Do You Think Bitcoin Mining Will Be Banned Due to Fears of Climate Change?

[Twentyonepaylots]

In a world increasingly worried about climate change and its effects on our planet, everything our leaders deem unwanted could be in trouble. We have heard numerous stories about how much energy Bitcoin uses. Those against Bitcoin often say that it requires more energy than whole countries.

But Bitcoin’s Proof-Of-Work consensus algorithm relies on that power to keep the blockchain safe. This will not be a discussion about PoW, its advantages, or disadvantages. It will also not be about how much renewable and clean energy is used in mining bitcoin already.

This is about why Bitcoin is scrutinized while other industries aren’t? For example, a report from 2019 shows that electronic devices on standby in the United States alone consume more electricity than the whole Bitcoin network would in over 3 years. Yet, nobody is talking about their impact on our environment.

If you want to read more about this, Bitcoin’s use of clean energy, PoW, and myths about Bitcoin’s energy consumption, check out Bitcoincleanup.com.  


Soon after US President Joseph Biden took office, he signed Executive Order 14067 - Ensuring Responsible Development of Digital Assets. This document mentions words like “environment,” “environmental impact,” “pollution,” “climate change,” “climate impact,” and similar terms dozens of times.

Both the EU and the US are discussing new crypto regulations. One of their agendas is, again, the crypto economy's impact on the environment. Let’s not talk about how the actual goal is to further restrict their citizens from using unregulated and decentralized assets they can’t control or adequately tax through their institutions and puppets in suits.

With all this in mind, what do you think will be the future of PoW and Bitcoin mining?

1.   Do you think it will be banned entirely after scaring people with climate change concerns?  
2.   Will they find ways to make it harder to mine Bitcoin? More regulation, bigger taxes, regular inspections, overly complicated paperwork, and heavy fines for not complying with CO2 emissions are some of the ways they could penalize entities involved with PoW mining.
3.   Do you think the world governments could incentivize those still mining with fossil fuels to transition to clean energy?
4.   Or will all this calm down one day, Bitcoin and its POW will be left alone, and world leaders will focus on other, more important things?

Please vote in the poll and share your thoughts and ideas below.

Comparing the energy consumption of bitcoin mining to other innovation, it is lower than the others such as Aviation Industry, Marine Transport Sector, and Air Conditioners & Electric Fan (Source: CoinShares). Bitcoin mining industry consumes less total energy than other industries and it has more renewable energy. Bitcoin miners are starting to use geothermal and solar energy when mining.

[o_e_l_e_o]

Still, they wanted to send a strong signal by doing that. Seized goods can be auctioned off unless it's something illegal like drugs. The Malaysian government used the steamrollers as symbolism of what they think of the industry. Personal opinion, of course.

My understanding was the equipment was destroyed based on a court order, so it could very well have just been the opinion of a single judge. Given the (super effective ) Chinese ban on mining, if the Malaysian government had wanted to ban mining outright then I'm sure they would have done so.

Let's say that's the direction the US takes, who could follow them? The UK is the obvious culprit. Maybe they get France on board and Germany.

Who's to say it doesn't go the other way? The US bans mining, and some European countries see an opportunity. They incentivize miners to move there on the provision that they set up near new and developing renewable projects, subsidizing the development of such projects by buying excess energy which would otherwise be wasted during periods of low demand, acting as a demand response system, and paying taxes on the bitcoin they mine.

[tadamichi]

However, how can it be just virtue signalling?

Because Bitcoin mining is in no way related to this energy crisis(result of failed policies), a ban against it will in no way reduce any amount of consumption/ increase energy supply where it matters. On a surface level people just connect 2 dots Mining energy intensive + energy crisis(result of failed policies) = ban, but in reality no one can afford to invest heavily into ASICs while using some of the most expensive energy on the planet without going bankrupt already.

Mining goes where a lot of cheap excess energy is available, it isn’t taking energy from where it’s needed, because it would be too expensive to do so. The only places where mining is more profitable than providing energy to an undersupplied grid, are places where the market is completely distorted trough artificial government policies that make no sense in practice.

