin Discussion.


The biggest nonsense you wrote in this thread, - because it's about the possibility that the energy from the volcano may be used for mining (emphasis on maybe), and not that El Salvador is using some green Bitcoin that they produce themselves using volcanoes.

I just added on such a trhead a document by Bitcoin Mining Council (whom you may disagree with, but numbers are numbers), regarding the fact the China Ban heavily impacted mining industry.
Read it here:
Re: Debunking the "Bitcoin is an environmental disaster" argument. (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5325350.msg57459563#msg57459563)

there is no reason to say bitcoin is bad for the environment, only some people say bitcoin is bad for the environment, bitcoin has long been founded by satoshi nagatomo, why only now there are so many debates like that, if bitcoin really damages the environment why not prevent it in the first place..

something important that is always overlooked when people talk about energy consumption and environment is that the amount of energy consumed is not important at all, WHAT that energy is being used FOR is important.

when we have a very useful decentralized currency that is working 24/7 for the whole world, then the amount of energy that it takes to secure this network is negligible no matter how much it is.
at the same time when we have thousands of useless altcoins (that is the cryptocurrencies) that have no purpose and are only pumped and dumped then even a single electron being spent for them is wasteful.

to answer the main question here, yes altcoins are bad for environment.

something that has developed is definitely a lot of people who are against it, when bitcoin first appeared and the price of bitcoin was still very cheap, no one banned bitcoin, no one said bitcoin was a scam, bitcoin is bad for the environment, I wonder why only now many comments negative about bitcoin, could this be a game of people who want to take a chance..

Is crypto bad for the environment, my answer is definitely no, those who say crypto is bad for the environment, I believe people who say that, people who hate bitcoin, and governments who can't control bitcoin,

I'm beholding a completely unethical attitude or you've probably been poisoned by the over-enthusiastic thought that Bitcoin is that needed. The amount of energy it takes is not negligible. It may not consume much right now, but if you notice it, it increases analogously with the price. If we ever reach a time in the future when 1 BTC = $1M, mining will be much worse than before.

That is just your way of seeing this. There are people who find Bitcoin completely useless and thus, their opinion about mining will be justifiably against your statements. There are also people who believe in altcoins and they surely not find them useless.

"People" in general are bad for the environment.  The more people who mine, the more electricity that has to be produced, and yes mining does take a lot of energy to mine, anyone can base it off the total power of XXX and YYY, but the only TRUE way to see how much it takes it for everyone to STOP mining completely and observe the change.  This will never happen so there is no real way to test it.

Many have mentioned for bitcoin to goto proof of stake as well.  I am not a crypto fanatic, wish I was and wish I hadn't lost accounts that I "tested" with back in the day, but oh well.  Obviously crypto is everywhere and when I wanted to get back in it, found out that "normal" individuals with "advanced" hardware really can't do it successfully.  I ran my three graphics cards recently 2070super for about a week and my electric bill was over $70 more and definitely didn't make that up...

Anyway back to a suggestion. 

I have been reading things here and there (definitely nowhere near a "noob" status yet, still a baby).  I see coins that went proof of stake/etc... so I have a suggestion..maybe someone with knowledge can tear it up so I could learn some more.

The point of decentralization is to have as many "nodes" as possible running to keep it decentralized. If everyone stopped hosting nodes, the whole system would crash (from my understanding)... so with that...why not make bitcoin mining all about decentralization/running nodes/verification.  Ehereum setting it at 32 is crazy for people, to mee it should be incentivized to run a full node...

1) lower the Proof of Work to a simple calculation that allows a basic CPU to do the work (no more advanced fpga/graphics cards/etc)...(lowering the electricity draw/electronic waste SIGNIFICANTLY)
2) not sure how, but I'm sure a list of all nodes is somehow on the network, but iterate through the node addresses and use something like 60% of them to send the "WORK" to.  The Node on top of the list gets the "coins" for the original work, the rest validated that it was correct, the next 60% is iterated down one by one with that 60% so that everyone does the work/validation/has a chance to get the coins the longer the node stays active.

Example

Transaction 1

List of Nodes
Node1
Node2
Node3
Node........1,000,000


So it starts at Node1 and grabs the next 600,000 nodes (60% of the current 1,000,000).  Node1 Does the simple PoW, Node2-600,000 does the same work, and validates that Node1 is correct/adds to network, node1 gets coins!!!! YAY thanks Node1 for helping keep Bitcoin Decentralized....

Transaction 2
Node2 through Node 600,001 get sent the work, Node 2 does the simple calculation, Node3-600,0001 validates its correct/adds to network/node 2 gets the coins!!!!.... and it just repeats....

The key is that they must be running a full node.  The node list will be based off an IP address so its not like running 10,000 nodes on a single IP will benefit anyone. 

