Overseing health and environmental impact of high energy required in Bitcoin

[justdimin]

Due to high consumption of power (electricity) demand in bitcoin operations and the respective effect of carbon emmisions through the process, progressive research have been made by various categories concerned in medical, environmental, science and technology fields in finding a solution to ameliorate the hazardous impacts of high power demand causing an unending continuous emmision of CO gas which is believe to be human and environmentally hazardous.

Medically, it is believed that carbon monoxide (CO) has a detrimental effect on human health such as: Asthma, severe cough, respiratory disorder, cells inflammation, damage to organs, irritation, difficult breathing and blood disorders. While it's Environmental effect could constitute the depletion of ezone layer, global warming, bad weather or climate change, indescriminate killing of primitive lifes among others. 

It just never made sense to me for these type of calculations to be made. Like how bitcoin is something bad for the energy when there are just 100 companies that are responsible for the 70% of pollution in the world. Yes that is right, just 100 companies, if those companies were gone today then we would have clear world and we would not have CO problems and we would be all doing fine.

So basically, all these energy crisis, all these pollution, all these climate change situations are all based on just 100 companies and how they need to make a profit. Most of them are energy companies and if we could replace that energy with renewable ones and then close those companies then we would not have any of these problems, bitcoin is literally nothing compared to those.

[dothebeats]

Or you know, instead of continuously complaining about how bad bitcoin's energy consumption is, why not governments make a move to help people do the switch from fossil fuels to renewables and help change this problem not only for bitcoin but also for other industries that use too much energy? Oh that's right, the government protects energy companies that utilize fossil fuels as they have vested interest on them.

It's really crazy how these reports surface, and how they only point out bitcoin as that one big mofo that uses excess energy when in fact there are other countless industries out there that use more or the same amount of energy. Perhaps they can advocate towards the use of renewables too, but they most probably won't.

[stompix]

Or you know, instead of continuously complaining about how bad bitcoin's energy consumption is, why not governments make a move to help people do the switch from fossil fuels to renewables and help change this problem not only for bitcoin but also for other industries that use too much energy? Oh that's right, the government protects energy companies that utilize fossil fuels as they have vested interest on them.

It's completely the other way around!

The perfect example is Europe, Germany as I mentioned before has spent 150 billions each year to pay for subsidies for solar and wind, the results? The most expensive energy in the world for a country that size.
Nobody here encourages fossil power plants, till...well till we need them as Europe is in an energy crisis where the only way to get out is by restarting coal powerplants that were supposed to be decommissioned and more and more gas one.

Despite what everyone says, both wind and solar are expensive as fuck, even with government subsidies. And on top of that, they can't guarantee 24/7 power, funny enough probably none of the officials in Germany knew before throwing that amount at solar panels that Germany gets the same amount of sun exposure as Alaska!!!!, an average of 3 peak hours a day!

If they would have spent all that money on nuclear energy Europe would have been now an exporter! Imagine that!
Luckily, there is still hope:

European Commission declares nuclear and gas to be green