Just spending time talking about Bitcoin mining during an energy crisis(result of failed policies) should be a scandal in itself, because it’s time that’s taken away from implementing/discussing measures to actually solve this mess. But like pooya already said, it’s easier to find a scapegoat to blame everything on, than to explain to the public that this mess was the result of years of failed government policies and that they’re still unwilling to fix them. So distraction it is. Maybe the term crisis shouldn’t even be applied here, because it’s distracting from the actual cause.

The problem of the costs and low supply is very real and it might destroy their economy. This is not a problem where the government can say it will fix without really fixing it. This is not a problem that they can ignore. They really need to fix it.

But they’re not doing anything to fix it, all they’re doing is:

1. Printing more money during times of inflation and shortages to combat inflation and shortages - Makes the issues worse.

2. Implementing price and consumption controls - Price controls could bankrupt energy suppliers, or make the supply issues worse, depending on how it’s implemented; Consumption controls will probably lead to an over complicated legal framework that wastes months on implementation and has little effect in practice. Consumption controls for companies would lead to an increase in production costs and reduced output again - terrible for inflation, supply issues and the job market.

So we have a mix of measures that increase inflation, make supply issues worse or threaten energy suppliers and months wasted of finding complicated ways to micromanage people that already can’t afford to pay their energy bills and already started to reduce their consumption where possible, because they had too. When the only solution can be to find ways to increase the supply of energy, everything else is utopia. You can’t print or ration your problems away on a big scale. Yet we’re still seeing countries only talking about saving on energy, shutting down reactors and refusing to use politically unwanted technologies to increase their energy production, while at the same time messing up regulations for renewables like me and oleo already highlighted above. There is no fix in sight, i would prepare for inflation and high energy prices to be here for a while. On an individual level the only way out is to get as independent from centrally planned infrastructure as possible.

Will bitcoin fix this?

Bitcoin has nothing to do with how central authorities planned and messed up their infrastructure. Produce your own energy and use Bitcoin so you don’t have to be completely dependent on mismanaged infrastructure - that’ll probably bankrupt large parts of the population and puts their fate completely in the hand of government, if nothing changes soon.

Also, I agree that decision to mine and not to mine will be handled economically, however, for some miners, this problem might be a decision of to steal electricity and not to steal electrcity.

Theft is already outlawed, a general ban of mining wouldn't be justified and doesn’t make any sense.

[pooya87]

bitcoin is mining.  without the miners there is no functional bitcoin.   and china has been stomping on the miners for awhile.   hasn't stopped them.  only stopped large scale mining.   bitcoin functions just fine with small scale mining.

That's not entirely correct. It depends on what kind of hashrate is "small scale mining" in total. If it is significantly less than the current level (eg. 20% of it) then bitcoin is in a big trouble because 51% attacks start becoming easy.
Besides the governments don't have to crack down on everyone, they only have to make it illegal for regular people to stop on their own out of fear.

[Z-tight]

First of all, the Chinese government hopes to develop the REAL economy, and does not want the economy to be deviated from the real to the virtual. It is clear that the trading of cryptocurrencies and their tokens is a virtual economy.

E-banking works fine in China, the e-CNY (China's digital currency) is still undergoing trial and development for over one year, and other forms of virtual or internet stuffs that the government can supervise and control are accepted in China, but it has to be the mining of the virtual currency that they don't control that gets banned. China themselves never said anything along the lines of what you are saying when they banned BTC mining, they made mention of 'enviromental safety' and 'money laundering' issues, both of which are lies too.

Second, China's financial authorities have always emphasized STABILITY as the main tone of policy formulation. This is easy to understand. The result of excessive financial openness in many developing countries is not long-term prosperity. The price of cryptocurrency fluctuates wildly and is not suitable for ordinary people to speculate, so China does not allow Bitcoin to circulate.

But the Yuan in itself is affected by inflation . Financial openess and freedom should be supported by any government that is not hungry to control the lives of her people. Nobody is forced to speculate with Bitcoin, it is an individual choice a person takes knowing the risks involved, BTC isn't only a speculative asset too but has more things it can be used for, it is also a source of income for miners.