______
Something else to think about is the "private key lottery".... if bitcoin can keep a blockchain on transactions, why can't it keep a blockchain of "password hashes" that are part of the validation process in order to complete the transaction process.....

public key address: bcrypt/scrypt/etc or some long hashing function that incorporates the private key/users made up password

This way, as technology evolves, its not just how fast can you go through the range 2^1-2^255, its can you provide the additional potential of the unknown.

____

anyway... food for thought

Only 1 problem with that -- considering that miners get paid for processing blocks, changing the algo to make it 'CPU friendly' would mean that gazillions more miners would be cheaply brought online and difficulty would still skyrocket as a way to keep to the existing rewards schedule. If the algo is changed to keep diff low the network could easily be swamped with miners vying to get the finder reward or more likely and worse yet, bad actors easily DOSing the pools/nodes or applying 51% attacks..

The existing POW format prevents all of that by making it exceeding difficult & expensive to attack the network..

As per the 2016 data of carbon emissions worldwide, the total value of carbon emission was 35753 million tons. I am sure it has increased in recent years but I am unable to find most current data from a reliable source.

So 40 million tons of emission accounted for roughly 0.11% of the global carbon emission. Organized industries emit way more carbon than bitcoin mining. So I think we should put this argument to rest until bitcoin mining accounts for at least 1% of global carbon emission.

I think that this isn't the case for decentralization. A better formulation would be: The point of decentralization is to keep the hashrate distributed. It doesn't really matter if the network has 100,000 or 100 nodes. The ones who broadcast the blocks are the ones we want distributed (and obviously many).

It already incentives you to run a full node. You gain privacy and a strong proof of verification of the events witnessed since 2009.

Well, the typical pos is definitely not a good alternative to PoW because it encourages centralization and typically requires huge amount of money from participants to have a full say on a network. Such "consensus mechanism" actually violate Satoshi Bitcoin or Blockchain principles/standards in many ways.
What we need is efficient PoW... Besides, most/all consensus mechanism are actually PoW disguised as so called or meaningless pos.
They should probably ask participants to stake other things like reputation and/or ID if they really mean well... At least most/all participants can afford that. It mustn't be money, unaffordable amount for that matter.

Proof of Work will be hard to replace in my opinion. It's the real consensus mechanism. Others sound like things coined by children.

do you mean cryptocurrency between bad for the environment and not...

https://www.dw.com/en/five-of-the-worlds-biggest-environmental-problems/a-35915705

The human activity itself is the cause of environmental damage. Bitcoin mining causes environmental damage is an old FUD that we must forget.

You have to take in consideration that crypto mining is a decentralized, and not every miner is using the same energy and he or she is using clean or carbon dioxide emitting energy, so collectively sure you can count that the energy consumption is equal to 1%  of the world and make a big deal out of it, and say that it causes environmental problems, but i can think of far more unnecessary systems and things that uses more energy and causes more harm to the environment in the process, do we need to think about alternatives ?, sure, but i personally think that this whole thing is just a way to spread negativity about crypto.

To answer the thread title, Yes!

Everything we do is bad for the environment, we have upset the equilibrium.

Why are so many people obsessed with Bitcoins energy consumption? Has anyone
voiced concerns about  how much energy is consumed by minting FIAT coins, printing
paper notes and the distribution and storage? no

---

El Salvador are not mining Bitcoin yet, they plan to offer energy as affordable as possible
to attract mining activity. Green renewable energy will be produced  from Geothermal activity
linked to a Volcano.

---

Here is a thread in the press secrion of the forum posted by @acquafredda which counters
any negativity around energy consumption

2021-07-02 CNBC - Bitcoin mining consumed 56% green energy in June quarter (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5347865.0)

Yawn.  The FUD and nonsense that gets bandied around and repeated is nauseating. 

The answer to the thread is: no.

Some questions should be answered before one can ask that question:
1. Is the environment constantly changing?
2. What are the optimal environment conditions for earth?  For humans?  For other life?
3. What is the cost of the tradeoffs involved?  e.g. between fiat's total environmental impact; between the people who are using fiat to steal from everyone every year etc.

Just an open ended question like the title is worthless unless the goal is to spam with nonsense to help advertise your casino.

It’s all FUD by people who work for governments or organisations that are scared of bitcoin making them obsolete.
They did it in the 90’s about the internet & about electricity in the 1900’s. It’s a load of rubbish. Think how much energy the world banking industry uses or how much energy is used in war. It’s pathetic, just buy bitcoin & ignore it.

Anything that involves the burning of fossil fuels and the pollution of the air is bad for the environment. And cryptocurrrencies aren't the prime offenders in this as far as I know. We have corporations to blame for not giving renewable resources a chance to shine because oil and non-renewable resources rake in much bigger stacks of money for them than the healthier and much more environmental-friendly variants. This is bound to change in the future however as more and more people are enticed to take in cheaper and renewable alternatives, which these companies will be forced to adopt or adapt into.

