Bitcoin Carbon Footprint

[arabspaceship123]

We're waiting for cryptocurrencies to be fully adopted in mainstream but we know it's contributing to damaging the planet. If there won't be solutions to make mining cryptocurrency environmentally friendly how can it be sustainable on current trends?

Are you worried about Bitcoin mining energy consumption? I've read it's using more electricity than Argentina, it's using more than energy than American Airlines and Bitcoin miners in Iceland use more electricity than their entire national domestic consumption.

Oil and mineral extraction is damaging our environment, selling tobacco is contributing to cancer cases but it doesn't stop investors wanting to make profit in unethical projects. If we're looking at ethical facts cryptocurrency traders are involved in a business that's damaging the planet, that's what makes me feel uneasy. What's your position?

[dkbit98]

Do we really need to have one more topic about Bitcoin cartbon footprint propaganda?
Don't believe everything you hear on mainstream news with sensational headlines, better learn to use search function before creating new one and check out this topic for Debunking the "Bitcoin is an environmental disaster" argument by fillippone.

There is obviously some agenda to put climate change and global warming in news even harder than it was done for covid pandemic and here is cnn director admited that on hidden camera for veritas.
We are going to see what happens in future but this can also affect Bitcoin and people should be aware of that.

[Altcoinsintel]

My opinion is that Bitcoin miners are using excess power. The reason most are allocated in China is the low cost and infrastructure in hydroelectric power.
Coal power plants have been in use in some locations to power bitcoin miners but not on a massive scale.

Most of Bitcoin mining uses efficient green energy. Our planet is not polluted by Bitcoin, and there is no estimation that Bitcoin mining will ever affect anything.
There are so many industries that have a destructive influence on the environment, not to mention the nuclear weapon and the radioactive isotopes released since 1950.

Bitcoin is the least of our worries when it comes to the environment.

[TangentC]

1st rule of Fight Club,
You don't talk about Fight Club

1st rule of Bitcoin
You don't talk about it's Carbon Foot Print

Reason being if you did, you have to admit that exploring a change to a different energy efficient algorithm is the only real solution to the carbon footprint of bitcoin reliance on PoW. And that is something Bitcoiners don't want to discuss.
Until the Governments begin shutting down the miners for excessive energy waste, they will not accept it as a problem.

We are getting there however.
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/02/china-bitcoin-mining-hub-to-shut-down-cryptocurrency-projects.html

China’s Inner Mongolia region plans to ban new cryptocurrency mining projects and shut down existing activity in a bid to cut down on the energy-consuming operation.
Bitcoin mining consumes an estimated 128.84 terrawatt-hour per year of energy, more than entire countries such as Ukraine and Argentina.
Inner Mongolia alone accounts for around 8% of all bitcoin mining globally, more than the United States which accounts for 7.2%.

[watergold]

based on data articles from the Cambridge University Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index (CBECI), it has made comparisons of electricity consumption with several other parts of the world.
You can see from some of the pictures that I show, which shows how much is the difference from the total per year of electricity which is the source of mining energy.


 

Mike Colyer, Foundry CEO said that

"It allows for faster payback on solar or wind projects ... because they [would otherwise] generate too much energy for the grid in that area"

source of reading www.visualcapitalist.com

[jesselui]

Yes, there is an excessive use of electricity. But today it is very inefficient to generate electricity using fossil fuels. More wind energy, dams or nuclear energy is used. This is not the type of energy that causes carbon footprint.

[arabspaceship123]

My opinion is that Bitcoin miners are using excess power. The reason most are allocated in China is the low cost and infrastructure in hydroelectric power.
Coal power plants have been in use in some locations to power bitcoin miners but not on a massive scale.

Most of Bitcoin mining uses efficient green energy. Our planet is not polluted by Bitcoin, and there is no estimation that Bitcoin mining will ever affect anything.
There are so many industries that have a destructive influence on the environment, not to mention the nuclear weapon and the radioactive isotopes released since 1950.

Bitcoin is the least of our worries when it comes to the environment.

I didn't read anything to suggest most of Bitcoin mining comes from green efficient energy sources. I'll look it up later.

