Stop talking about cashless society! Let us preserve mother nature!

[jeromix]

This is the problem with industrialized countries they are the one who are mandating that we need to preserve and conserve natural resources for the benefit of the next generations to come. However, they are not worrying when they use too much electricity or power with the ambitious move to make a cashless society. How will they do it without using the natural resources to power up their digital equipment? And then there is no absolute cashless society because anywhere you go you will going to need physical money for a medium of exchange especially in times if there are natural calamities like earthquake, floods, storm and etc. where power could be affected by these events. So they are just really ambitious and damaging our mother nature sir/maam.

[1713564384]

1713564384

[1713564384]

1713564384

[St4yInTh3D4rk]

Using large amount of electricity is not a problem but how they are making that electricity matters,if they are using electricity from renewable sources like solar,wind and hydro power plants then they can talk about the environment issues but electricity is the reason for transferring from physical money system into cashless system?

[gambitcoin53]

This is the problem with industrialized countries they are the one who are mandating that we need to preserve and conserve natural resources for the benefit of the next generations to come. However, they are not worrying when they use too much electricity or power with the ambitious move to make a cashless society. How will they do it without using the natural resources to power up their digital equipment? And then there is no absolute cashless society because anywhere you go you will going to need physical money for a medium of exchange especially in times if there are natural calamities like earthquake, floods, storm and etc. where power could be affected by these events. So they are just really ambitious and damaging our mother nature sir/maam.

i am sooo at lost at this topic, what has nature got to do with nature, but i like your point about calamities and exchanges, this surely shows us that cashless society will not gonna happen, not unless they developed a physical medium to replace paper money that i think illogical. the point is, cryptocurrencies are digital, without electricity during calamities, all those crypto assets will be deemed worthless. 

[richminded]

You have your point here but we can't stop them from using too much electricity not unless everyone will use solar power to generate electricity which is not going to happen easily. Cashless society is really not possible because of many circumstances and who will wants to put their money online while you are on the place when there is no internet, so technically cash will stay with us.

[andriw]

Technological advances especially in the financial sector, cannot be avoided, because humans are required to be able to solve current problems, especially bribery in the government bureaucracy. And this situation is inversely proportional to the reality of natural resources that are directly related to energy sources, especially electricity that supports cashless system infrastructure. Solutions should be sought to overcome these problems, for example making power plant from renewable natural resources such as solar or hydro energy.

[davis196]

This is the problem with industrialized countries they are the one who are mandating that we need to preserve and conserve natural resources for the benefit of the next generations to come. However, they are not worrying when they use too much electricity or power with the ambitious move to make a cashless society. How will they do it without using the natural resources to power up their digital equipment? And then there is no absolute cashless society because anywhere you go you will going to need physical money for a medium of exchange especially in times if there are natural calamities like earthquake, floods, storm and etc. where power could be affected by these events. So they are just really ambitious and damaging our mother nature sir/maam.

You sound like an angry teenage kid.Who is talking about cashless society?I don't see it coming in the next 30 to 50 years.Some newbies keep asking questions about the cashless society here and there,but that doesn't mean anything.It's just a discussion about the future.I don't get your point.So you say that physical money,like banknotes can't be destroyed by earthquakes,floods,storms and it's better to save them in our closets. Really?
The human civilization is poluting the nature in a thousand different ways,why do you bother only about digital payment systems?

[rodalutor]

Firstly the two things do not necessarily go hand in hand. It is perfectly possible to have a technology that enables a cashless society that doesn't use a large amount of energy. Secondly using a large amount of energy is not an issue if this energy can be renewable - I bet you within 50 years we will have a sustainable way to consume electricity at our current levels or even higher levels. You may be right in saying we may never be able to function without cash but there are ways around this, the blockchain can function offline it's just the tech is readily available just yet, if it becomes more commonplace then this will be facilitated far more easily. It will operate much better than cash in natural disasters, no one is going to accept your wet ruined paper bills if there's a flood but your provable digital funds will look much more appealing.

[Edward_Ray]

I'm sorry but you don't seem so informed in your post. Aren't you aware that there are naturally renewable sources of energy? We do not need to use up our natural resources to provide power to run a cashless society. Aren't your choice paper money and coin more dependent on natural resources? The sun, amidst other unending energy sources, for example is available to keep powering whatever project we have in mind. We know countries like Germany produce so much energy that there was even an excess in supply. So, I do not really think that your arguments are plausible. Depleting natural resources isn't one of the fears in moving to a cashless society.

[darthmaul]

Using large amount of electricity is not a problem but how they are making that electricity matters,if they are using electricity from renewable sources like solar,wind and hydro power plants then they can talk about the environment issues but electricity is the reason for transferring from physical money system into cashless system?

If everything is generated with the renewable sources like wind, solar, water then there is no question about the hampering of Mother Nature. Sometimes, these are the things which needs to be discussed because when we will be powering the internet with such electrical sources then what is wrong with using of digital money at all? Dont you think that the digital money will itself be a harmless currency because it is running on the renewable energy sources! Thats the fun thing about it. The cash will always need more from the mother nature, starting from the cutting of woods for the paper prints to the fire pollution for destroying the old notes with wear tear state.

[vixcious]

I can agree with your point. Although technology is needed and it is really useful in today's world, we still need cash. I really quite like to use cash to pay for some items and I do not like to put too much money at the bank. It made me very nervous about the money I sent.

[unusualfacts30]

This is the problem with industrialized countries they are the one who are mandating that we need to preserve and conserve natural resources for the benefit of the next generations to come. However, they are not worrying when they use too much electricity or power with the ambitious move to make a cashless society. How will they do it without using the natural resources to power up their digital equipment? And then there is no absolute cashless society because anywhere you go you will going to need physical money for a medium of exchange especially in times if there are natural calamities like earthquake, floods, storm and etc. where power could be affected by these events. So they are just really ambitious and damaging our mother nature sir/maam.

they will use renewable resources to power up their digital equipments. Where did you hear this idea of cashless society? We're still very far away from going completely cashless but it's consumers and businesses who get to decide whether they go cashless or not.