Very well said mate! If we do look back in time then those are just bullshit things for government and other people involved on making out some issues whenever they do saw
that it would be totally opposing or would really be putting them on disadvantage or would really impose some threat but look at we now? Its been a decade where Bitcoin
is already existing and we have seen countless of issues been thrown and lots of criticism had been endured and still we are standing from this very moment.
Environmental issues? Its just a lame excuse and just to make it look bad.

People say that cryptocurrency is harmful to the environment, because miners use a lot of electricity to mine, but mining other projects also uses a lot of electricity, such as oil, such as gold. But people are not optimistic about Bitcoin. They will say some negative news. When people don't know Bitcoin, there is no news that Bitcoin is harmful to the environment. Because if Bitcoin is influential, it will be controversial,

if someone says crypto is bad for the environment, we should not care about those who say all that, because we know, there are still many big companies that cause the environment to be unclean, but why is it supported by the government, from here we know, whatever the government can't control, there must be a lot of negative posts, we should just ignore it..

How is it exactly baad for the environment though? I mean there's no physical thing involved in cryptocurrency, it's just a consumer of electricity, even though it consumes a lot, that doesn't mean that it's going to destroy the environment, the key word is consumer meaning that cryptocurrencies are just like households, they consume energy but they don't produce any. Remember that what we should be focusing on is the producers of electricity because they are the reason for the destruction of the environment.

Just like what happened a few months ago when the tweet about it cause some big issues in the market and the reason for it to crash just because of that non-sense topic where it does not prove any point. Looks like they already planned that thing before tweeting those words because it is impossible that the reason for the market to fell last few months was because of the bad to environment thing. Therefore, whenever they tweet those negative words and link them to cryptocurrency, we should take heed and don't listen to them because they are not really hearing themselves every time they talked, it's just simply non-sense at all.

I heard there is some news saying that BTC mining pollutes the environment because it is quite expensive to mine electric energy and to generate this electric energy they use the way to create pollution rate. very high environment.

Does mining produce this electricity? I don't think so, they are just consumers like any of us. It's the source that we should be worrying about because they are the ones that is causing the pollution because they're the one that burns the fossil fuels and oils for electricity.

Yup, I really hate this situation because when the popular man tweet on his page about environment issue of BTC that was just a bullshit. They use this issue just for their own profit and kill the price. But as the penny investor, we follow what whales said meanwhile they told the statement with full politic agenda behind of this.

it's been proven, following the instructions of tweet tweets makes us deviate from the initial trading strategy and try to test our luck because the information is raw and not ready for consumption. no matter how raw the information is, just for the sake of making a profit we forget trading discipline.


Everything that has a major influence on economic growth will be used as a political game so as to trigger two parties who are pro and contra. both are designed to balance and behind them institutions play behind the scenes. Yes, they are high-level economists who run businesses in murky waters. found the pearl in the garbage heap.

Cryptocurrency is an environmentally friendly technology. At this time bitcoin mining, although altcoin mining will not pollute the environment because all the tools used to mine cryptocurrencies do not emit smoke and do not emit hazardous waste from mining results.

And why did everyone decide that nature is subject to negative effects from human activities, including from cryptocurrencies? Yes, there are changes in nature, but why does everyone think that this is from the influence of humans and cryptocurrencies? Or maybe there is simply a change in the position of the earth in relation to the sun and from this the climate changes? Of course, making harmful emissions, deforestation and other factors is not a very good thing, but where is the evidence that all this is affecting climate change? And there is no evidence and there will not be, since it is simply beneficial for many countries to pursue such a policy in order to perform various manipulations. Yes, cryptocurrency mining consumes electricity, but how exactly this negatively affects nature, I do not understand. I believe that cryptocurrency is not harmful to the environment, and such statements are deception and manipulation of people's minds.

Crypto can be harmful to the environment by using a large amount of electricity to mine but we also know a few harmful factors are inevitable in industries, to compensate for the environment, the government also regularly collects high taxes and they also rebuild tree reserves, this exchange is probably not too much damage, the environment will still be very fully produced and built up every year. Besides, with the technological factor being studied by scientific institutes, the elimination of emissions and bad factors of mining will soon take measures.

The digitalization feature of cryptocurrency itself has pros and cons towards the environment. Due to its existential requirement of electricity, resources like fossils are being used up for energy conversion, while it also saves natural resources that are being used to produce paper money and such. I think that more than it defects  or degrade environmental condition, cryptocurrency is eliminating a huge environmental problem.

We spend %0.1 of our energy on bitcoin --- but for that expenditure we get financial freedom for humanity. It's a small price to pay.

I don't like that much of the environmental narrative as of late focuses on the amount of energy used to secure the bitcoin network without emphasizing what a truly amazing thing it is for humankind that the energy goes toward.

Bitcoin mining destroys the environment is one of the many myths circulating among the public and government, but many people are reluctant to believe that bitcoin mining is much more environmentally friendly than natural resource mining in general. I found an interesting resource here to read (https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Myths#Bitcoin_mining_is_a_waste_of_energy_and_harmful_for_ecology).