1st rule of Fight Club,
You don't talk about Fight Club

1st rule of Bitcoin
You don't talk about it's Carbon Foot Print

Reason being if you did, you have to admit that exploring a change to a different energy efficient algorithm is the only real solution to the carbon footprint of bitcoin reliance on PoW. And that is something Bitcoiners don't want to discuss.
Until the Governments begin shutting down the miners for excessive energy waste, they will not accept it as a problem.

We are getting there however.
https://www.c[Suspicious link removed]m/2021/03/02/china-bitcoin-mining-hub-to-shut-down-cryptocurrency-projects.html

China’s Inner Mongolia region plans to ban new cryptocurrency mining projects and shut down existing activity in a bid to cut down on the energy-consuming operation.
Bitcoin mining consumes an estimated 128.84 terrawatt-hour per year of energy, more than entire countries such as Ukraine and Argentina.
Inner Mongolia alone accounts for around 8% of all bitcoin mining globally, more than the United States which accounts for 7.2%.

The numbers of places banning cryptocurrency mining is going to increase year on year. Maybe it'll have something to do with concentrating mining to specific places for strategic purposes.

Yes, there is an excessive use of electricity. But today it is very inefficient to generate electricity using fossil fuels. More wind energy, dams or nuclear energy is used. This is not the type of energy that causes carbon footprint.

I've read about a country in Asia building hydroelectric-powered mining farms. State owned cryptocurrency mining with green power is interesting but building them isn't going to be easy it'll take years.

[odolvlobo]

It is the producers of electricity that bear the burden of carbon emissions, and not the users of electricity. Usage of electricity has no carbon footprint.

Certain people want to dictate who can use electricity and what they can use it for. It is as simple and as scary as that.

[Streets 2.0]

In my opinion, the mining of cryptocurrency cannot seriously affect these factors, since computers will still work. Even if you imagine a fantasy where mining stopped and people returned video cards to the shelves, there will simply be more gamers who will use these cards only for games in the same way. As for mining farms - I have a big doubt that they produce more emissions than the average production of anything, let alone a large industry.

[Theb]

TBH there is not a lot of industries that don't contribute a lot of carbon emission in our world from plane rides, manufacturing plants/factories, and even agriculture produces a lot of carbon emission and what they are saying about Bitcoin is an attempt to single them out when in fact they aren't even the biggest contributors for the carbon emissions. They might have hidden agendas by doing so and I think siding with them is something that will just make Bitcoin look bad. Year by year mining hardware companies are always trying to produce the most efficient hardware and also mining farms as well are trying to figure out how to lessen their biggest cost which is their electrical consumption and they always have the option to switch to renewable energy.

[ranochigo]

I consider this site's methodology a lot more reliable than other stats: https://cbeci.org/.

PoW is probably one of the most secure systems out there. It functions on the basis that certain resources has to be exchanged and hence it is called proof of work. The game theory behind this makes Bitcoin secure and IMO is quite irreplaceable. I think the environmental concerns are valid but it doesn't mean that the benefits to using this doesn't outweigh the cost in terms of negative externality (namely the environment). As renewable energy are actually more widespread in Bitcoin mining, you can justify that it still helps to offset the cost of the R&D and the cost of building those facilities.

Yes, it is still very much a prevalent issue as it doesn't solve the problem of e-waste among other things. I'd still argue that the tradeoffs is still worth it considering the utility of Bitcoin.

[Kong Hey Pakboy]

If countries continue to use fossil fuels and other high carbon footprint as a main energy source rather than renewable energy sources then there is no point to this argument because bitcoin will inadvertently still use electricity produced by the fossil fuels so there is no point going green if big players don't take initiative.

[Lucius]

1st rule of Bitcoin
You don't talk about it's Carbon Foot Print

There are no rules that say you shouldn't write about as much as you want on this forum, but anyone who enters this story should show what exactly the problem is. People say that there should be some special taxes for everyone who mines or owns Bitcoin, and at the same time they don't know how to answer how much energy Bitcoin mining actually consumes.

If we assume that there is an environmental impact caused by Bitcoin mining, can we determine where that impact is located compared to all the others that have a far greater impact on the carbon emissions released into the environment over the past 75 years? According to some objective calculations, Bitcoin consumes about 0.2% of the total amount of electricity produced - where does someone with common sense see the problem in that?

