US congress set to consider legislation to BAN proof of work

[Zilon]

The US always making claims on POW been the major cause of Green house gas emission causing the green house effect the leading factor affecting global warming.

I was wondering if the US will also consider banning:

• Transportation
• Commercial and domestic use of Fossil fuels
• Industries
• Electricity production
• Land use and forestry

As the contribute to green house effect as well even on a greater percentage compared to POW

The US are just too concerned about proof of work because they can't control and regulate its consensus mechanism else it would have been tolerated like every other sector of the economy that utilises energy of different form to carryout their operations

[jackg]

Banning the subsidising of air travel would do wonders for greenhouse gas emissions. Also price gouging companies that refuse to send things by boat because "air is only double the cost for a quarter of the time".

The majority of flights are taken by a small number of people so it's not exactly an equal split/necessity to subsidise them compared to things like national public transport via bus or train.


The US banning pow will just move it elsewhere anyway, if it even goes through - how will they convince countries that are mostly renewable/nuclear to ban it?

[hosseinimr93]

China owned a big percentage of the total hashrate when they decided to ban bitcoin and its mining. What happened after that? The total hashrate increased and reached a new all time after a while.
The same thing will probably happen if United States ban bitcoin mining.

[Solosanz]

I think US are taking personal to ban proof of work cryptos because we all know Bitcoin and Monero are POW, the reason of the ban to reduce global warming isn't make sense. They should look on which sectors that mainly use high energy and produce gas emission, don't only look on POW. They're just close their eyes when someone pointing out banking sectors are consume a lot energy.

I just wondering why there's no one speak up on US congress and say if Bitcoin is more green than banking sectors?

[el kaka22]

I wouldn't be against it honestly. First of all, they can't "ban" proof of work, they can ban bitcoin mining in their own land but that's it, you could always move to another nation and continue there if you are a rich miner, if you spent 2+ million dollars on equipment, you could literally just go a bit north or south and continue.

However, what bitcoin maximalists like me do not realize that there are other ways and we do not have to keep doing this. Yes, airline industry is spending more energy, but just because they do, we do not have to do it as well, let's get rid of it and move on. ETH will do it soon, I hope it will be an example to everyone and we could move to staking which would be a lot better.

[jackg]

China owned a big percentage of the total hashrate when they decided to ban bitcoin and its mining. What happened after that? The total hashrate increased and reached a new all time after a while.

Yes there are enough countries that can't be touched by US/China sanctions too that could take on these mining farms - like West Asia and North Africa.

However, what bitcoin maximalists like me do not realize that there are other ways and we do not have to keep doing this. Yes, airline industry is spending more energy, but just because they do, we do not have to do it as well, let's get rid of it and move on. ETH will do it soon, I hope it will be an example to everyone and we could move to staking which would be a lot better.

The proof of concept going on at the moment with ethereum might prove whether or not that's actually something we could implement well with bitcoin or not. There's a lot of ways proof of stake can be implemented and some seem to be more centralised than others (though bitcoin pooling might also be considered more centralised than some PoS solutions).

[NotATether]

The US banning pow will just move it elsewhere anyway, if it even goes through - how will they convince countries that are mostly renewable/nuclear to ban it?

Yeah, people are making this out as if they are meeting to ban the cryptocurrencies themselves.

Nobody can ban consensus mechanism that are distributed enough, even if they are a government.

[Hydrogen]

I would be curious to see poll data and age demographic information regarding PoW. It is known that youth are the largest user and supporter base of both bitcoin and crypto. I wonder what percentage of the world's youth support the claim of proof of work needing to be banned?

This latest move which comes only a few days after russia announced they would support international crypto transactions in the country. I wonder if proof of work bans will become recognized under international sanctions against russia. If they are passed. Rather than as a form of climate change policy.

US states like texas will have a difficult time with these proposals. Texas has a booming bitcoin mining industry powered by their newly constructed wind farms. It is possible that US states like texas and florida will choose to oppose these forms of regulation. And that the entire issue will come to resemble something similar to prohibition on alcoholic beverages of eras past.

[electronicash]

this started when the NY legislature passed the bill cracking BTC mining. its to stop miners using carbon base fuel sources which we thought its going to regulate mining farms which they need government approvals much like the Bitlicense.

its getting grander up to the congress. those BTC miners moving out of NY can't just operate by moving to some other state, they have to move to other countries if congress consider. this is the same as China did but mining continues in China.

[paxmao]

After most of the laws in US there ahs to be a group of interest, that is just how the system works. I wonder who would be promoting the an on proof-of-work or other similar technologies. May it be related to the Ethereum foundation and the changes in Ethereum? In any case, if the hashing does not happen in the US, so be it, there are better alternatives.

[Lucius]

Although banning POW in the US would not mean the end of Bitcoin in that country, it would not be good for Bitcoin globally. The influence that country has on the rest of the world would mean that other countries would follow this example, especially the EU, where there has been a lot of talk lately.

However, considering that Bitcoin mining is very popular in some US states and that many have invested a lot of money in this business, I hope that they will lobby strongly against such a law, especially since it is not about the amount of energy that means something important in the overall picture.

[Gyfts]

This is the full report that the White House had released: https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/09-2022-Crypto-Assets-and-Climate-Report.pdf

See pg. 5 for a summary.

I read the report briefly and there isn't anything particularly new about their arguments against crypto. Basic premise, according to their summary report, is the typical climate change activism garbage and debunked arguments attributing excessive environmental burdens with crypto mining and usage.