So far I am confused by people's belief about bitcoin mining being dangerous or having a bad impact on the environment. Although we know there is a lot of mining of other natural resources including gold, other metals have a direct impact on the environment but many people don't really care. Why does bitcoin and cryptocurrency mining get so much attention from the government or from other circles that some government like China have to ban and close mining farm? Is it possible to say that the government is the enemy of bitcoin so far judging by the way they really care about bitcoin mining which is said to be damaging to the environment?

I think bitcoin is.not pollution.for environmental.pollution that causes.pollution everywhere, so this is.very unlikely.to happen, because what can.pollute.the environment.itself is.the traffic jam pollution.that is.engulfing big cities, therefore.we don't need to worry about bitcoin because it will not cause.environmental.pollution

there is no pollution caused by bitcoin, it's only possible that bitcoin mining requires greater electrical energy so that the electrical energy used increases. but I don't think it will be a problem, because currently a lot of electrical energy is being developed that comes from natural uses, such as wind power or hydro power.

Do you suggest that we should dump Bitcoin and switch to Proof-of-stake altcoins,only because some FUDsters say that Bitcoin is bad for the environment?Really?Are you kidding me?
Breeding and farting are also bad for the environment,because the people are producing CO2 and toxic gas and letting it go into the atmosphere. ;D Should be stop breeding and farting?
Just don't listen to the environmental fundamentalists and you will be fine. ;D

I've read about several articles that say that Bitcoin is bad for the environment and a lot of statements and speculations stating that Bitcoin is bad for the environment. but from what I entered into the world of cryptocarensi, especially to Bitcoin, I have not found facts or for example places or pictures about the environmental impact that is damaged by crypto mining.
maybe what is certain is basically because mining crypto requires a lot of available electricity supply and from there it is possible and the negative impact that occurs when mining crypto so that a few weeks or a few months ago Iran once hated Bitcoin because mining consumes a sufficient amount of electricity supply a lot but it's only temporary and if I'm not mistaken the ban will only last until September.
and maybe for pollution I think the impact is very little but for electricity supply I think crypto mining takes up quite a lot of supply so maybe that is based on crypto mining can damage the environment

impact on the environment maybe because basically crypto mining has a bad impact on electricity supply because basically crypto mining is associated with very large electricity and very large electricity supplies.
so that if this mining continues to be carried out continuously it will have an impact on the electricity supply which continues to decrease because we know that the supply of coal in this world is only limited and if it is taken it is continuously used for electricity and electricity is used to add crypto, I think it will increase. the longer it will be less and maybe we will become a crisis in the electricity supply maybe that is one of the reasons that basically crypto mining has an impact on the environment

I don't think so. There are several levels of pollution caused by Bitcoin. The computer network that mines bitcoin around the world currently emits about 60 million tonnes of CO2 or the equivalent of what Greece needs, according to Bank of America. It is known, bitcoin transactions consume as much as 32 tera watts of energy every year. According to the Bitcoin Energy Consumption Index published by Digiconomist, that much energy is enough for the energy consumption of 3 million US households.

However, as technology develops, the level of pollution will decrease if every miner uses environmentally friendly fuels. Currently, many miners have started to switch and are already thinking about the impact on their environment, not only concerned with profit.

Most times the people who says bitcoin is bad for the environment say it out of ignorance, most of them have little or no understanding about bitcoin and possibly just take any Damn bad news there hear about bitcoin. I can proudly say bitcoin adds value to the environment, check out in some countries where there are lack of job opportunities, crypto trading and investing in bitcoin serves as a self employment to their citizens thereby reducing the rate of poverty.

People say bitcoin is bad for the environment because they do not see how bitcoin work. Maybe the government sees it as bad for the environment because the popularity of bitcoin increases yearly, so they think that bitcoin can be their next treat. The government can not fully control bitcoin so they do not like it and warn people not to stay close to bitcoin. But when people see that bitcoin can be a new opportunity to make money, they will search for more info and use bitcoin. Yes, crypto trading and investing in bitcoin gives people a chance to be the new jobs and make money.

Here we go again with the BS being spread by anti-bitcoin crowd, no bitcoin isn't bad for the environment, in any aspect of bitcoin, almost everything is just a consumer of electricity and not a producer of electricity. What we have to worry much more are the producers of this pollutants rather than the consumer because in a same sense we are also to blame as individuals since we also consume electricity.

Bitcoin alone cannot be considered bad for the environment hence the way it is being earned or mined is the one thatv causes damage to the environment. The massive use of fossil fuel so that people can mine bitcoin is very damaging to the environment that's why many are already finding a new source of renewable energy. It has become one of Elon Musk's alibi on why he suddenly chose to remove bitcoin as a mode of payment in Tesla and came back after he said he find a new way of mining bitcoin. Let us not be selfish about this matter, let us protect still nature or else it will pay us back in the future.