[damberg]

This is the problem with industrialized countries they are the one who are mandating that we need to preserve and conserve natural resources for the benefit of the next generations to come. However, they are not worrying when they use too much electricity or power with the ambitious move to make a cashless society. How will they do it without using the natural resources to power up their digital equipment? And then there is no absolute cashless society because anywhere you go you will going to need physical money for a medium of exchange especially in times if there are natural calamities like earthquake, floods, storm and etc. where power could be affected by these events. So they are just really ambitious and damaging our mother nature sir/maam.

Speaking of the resources and energy, the digital infrastructure is already here. I wouldn't say that the shift to a fully cashless society would mean a rapid increase in energy/resources consumption. What I am worried about is a personal freedom. The right to hold cash means by the way possibility to evade or at least mitigate consequences of monetary and fiscal policy. This right is important to be protected and preserved.

[cok_elat]

hey bro, do you forget that the paper used to make cash money is made from wood, whether the cutting of trees isn't included the destruction of natural resources too, I think electricity is easier to obtain without destructing natural resources, solar cells and wind for example

[jseverson]

And then there is no absolute cashless society because anywhere you go you will going to need physical money for a medium of exchange especially in times if there are natural calamities like earthquake, floods, storm and etc. where power could be affected by these events. So they are just really ambitious and damaging our mother nature sir/maam.

I don't think there will be an absolutely cashless society in the near future because they still have a legitimate use case, like what you illustrated. People have been inching closer and closer though, like Sweden and China. These shifts are more because of convenience rather than ideology. Note that Sweden is concerned that they may be going cashless faster than they're ready for, suggesting that cash will be living on even in the country closest to being cashless for a while longer.

I don't think cash is significantly more nature friendly than cashless considering the resources it takes to create, transport, and store it. If that's your biggest concern about going cashless, you may want to do more research on the issue.

[aoihs00]

If we are going cashless then we are already preserving the nature as we dont have to spend more energy on the printing press of the fiat currency and thus there is no way we are calling the nature in bad path.

Lets assume, printing press would take huge energy to do so, plus lots of paper, colours, and much more, This can take up huge trees down and also may need more electricity than the normal industries. So isn't that we are already onto something ?

[HeRetiK]

[...] How will they do it without using the natural resources to power up their digital equipment? [...]

How does one create physical mediums of exchange such as bank notes and coins with using natural resources?

For all its downsides going paperless and digital has likely decreased the amount of paper and ink wasted for not only creating physical cash but also invoices, documents, etc. We already live in a digital age. Unless you want to go back to pre-internet days we might as well leverage existing technologies for more productive tasks than posting on online forums.

[dothebeats]

I found it quite appalling that people only see the bad on the initiative towards a cashless society rather than the good. Also, blame the 19th century industrial revolution for all this mess and waste that the earth has accumulated for over 200 years. Compared to the burning of fossil fuels, cryptocurrencies are only around for ~10 years, with the first few years of its existence generating little to no carbon emissions.

I'm pretty sure that there will come a time when PoW will become obsolete once a new algorithm is found to be fair and secures the integrity of the network after all the 'switch,' but until that isn't solved, we'll be sticking with PoW for now. With all the recent yapping about energy consumption from the community and the peers, I'm sure this will ring the minds of brilliant devs who can come up with a solution.

[coinplus]

You think you have been preserving mother nature with cash all these while. Stop deceiving yourself mate.

Moreover, I do not see how this would really mean much for the mother nature preservation when the energy and what you are trying to preserve are meant to be used for something tangible anyway and they are simply more like the way of seeing more advancement in technology and how things can be done faster and better.

Cashless society has nothing to do with the pandemic situations you mentioned such as earthquake, floods, storms, which makes me wonder the point you were really trying to drive at in the first place.

[timerland]

This is the problem with industrialized countries they are the one who are mandating that we need to preserve and conserve natural resources for the benefit of the next generations to come. However, they are not worrying when they use too much electricity or power with the ambitious move to make a cashless society. How will they do it without using the natural resources to power up their digital equipment? And then there is no absolute cashless society because anywhere you go you will going to need physical money for a medium of exchange especially in times if there are natural calamities like earthquake, floods, storm and etc. where power could be affected by these events. So they are just really ambitious and damaging our mother nature sir/maam.

Who is saying that cashless societies will mean that natural resources will be depleted?

As long as the energy source is clean, there is no reason why a cashless society can't be environmentally friends, sustainable, while still offering the benefits of cashlessness when it comes to convenience, zero-counterfeits, and digital nature of it all. In fact, printing cash could be potentially more harmful to the environment, or even the mining of precious metals.

The only concern that people should have with a cashless society is if the society relies on third party payment processors that are centralized and controlled by the government. In that case, payments can be monitored easily, and the government has even further control on currency itself.

[charlotte04]

This is the problem with industrialized countries they are the one who are mandating that we need to preserve and conserve natural resources for the benefit of the next generations to come. However, they are not worrying when they use too much electricity or power with the ambitious move to make a cashless society. How will they do it without using the natural resources to power up their digital equipment? And then there is no absolute cashless society because anywhere you go you will going to need physical money for a medium of exchange especially in times if there are natural calamities like earthquake, floods, storm and etc. where power could be affected by these events. So they are just really ambitious and damaging our mother nature sir/maam.

Yep, this would the most important thing that we need to do. Without nature we may be in a lot of trouble. How can we enjoy those things we we're all going to die sooner?