Third, any industry is relatively easy to control in the early stage of development. When more and more people are involved, even if legal control should be introduced, it usually encounters great resistance. This may also be the reason why China will soon ban any local banks from supporting bitcoin transactions.

Bitcoin has always been resistant to control right from its early stages. China or any other country can ban BTC mining, regulate miners, ban local banks from supporting BTC transaction, but they can't ban BTC or control the network or its hash rate, it is decentralized and collectively run.

[Pmalek]

Who's to say it doesn't go the other way? The US bans mining, and some European countries see an opportunity. They incentivize miners to move there on the provision that they set up near new and developing renewable projects, subsidizing the development of such projects by buying excess energy which would otherwise be wasted during periods of low demand, acting as a demand response system, and paying taxes on the bitcoin they mine.

I would love to see it. Maybe I am just too big of a pessimist but I don't see the EU going against Big Brother when it comes to big major decisions. That is, if we get to a point that bitcoin mining becomes such a huge affair for some reason. I have to mention the situation we have now with what is going on in Ukraine. If for some reason the US was pro-war and in support of Putin, I don't think the EU would be supplying Ukraine with weapons, munition, military vehicles, etc. to go against American interests.     

[lhrbeijing]

I would love to see it. Maybe I am just too big of a pessimist but I don't see the EU going against Big Brother when it comes to big major decisions. That is, if we get to a point that bitcoin mining becomes such a huge affair for some reason. I have to mention the situation we have now with what is going on in Ukraine. If for some reason the US was pro-war and in support of Putin, I don't think the EU would be supplying Ukraine with weapons, munition, military vehicles, etc. to go against American interests.     

I don't think your concerns are pessimistic. In fact, very few countries in the world can achieve true independence. Governments in many countries listen to Big Brother.

[febriyana]

I see some Bitcoin Miner now has moved to the green energy.
So about climate change is not real reason to banned Bitcoin Mining.

In some country energy electricity is surplus, that country have chance to legalized Bitcoin Mining.
So the electricity can be used and not wasted, also give them some money.

If we compare with PoS mining model, yes PoW have big issue about energy they wasted.
But that is price we pay for decentralization.
From time to time, i believe many miner will think how to use energy more cheap but green energy.

That is still a lot of work for government than headache about Bitcoin Mining reason Climate Change.
The fact Bitcoin Mining is only give 0.1% gas emission for the world.
https://finbold.com/bitcoin-accounted-for-0-1-of-global-greenhouse-gas-emissions-in-2022-data-finds/

[Reid]

First of all, there is more to worry about when it comes to destroying nature than just Bitcoin. They always blame it on Bitcoin because it cannot defend itself.
How about the real mining companies, the physical ones. In Germany coal mining, a big one. In other countries, their waste, they don't want their trash to be in their vicinity so what they do is put it in a big box then send it away to other countries who will accept trash and recycle it. But included in that are other waste that cannot be used anymore or it's just too many to handle.
They should focus on that first before we play the blame game and using Bitcoin as scapegoat to avoid being investigated.
4. It will not calm down, they will keep on pointing all their fingers in Bitcoin so that no one will look at them.

[Minor Miner]

First of all, there is more to worry about when it comes to destroying nature than just Bitcoin. They always blame it on Bitcoin because it cannot defend itself.
How about the real mining companies, the physical ones. In Germany coal mining, a big one. In other countries, their waste, they don't want their trash to be in their vicinity so what they do is put it in a big box then send it away to other countries who will accept trash and recycle it. But included in that are other waste that cannot be used anymore or it's just too many to handle.

Bitcoin has energy consumption, that's true. But it is very small, insignificant compared to other mining industries as you say. Those industries are created by them and they have control, but bitcoin is not. Even if bitcoin later goes completely to renewable energy, they will still find a way to blame.

They should focus on that first before we play the blame game and using Bitcoin as scapegoat to avoid being investigated.
4. It will not calm down, they will keep on pointing all their fingers in Bitcoin so that no one will look at them.

That's what the government has always done, they never admit they're wrong, they'll always find a replacement to blame it all, unfortunately this time it's bitcoin. Governments are human too, just like us, once we don't like something and it hurts us, we find a way to get rid of it or destroy it. Bitcoin is decentralized what they hate most, their power comes from centralizing and controlling us. They don't want their power to be scattered or weakened by anything. If we let us become free, their power will collapse.