People really are believing that bitcoin is bad for the enviroment but they didn't realize that there are many things which x3 worse that ruins the environment. This is a non-stop topic because many people are still worrying that bitcoin might destroy our environment but the reality is, it's just a small portion that affects the environment compare to other businesses that produces toxic wastes. I really hate this fud that was created recently and even known people like Elon believe this without putting research on it.

Actually I'm not surprised that there will always be people looking for Bitcoin flaws, but they forget to do their research properly. Bitcoin is bad
for environment with big electricity usage, but they forget that there are many more severe environmental damage out there for decades,
without any decisive action from the government. Nothing in this world is perfect in my opinion, as well as Bitcoin which has its drawbacks.
But we have to be fair in judging something, meaning don't just look at the flaws, but compare that to the positives that Bitcoin can provide.

It's been brought up by Elon Musk about mining and renewable energy. He's an 'advocate' of greener energy and that's why it's been an issue lately.

They're putting the point of their fingers to bitcoin but they do not see those other businesses that are bringing more waste and not eco-friendly with their operations. As someone who's got much influence, he's misled a lot of his followers.

https://s3.cointelegraph.com/uploads/2021-05/60bda2e4-58da-4269-bf85-9cb180fe37b7.png

I got this on Cointelegraph (https://cointelegraph.com/news/banking-system-consumes-two-times-more-energy-than-bitcoin-research)
If you do a serial based on destructive things, the banking system and the gold and diamond industries are more destructive than bitcoin. Even Xbox game studies are consuming much more Energy than Bitcoin mining. There is no headache in wasting energy on these non-productive activities, but all the problems are just with bitcoin mining! where bitcoin is the ultimate solution of prevention of banking corruption.

I agree with your opinion, why is bitcoin always the scapegoat, even though there are many other companies that cause very severe environmental damage, such as the Lapindo company in my country, which emits toxic waste, almost several villages drowned because of the mud that came out of the company them, I strongly disagree if anyone says bitcoin is damaging the environment..

Elon Musk also has a big fat agenda why he is following the green energy movement. He definitely gets subsidies from all kinds of organizations that belong the green energy movement. When he bought Bitcoin he probably got into trouble, maybe even into contractual trouble. I have no idea how many subsidies he gets, but I can imagine it's quite a high amount given the businesses he has and the vision he has for them.

Because the governments of various countries are improving the environment and reducing carbon emissions, the media took this opportunity to say that mining is not good for the environment. Although it is indeed global warming now, there are also many green energy mining, so I think it is wrong to think that Bitcoin mining is harmful to the environment.

Gentle reminder:
you can find this document linked, together with many others, in my thread:
Debunking the "Bitcoin is an environmental disaster" argument (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5325350)

Cryptocurrencies only have a small impact on the environment and the benefits of cryptocurrencies outweigh the harms.
Based on economic reference, cryptocurrencies create savings in deposit time, security of DAPPs, deposits. It's better than the traditional way banks operate.
Cryptocurrencies promote various fields such as currency, employment, data governance, entertainment. Cryptocurrency is really being applied to life and is being recognized as a legal asset.

I never heard of environmental problems related to crypto , until Elon Musk highlighted this.
I think it was not a realistic analysis as waste produce by factories and other things are way more than it is being produced by minning crypto currency. Crypto is not at all bad for the environment. It's just a fud being spread by Elon musk.

If the image is of annual energy consumption of the total banking system of the world, then it doesn't look good for Bitcoin because it's used by 1-2% of the population, whereas bank accounts are used by at least 50% of the population. That being said, I'm not sure this number for the banking system actually accounts for everything. For example, there are TONS of bank branches in every big city, and does this number take into account all the electricity bills for keeping these buildings heated and full of light? If not, it's not a very fair comparison.
We have to be conscious of energy waste, but it's also important to focus or moving to alternative energy sources rather than on reducing energy consumption.

Cryptocurrency definitely has a negative impact on the environment. Actually, a lot of industries really have that effect since most devices, hardware, and software are really consuming a lot of energy that comes from fossil fuels which are non-renewable. Crypto isn't exempted from possessing that kind of influence on the environment. Before, a lot of mining sites are really consuming great power to supply their operations. Hence, many mining sites have closed down because of the minimization of electricity consumption.

Right now, more mining sites are currently using and starting to switch to sustainable energy for lesser cost and for lesser damage to the environment as well. Sustainability is one of the advocacies of most mining operations to avoid an additional carbon footprint that could damage the planet's ozone layer. Eco-friendly cryptocurrency operations are advocated and a lot of countries that comprised of the most percentage of mining are now encouraged to use renewable sources of energy instead. I agree with your example about El Salvador using geothermal energy which later on converted to become electrical energy that could power their mining sites. These kinds of steps make it more possible to go green and togetherly exist with the environment harmonically.

