If there’s no energy for BTC, there won’t be energy for anything, in which case you won’t need to worry about BTC or ETH.
But there is no lack of energy. There is lack of intelligence and abundance of malice: the one the US is using to strangle the EU, governed by servants of the US empire of injustice, who are playing the same cards of the French Bourbons (they lost the head in the game) against UK during the independence of the US. US promoted, first, a coup the tat in 2014 in Ukraine to incite this Russian invasion, plus US never respected the deal not to increase NATO with former Warsaw Pact countries, right after the fall of the Berlin Wall. Second, US is promoting the most insidious campaign against Russians, only comparable to the campaign against Jews started in the Czarist Russia that, later, moved on to Central Europe to finish in the Holocaust. In this case, Russia has the means to defend themselves (it was not the case of the Jews), and the US, which could not win a war against a country of plain sheep herders (Afghanistan), will not win this war either.
Once this is clear and massive protests erupt in Europe, their governments will tumble down or Europe will finish in a total war. I really think this is the real purpose of the US, which went from total bankruptcy in the late XIX century to accumulate 75 % of world total capital (it was gold then) at the end of WWII. I don’t think it was done on purpose back then, but I think it is now. US want to repeat this massive theft. In any case and for the rest of the world (“F the EU” as Victoria Nuland said, and more if they are a bunch of idiots), energy trade will resume to normal. So there will be planty of electricity for BTC mining.
Respecting to BTC, its value resides precisely in the fact that it is a POW technology, and that it has a limit of emission, which ETH lacks (another fiat currency as any other one based in the multiplication of units). It is a proven mathematical and economic theorem that any money based on the unlimited multiplication of its units, its value tends to cero over the time (the pathetic case of ETH). On the contrary, any money based on the subdivision of units which total amount cannot be multiplied (the case of BTC), its value tends to increase with only one limit: wealth over the crust of the Earth.
It does not matter any other ETH utility might have. Many things have crucial utility (water, oxygen, etc.), and its abundance invalidates those material substances to be used as money. The ETH defenders lack the understanding of what money is, which is something you do not learn programming computers. They need to study economics profoundly. This is the main difference between BTC and ETH creators. Whoever Satoshi Nakamoto were, they knew about cryptography, programming, computing, and economics. These ETH guys do not understand economics. Even Isaac Newton, in the 1700 knew then more than these guys know now.
Maybe they should start with this interview to economist Saifedean Ammous to understand the real value of BTC as money:
https://podverse.fm/es/episode/m3jJcVzOl.
We’ll see sometime in the future who is right and who is wrong.
Good luck, everyone.