[NotATether]

The Malaysian government used the steamrollers as symbolism of what they think of the industry. Personal opinion, of course.    

That's going to be an embarrassing point for them to look back to by the time the whole world uses Bitcoin in 2147...

[o_e_l_e_o]

If we compare with PoS mining model, yes PoW have big issue about energy they wasted.

The energy isn't wasted - it is being used to secure the network, which is a very useful application. I could just as equally argue that the energy used to allow people to watch reality TV is completely wasted, not to mention being a net negative for society, but I don't get to dictate how other people use energy that they are purchasing on a free and open market. Energy has a price. If you are willing to pay that price, you get to use that energy. Simple.

Maybe I am just too big of a pessimist but I don't see the EU going against Big Brother when it comes to big major decisions.

I don't disagree, but bitcoin mining is hardly on the same scale as open war with Russia. I'm sure I read in the last few months that some UK politicians were talking about making the UK attractive for cryptocurrency businesses, which is in stark contrast to the horrendous bitcoin related bills and laws currently making their way through the US government.

[Pmalek]

I'm sure I read in the last few months that some UK politicians were talking about making the UK attractive for cryptocurrency businesses, which is in stark contrast to the horrendous bitcoin related bills and laws currently making their way through the US government.

What is your opinion about the outcome of those bills and proposals, setting aside personal wishes and subjectivity? Do you see a significant number of strong opponents in the ranks of the Democrats or Republicans, or is it more or less all the same? Are there more than just a handful of strong spines that won't bend with the necessary amount of pressure or incentive?     

[blue_hurricanger]

First of all, the Chinese government hopes to develop the REAL economy, and does not want the economy to be deviated from the real to the virtual. It is clear that the trading of cryptocurrencies and their tokens is a virtual economy.

E-banking works fine in China, the e-CNY (China's digital currency) is still undergoing trial and development for over one year, and other forms of virtual or internet stuffs that the government can supervise and control are accepted in China, but it has to be the mining of the virtual currency that they don't control that gets banned. China themselves never said anything along the lines of what you are saying when they banned BTC mining, they made mention of 'enviromental safety' and 'money laundering' issues, both of which are lies too.

China is actually smart. At least from their standpoint, why would they give away their monopoly on the control of their economy by allowing cryptocurrencies? Hello? We're talking about China's single-party system, full-on seeking to increase more authority here. From that point, any of their digital currency is not a real cryptocurrency as you said. lhrbeijing wants to believe those actions are for the people's own good but that's a bit naive. No, not China's CCP.

I expect any similar countries like China will pull the same thing. Talk about how it was to protect the environment and because of climate change but at the end of the line, to increase their control and slap down anything they consider a risk to their control of the economy. Especially in dictatorship countries.

[o_e_l_e_o]

What is your opinion about the outcome of those bills and proposals, setting aside personal wishes and subjectivity? Do you see a significant number of strong opponents in the ranks of the Democrats or Republicans, or is it more or less all the same? Are there more than just a handful of strong spines that won't bend with the necessary amount of pressure or incentive?

I would say its an education and lobbying issue more than anything else. The average age of our Senate is mid-60s, with some Senators well in to their 80s. I think our oldest at the moment is 88. We have Senators who say they only communicate with their staff via hand written messages because they don't like technology, and seem proud of the fact they have never sent an email. And we expect such people to pass sensible laws regarding bitcoin and blockchain technology?

On top of that, most of our Senators on both sides receive campaign funding and donations from large banks and other financial institutions who have a vested interest in seeing that bitcoin does not succeed. Take a look at this data for example: https://www.opensecrets.org/industries/indus.php?ind=F. We are talking hundreds of millions of dollars every year. And so they vote in the way that banks or other lobbyists want them to, so as not to bite the hand that feeds them.

I would say the biggest proponent of bitcoin in the Senate is Cynthia Lummis, who has tried on multiple occasions to advance sensible amendments or legislation, such as exempting all bitcoin transactions under $200 from capital gains tax. Not much progress has been made, though, given the majority of our Senators are as I have described above. I'm hopeful that as bitcoin continues to grow and develop, a steady trickle of Senators might actually take it upon themselves to learn a little bit about what they are trying to regulate.