Due to the high power consumption of Bitcoin mining, many media have caught this and began to report the news that Bitcoin mining wastes energy. But is Bitcoin really a waste of energy?
In our daily life, there are many places where energy is wasted:

• When we are out, we will not turn off all the electrical appliances in the house.
• We often forget to take out the banknotes in our pockets to wash clothes, which leads to the consumption of banknotes (because the banknotes are made of trees)
• The carbon dioxide we emit when we drive to and from get off work every day

These are pollution to the environment
Now Bitcoin has green energy mining
Bitcoin is easy to carry and not easy to wear[/list]

cryptocurrencies don't harm the environment like you said. With the existence of cryptocurrencies some of them have reduced their actions in the environment, some of their time is just to monitor the future growth of the market. On the other hand, they have indirectly increased the economic growth in the environment they live in.

I can say those dudes that is saying that bitcoin is bad to environment never come with bitcoin fully, looking at what cryptocurrency has done to the environment is opened to everyone even to our newbies such as humans offsprings know that bitcoin is the light of world currently, I Know in future everything will be going to bitcoin.

Bitcoin is not more bad for the environment than other companies like Apple and Google they all run on Fossil fuels. Bitcoin is just seen as a unnecessary way of generating the block rewards but I think in the next couple of years we will see a lot more miners using green energy not because of the public backlash but because it will be cheaper for them in the long term to use green energy and that means they generate more profit.

POW is not healthy for the environment if it is running on fossil fuels which is currently is with most miners but it was blown out of proportion by the media on how bad it is when you compare it to other companies that use fossil fuels.

Wanna know what's bad for the environment? The energy sources like coals and oils being burned everyday to produce electricity, it's not cryptocurrencies that causes these damages to the environment, aren't cryptocurrencies the same as a single household? They both consume electricity but not produce them meaning they aren't the problem plus even if we find ways to conserve in household or consumer level, it will only do so much.

- They indirectly increase the value of the environment and their lives but they also indirectly reduce the standard of living of a few people because the crypto market is the story where a lot of people deposit and withdraw, there are so many different fingerprints on every coin, so a small part of crypto is causing harm to the environment without us realizing it. Besides, the natural environment is also influenced by technologies and companies, crypto allows mining and building many platforms, the volume of high-tech machinery requires a strong energy source, directly create waste for the living environment

We can't call cryptocurrency bad for the environment when we know fully well we are all benefiting from it's end result, crypto consumes so much energy or can I say electricity that's why it's been called bad for the environment, but we all can't deny the fact that without crypto the world wouldn't have been this easy as it is, live without crypto could have been a bit weird, talking about climate change they are more bigger companies that desecrates the environment even more and doesn't add values to human as bitcoin did.

Everything has got good and bad. Whatever we do on earth makes some harm to the environment, and everytime bitcoin was connected with the increased electricity usage as the major harm. This is like praising the usage of electric vehicles usage. The co₂ emission from combustion engine is much low compared to the co₂ released on the process of manufacturing lithium battery. There'll be more other things harming the environment, but some people's eye has the visibility on bitcoin mining alone.

@kryptqnick, Your argument is valid, But my explanation is not brief, I just showed an example and wanted to say that some people are expressing extremely allergenic behavior for Bitcoin only.
Environment is not a big issue for them, they are attacking Bitcoin only, without paying attention to other harmful activities where bitcoin-mining is 70 times more eco-friendly than Gold-mining.
Their main target is attacking only Bitcoin, I didn't dig more, better you could read @fillippone's explanation, I got that very informative and well discussed.

We can't stop the release of the cottage, even if the Shanzhai coin is contaminated with environmental pollution, we can't do something.
If you want to stop the cottages, then Bitcoin will also be affected.
Some of the impact of some mountain treascoin will involve Bitcoin, allowing Bitcoin to bear public opinion.
Because it is said that the encrypted currency will think of Bitcoin, it will not think of the useless cottage coins.

already answered  that energy consume on paper money is much greater than energy consuming miners. no one have said that paper money is bad for environment. who said this should compare bitcoin consuming energy with all other payment source. i assure  you bitcoin consuming  energy is very low.
also now miners started to transfer mining into new energy which will consume low energy and will have no bad effect on enviornmrnt.

The culprit is the energy generation ways. Bitcoin and other crypto currencies just utilize the energy. So if we have to take it that way, then the energy is also used in daily home usage, agriculture industry, every business, stock market etc, infact every field of life use energy so they all should be blamed.
Instead of generating clean energy, we are just blaming the products that use it. This is not the right mindset, with this mindset we can't move from a lowly "Type 0 civilization" to "Type I Civilization".

Cryptucurrency is not bad for the environment what is bad is the miners that decide to mine the cryptocurrencies it is their choice if they want to use green energy or not and most of them at the moment are not using green energy and that is what the criticism comes from but I think because of the issues have not been highlighted slowly each miner will change to green energy.