The agenda “we’re going to stay in the dark because of Bitcoin” is such nonsense that it should win the Nobel Prize for nonsense...

[arabspaceship123]

It didn't help miners in Kosovo. It's got one of the cheapest electricity costs in Europe but mining's banned. Russia's central bank proposed to ban mining. China banned mining last year. It's known some countries face electricity shortages because of mining but mining isn't banned in them.

You can't accept you're being told how to use electricity you've paid for but governments do introduce laws when they say it's necessary. Who's going to fight back against laws forbidding mining?

It is the producers of electricity that bear the burden of carbon emissions, and not the users of electricity. Usage of electricity has no carbon footprint.

Certain people want to dictate who can use electricity and what they can use it for. It is as simple and as scary as that.

[Gamerholic]

When I hear about "damage to the planet" - it becomes funny to me, especially when such bigwigs of capitalism as Elon Musk or other similar people talk about it. Oh yeah! They definitely care about the climate and nature, their production and assets, of course, are 100% environmentally friendly and have never been "dirty"))) just think what cynicism and verbiage - in the fight against bitcoin and blockchain in general, all means are good. I personally saw how things really are with the environment at large-scale production - therefore, all these insinuations about the harm to nature, the carbon footprint - fairy tales are unreal. Greta, I'm sorry! 

[coolcoinz]

We're waiting for cryptocurrencies to be fully adopted in mainstream but we know it's contributing to damaging the planet.

No, I don't know anything like that. Don't assume everyone here is brainwashed by the mainstream media.
Please explain to me how using already generated power is damaging. Do you really believe that if you sit in the dark and don't use computer, the energy you would consume will go back to the ecosystem and fix global warming?

[amishmanish]

This has gained a lot of attention from the authorities around the world and its not easy to ignore. Whole industries that everyone deemed invincible are shutting down because of the climate commitments. While the world finds Bitcoin and crypto to be a worthy investment, authorities seem to be pondering to stop PoW.

I think it is always better to see the footprint from alarger perspective. What can bitcoin and bclockhain do to reduce carbon footprint from other areas? Can we utilize it for efficient banking, reducing currency burden? Can we use blockchain for efficient farming by local farming models? Can we use it for generation and verification of data in trustless ways instead of cutting trees for the immense paperwork?

This larger perspective can lead to a more informed debate where Bitcoin and the blockchain technology can act as carbon mitigation mechanisms.

[fiulpro]

This topic have already been thoroughly discussed in depts. The whole idea is the use of sustainable resources to make sure everything is working well. For example if there is a country where there is a lot of sunlight then at the end people can easily use solar energy. When we talk about county like El Salvador they are using volcanic energy as well that's a big step forth but ofc not all miners can afford it since at the end of the day it's extremely expensive to get it going but at the end it pays itself off at the end. The most money that goes is in the upkeep of everything and else it's a personal choice and many environment summits will never fail to actually say bad things about mining and cryptocurrencies as long as people don't come forth and make a move.

[Nhazwrath]

We're waiting for cryptocurrencies to be fully adopted in mainstream but we know it's contributing to damaging the planet. If there won't be solutions to make mining cryptocurrency environmentally friendly how can it be sustainable on current trends?

Are you worried about Bitcoin mining energy consumption? I've read it's using more electricity than Argentina, it's using more than energy than American Airlines and Bitcoin miners in Iceland use more electricity than their entire national domestic consumption.

Oil and mineral extraction is damaging our environment, selling tobacco is contributing to cancer cases but it doesn't stop investors wanting to make profit in unethical projects. If we're looking at ethical facts cryptocurrency traders are involved in a business that's damaging the planet, that's what makes me feel uneasy. What's your position?

lets open an augment by seemingly to agree with us to establish your gaslighting point. 

[hatshepsut93]

Are you worried about Bitcoin mining energy consumption? I've read it's using more electricity than Argentina, it's using more than energy than American Airlines and Bitcoin miners in Iceland use more electricity than their entire national domestic consumption.

Electricity production is far from being the biggest source of greenhouse emissions. Society should worry about things like meat production, construction, chemical industry, metallurgy, transportation and lots of other industries before thinking about Bitcoin mining.

IMO this environmental FUD is not only beneficial for banks and nocoiners, but also for the big polluters who found a nice scapegoat for distracting the public from the real problems.