[bitgolden]

It's good to see that most people think it's not going to really be a bother. I mean it's clear that there is a good amount of energy spent on mining, but that's not a bad thing, it's not about where we spend our energy, it's about being clean and having more energy.

World is not doing good for 2 reasons, one of them is pollution and coal mining or oil type of energy needs, even gas to a point, is not clean, gas could be clean if you take care of it with some filters though, meaning as long as the whole world is producing 10x more energy than we need via hydro, wind, solar and so forth clean stuff, and they do not put pollution out there like china does, then we should be fine, spending it is okay in that case.

[Lanatsa]

It's good to see that most people think it's not going to really be a bother. I mean it's clear that there is a good amount of energy spent on mining, but that's not a bad thing, it's not about where we spend our energy, it's about being clean and having more energy.

World is not doing good for 2 reasons, one of them is pollution and coal mining or oil type of energy needs, even gas to a point, is not clean, gas could be clean if you take care of it with some filters though, meaning as long as the whole world is producing 10x more energy than we need via hydro, wind, solar and so forth clean stuff, and they do not put pollution out there like china does, then we should be fine, spending it is okay in that case.

Not surprising that they are really that loving on putting some emphasis on Bitcoin or crypto mining which they do really love to blame that it do really affects out major environmental issues without even trying to

look into those known problems mainly which is on pollution made out by cars and other factories or something correlated which do really give out big contribution on speaking with climate change.

This isnt only talking solely on one source but if we do really make some in depth then i dont see much relevance that mining do really give out big contribution in speaking about climate change.
They are just misleading out everyone.

[panganib999]

Although it may look as if the most sensible answer, nothing happening wouldn't seem like a good one considering how progressive our society is slowly becoming especially when the welfare of our planet is being discussed. Lots of movements and protests may force large-scale mining operations to look elsewhere for energy resources or halt operations. The environment may also outlive the mining operations of bitcoin as it exponentially gets harder to mine a bitcoin the more bitcoins are mined. So, the most appropriate answer for me is the fact that sooner or later, it may not be sustainable to mine cryptocurrencies anymore as you spend more in creating a rig that would pass off as good and the profits aren't gonna be as great as it is.

[Marvell1]

Maybe I am just too big of a pessimist but I don't see the EU going against Big Brother when it comes to big major decisions.

I don't disagree, but bitcoin mining is hardly on the same scale as open war with Russia. I'm sure I read in the last few months that some UK politicians were talking about making the UK attractive for cryptocurrency businesses, which is in stark contrast to the horrendous bitcoin related bills and laws currently making their way through the US government.

I also don't think the EU will follow everything Big Brother says, national interests must always come first. What you are talking about is the new prime minister of the UK, Rishi Sunak, Rishi is the one who has stated that he wants the UK to be a crypto hub during his time as finance minister.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-sets-out-plan-to-make-uk-a-global-cryptoasset-technology-hub

And in one of the latest news today, UK lawmakers are voting in favor of cryptocurrencies becoming a financial instrument. This bill will be passed if it is passed by parliament and approved by King Charles III, the Bill will go into effect soon. This is very good news for the crypto industry.
https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2022/10/25/uk-lawmakers-vote-to-recognize-crypto-as-regulated-financial-instruments/

[o_e_l_e_o]

So, the most appropriate answer for me is the fact that sooner or later, it may not be sustainable to mine cryptocurrencies anymore as you spend more in creating a rig that would pass off as good and the profits aren't gonna be as great as it is.

Not how it works. If mining becomes less profitable then some miners drop out, meaning mining becomes easier, meaning more profit for existing miners. It's a self correcting system which ensures that mining will always remain profitable at some level.

-snip-

I'm not sure the links you shared are particularly good news for the UK. While it does make it seem pretty unlikely that lawmakers there would pursue an outright ban on bitcoin, talks of more and more regulations are unwanted. Bitcoin does not need regulated. Reading between the lines, it sounds like this is them paving the way for a CBDC.