From what point of view does bitcoin mining have a negative impact on the environment?
do you mean the use of coal as a power plant that you use?
I think electricity can be generated using water and steam, so technological intelligence will provide a solution if one material runs out for electricity, there is another backup power source

they can be contented in their situation like they have a moderate fees for electricity thats why they dont bother switching to green energy and the transition to a different energy can also be complicated to some due to their area but for those that doesnt have a problem from switching to green energy why not ? they can be a big help in this issue .

It's  unclear exactly who dreamt up bitcoin, so no one knows what this person was thinking when the mining protocols were first established. But, as Ari Juels, a computer scientist at Cornell Tech, recently explained to me, the arrangement seems to have been designed with equity in mind. Anyone devoting a processor to the enterprise would have just as much stake in the outcome as anyone else. As is so often the case, though, the ideal was soon subverted.
Mining is the process by which bitcoin is both created and accounted for. Instead of being cleared by, say, a bank, bitcoin transactions are recorded by a decentralized network—a blockchain. Miners compete to register the latest “block” of transactions by solving cryptographic puzzles. The first one to the solution is rewarded with freshly minted bitcoin. Miners today receive 6.25 bitcoins per block, which, at current values, are worth more than three hundred thousand dollars.

so there is actually a solution to reduce the bad environmental impact of mining cryptocurrencies. this is a good solution, hopefully it will be realized soon and can silence the mouths of those who always blame crypto, especially bitcoin, because the mining process is considered environmentally unfriendly.

after all, mining is not currently the main focus of developing new crypto projects. besides, there are actually many other real projects in the world that are more dangerous in polluting the environment, factories, gold mining, etc. many things have the potential to harm the environment, but when it comes to bitcoin, it's bound to be hyperbole.
btw, thanks op, the information is very useful.

I never see the cryptocurrency bad for the environment but only people making it bad. We all know that only people are the one abusing our environtment specially to those business man/woman that have factory like chemical factory,plastic ware etc. And if you are pointing in your thread the mining of crypto using big mining Rig in some other country I thought its only give little percent to have a bad effect to the environment for all we know that not all country using it and know about crypto currency.

In short, there are other human activities that are more damaging to the environment. And in terms of crypto, at least, this technology is helping a lot of people. Also, there are other alternative ways on how to address the situation of crypto mining like using renewable energy sources. So it means, the problem is solvable and can be addressed with other options.

For one, you have to consider that cryptocurrency mining is decentralized, and that these miners, some uses more energy than others, and while some use more energy, some of them also use clean, renewable energy sources and leaves a very small carbon footprint. Sure you can spread news like crypto mining is bad for the environment and many people will believe in it and will somehow put crypto as a dirty technology for polluting the planet and all, but I also have to consider the politics and the motives of those who say it is a bad technology too. Are they sincere or do they have an agenda?

Not 100% decentralized. For sure more decentralized than anything else you can take into comparison, and after the China ban in fact a bit more of a blessing than a curse because it forced even more decentralization now and allowed more variety of nodes to be part of the Bitcoin network.

But that apart, old arguments about environment must always take into account cost + benefit. Not just cost alone like all these people do,,, which ignores what we get from the mining (security most importantly).

Most miners are now converting to green energy because we know that most countries have high electricity prices, so converting to renewable energy saves us money while maintaining the same efficiency, and it also has the potential to have a positive impact on the environment. Although it is initially expensive and requires money, it will be cost effective and require less maintenance in the future. It's also a good idea to locate your mining rigs in a cold location, such as Greenland, where they have rigs and use renewable energy.

It's true that mining is not environmentally friendly, because the growth of bitcoin enthusiasts is getting higher, resulting in consequences that ultimately mining is a problem for now. Mining is very much, because it is very profitable so that they do not think about the impact that occurs from the mining. so that it becomes a spotlight that has an adverse impact on the environment.

maybe with the problems that occur it will open the mind to do updates (many alternatives that can be done) but maybe it can't be instant and it takes time to be able to change things that are already used to renewable methods. like it or not, there has to be an update in bitcoin mining because it is really needed to be able to not have an impact on the environment.

I don't think so, unless the electronic waste produced by mining rigs like old chips and stuff are not being properly disposed off then we can say that in extension, cryptocurrency is bad for the environment but other than that, I don't see any other cause for alarm for cryptocurrency that might affect the environment. The electricity consumption is a BS, every household consumes electricity too so it's not a problem that cryptocurrency is a guzzler when it comes to electricity.

Crypto currency is not bad for environment. Because we use computers it consumes electricity. And the mining machine consumes electricity for running. There are graphics cards that are used in mining machines. So, i think it does not effect the environment. If it is harmful for human health then no one adopt this currency. But now, it is used in worldwide.