Report cites that electricity usage in the U.S associated with crypto assets to be 0.9-1.7 percent. They want you to believe that an estimated <2% of electricity usage from crypto somehow create a climate change crisis and that the crypto mining industry needs to be heavily regulated.

Does anyone actually buy this nonsense?

[hosseinimr93]

I think US are taking personal to ban proof of work cryptos

From my understanding, it doesn't say anything about banning proof of work cryptocurrencies in the United States. It says that the congress may ban cryptocurrencies mining.

[goldkingcoiner]

Bitcoin is always up for the challenge. Especially when that challenge includes governments trying (and failing) to regulate Bitcoin. The problem is that if they go against centralized giant miners, that may have an impact, probably short term, on the price of Bitcoin. Long term, we will find ways to outsource the mining to different countries. In fact I would say this ban of proof of work would only truly hurt Bitcoin if they banned proof-of-work mining in countries which actually offer good incentives for mining in the first place. Cheap electricity, cheap storage place, lax regulation laws and so on. But nonetheless the title of this thread is misleading. I would not say the US congress set to consider legislation for banning proof of work but rather that they are weighing their options. And I do not think they would consider redundant measures viable. Miners will find other ways and places to mine.

All the US would do is deprive itself of taxes from mining operations.

[kryptqnick]

I hope it's just speculations and such a rushed decision as banning PoW won't be imposed in the US. It's unfair to focus or targeting such a small industry that isn't even all bad for the environment (because it can be done with clean energy), when there are things that are obviously very bad for environment and should be limited because they can't be done in totally eco-friendly ways. But also, I agree with others that even if mining is banned in the US, it will be only a temporary issue, after which miners will relocate and resume operations.
Also, since China banned mining for, allegedly, environmental reasons, why not wait and see if the ban on mining made China for environmentally friendly than it used to be before? Unfortunately, I can't find the data for 2022 and 2021, so it's a bit hard to assess for now, but it would be smart to wait and see if emissions are even reduced when mining is banned (I doubt they are).

[Dunamisx]

The US always making claims on POW been the major cause of Green house gas emission causing the green house effect the leading factor affecting global warming

Despite this has been discussed on several occasions i don't know what it's going to benefit the government with the said attack from this angle and if this where to be justified then the first set of people to receive an attacks where the ones engage on the use of these same fossil fuels of carbon emission in polluting the environment, affecting the society and lives in it the bad way by pollutant, there's this explanation i will like to give that reveal more about the bitcoin less harm effect on the environment https://twitter.com/DSBatten/status/1566735902617276416?t=RPpsidFhC3NH7LhjyBSwyQ&s=19 this has given more insight on bitcoin energy use and it corresponding carbon emission.

[stompix]

Two things here
It's a proposal from the White House IF some things don't work to try and persuade congress to issue legislation against PoW. Which will happen if ever like in a decade or so, maybe the democrats whon;t be in power by that time at all.

But at the same time, comparisons like this are simple, let me be truly honest, stupid!

I was wondering if the US will also consider banning:

• Transportation
• Commercial and domestic use of Fossil fuels
• Industries
• Electricity production
• Land use and forestry

Let me ask you a simple question, how long will you and your family survive if PoW is banned? What will change radically for you?
Let's now compare your life with no transportation, no industry no usage of fossil fuel. How long do you think the world economy will last?

Yes, there are really stupid things that burn a ton more energy than PoW, I would love to see some numbers comparing how much energy GPU mining for ETH burns compared to the GPU editing clips for youtube and TikTok, but for god's sake, don't compare with stuff without which the world would collapse in a month.Those comparisons are just as stupid as the whole idea of banning crypto mining.

Although banning POW in the US would not mean the end of Bitcoin in that country, it would not be good for Bitcoin globally. The influence that country has on the rest of the world would mean that other countries would follow this example, especially the EU, where there has been a lot of talk lately.

The influence will be minimal because all the countries in the EU and in east Asia that might take further steps already have high electricity prices and the number of miners here is just minimal. I was talking to some friends who are in GPU mining and they've said that even without the Ethereum change the returns are just ridiculous. If I were to mine on national grid prices I would be listing my miners now on eBay in a second.

Only two countries would matter Canada and Australia, both of which have like a ton of energy that can't go anywhere.
But overall yeah, IF this actually happens it would be bad.

[Haunebu]

This is just another bullshit proposal which will most likely never see the light of day if you ask me. By some miracle, if it actually passes, it would definitely cause a temporary ripple in cryptocurrency prices.

If the US government were seriously worried about our environment, they would have banned POW etc long back. Just ignore this pointless proposal.

[dothebeats]

The greenhouse emission problem is just another front for the US Government. It's not really their goal, because if it is, then they'd be on the hunt for other industries that produces a lot of greenhouse gases that is no longer acceptable by any means. The question is, how would this legislation go through? Who would support it and what are their reasons, aside from protecting the environment? If this comes to light, the other side of the globe will be happy to accommodate their business.

[mindrust]

That’s pretty concerning for bitcoin’s future. If this legislation passes, then bitcoin might take a major hit. Especially if the other countries decide to follow. Maybe the devs should consider a new proposal to integrate PoS. Most people won’t like this idea but if that’s the only way for bitcoin to survive, then we will have no choice. It is still early to discuss this though. Even if the legislation passes it will only affect the miners in the US anyway. Maybe it won’t hurt bitcoin that much.