I agree with you, human activities in this modern era that have a negative impact on the environment, not bitcoin mining
government under bank control deploys environmental FUD to make people blame bitcoin miners for environmental damage

cryptocurrencies never harm the environment, instead it fix our outdated financial system and improve it

There is no requirement in Bitcoin mining industry that electricity should be generated specifically from the fossil fuels. The miners use electricity from the national grid and therefore it is not their responsibility to check whether the power generation is done using renewable sources or not. If the environmental activists are so concerned, then they should request the government to shut down all the coal-fired power plants and pay double price for energy that is generated from solar or wind powerplants.

this makes a lot of sense. because the miners and companies only use the available ready-to-use electricity. other big companies that also use big electric power should be protested as well.
however, if anyone wants to build a renewable alternative power generation facility, it will definitely have a very good impact on the environment. if there was a crypto company that pioneered this, and it did well, there would definitely be no reason that crypto mining could harm the environment.

it's true as you said comrade, Cryptocurrency, with Bitcoin as one of the most popular variants, is one of the new alternatives in investing. The advantages are decentralization and high exchange rates. But there is a price to be paid, namely environmental damage. Recent studies have shown that Bitcoin's energy consumption is extremely wasteful. The study even mentions that the energy spent on Bitcoin transactions every day is greater than the energy consumption of Switzerland.

I think the use of electrical energy for bitcoin miners can be said to be detrimental to the environment if the electricity used is free, but of course they pay the electricity fee.
If we look to the past then it's just bullshit for the government and other people who are involved in creating some trouble every time they see
that it will actually oppose or will actually harm them or will actually impose some threat but look at us now?
Environmental issues? It's just a lame excuse and just to make it look bad.

Not really. Mining bitcoins from fossil fuels, it also emits tons of carbon dioxide emissions every year. But bitcoin mining energy is still much lower than in other industries. Currently, a lot of miners are converting to green energy, which will make bitcoin mining more environmentally friendly in the future.

it's true as you said, actually there are still many companies that cause environmental damage, because it is caused by the air pollution they emit, and causes global warming, but why is bitcoin always the scapegoat, even though we know bitcoin has provided many positive benefits for us, but there are still people who hate bitcoin..

You've got solid argument and I agree with it. The fact that we are facing an environmental crisis is because governments and those in positions to make a change are not taking climate change seriously. Cryptocurrency mining energy expense is nothing by comparison.

All it takes is a change in attitude but the problem is that governments only think for the 5 year period they're in power/office so plans are made on these short scales not the long term as required.

Yes, renewable energy and reduction of fossil fuels as main source of power are necessary and we must do better to see these implementations.

Cryptocurrency mining is not harmful to the environment but cryptocurrency mining can have some adverse effects on the environment. Bitcoin mining can create a crisis environment on electricity and fuel.This is not a problem, but there are thousands of factories around the world that are harming the environment, I do not see environmentalists sniffing. But why so much speculation about bitcoin mining?

Many people are just too ungrateful, there benefit from bitcoin and same time fight against bitcoin which  isn't supposed to be so, if bitcoin is bad for the environment then they should avoid it but no way there won't because they benefit a lot from  it. Bitcoin does more good than harm, many people are solely being liberated financially because of bitcoin so why now fighting against it, actually no point so u did say the debate shouldn't continue.

Issues with environment about bitcoin mining is just bullshit.If we do consider on how other factors or things in the earth is affected into those old problems or before crypto exist then they could really make out some
comparison.

Agree that people are just too ungrateful and instead on looking on the good side there are still people who do really love to make some issues and make out some focus or elaboration on why bitcoin mining is really harmful
without even thinking that there are lots which is much more worst that this.

This is why the entire crypto community is really having bad impressions to those people/institutions who do really make out issues in regarding to this and now its being really that ignored.

This is just an another day on where people do really love to seek for some holes just to throw out something and can be blamed out but still the demand and support hadnt been affected that much.

There is no accurate data that bitcoin mining damages the environment, of course the percentage of natural damage from mining is very small, everyone will attack bitcoin because they hate and hope bitcoin will die soon but they are silent when a forest fire is used for plantations.

This have become a big talk few years ago with regards to the activity of mining Bitcoin that consumes a big amount of electricity for power consumption to operate those mining and that it can possibly lead to have a bad effect on the environment. Whether it is true or not, still there is no enough data to prove such claim and before hand, there are already lots of things that consumes big amount of energy that is harmful to the environment, yet are still operating until now. The mining activities might be the bad thing about crypto but the existence of such is not really bad for the environment.

Although the cryptocurrency is bad for the environment but not. It is very harmful to use cryptocurrency data for plantations and the environment Cryptocurrency has become one of the best cryptocurrencies in the world today because those who are investing in cryptocurrencies have benefited the most and have certainly gained widespread popularity.

Cryptocurrency is not a threat to the environment, but bitcoin mining is somewhat harmful to the environment. Because the fuel oil and electricity required for mining are used to improve the economic condition. Moreover, the amount of carbon dioxide produced by burning fuel oil harms the environment.