Peter Zeihan - in a world of carbon taxes, cryptos net worths is negative

[zander1983]

Im a fan of Peter Zeihan and in general agree with many of his arguments, such as China collapsing by 2030 due to demographics and Germany falling down the economic ladder fast due to its reliance on ever-more expensive fossil fuels. So that's why Im torn on his views on crypto - hes usually right.

He goes on to say "crypto is the poster child for the environment from 1990 - 2022 when we had unlimited volumes of capital. Now with that the money is going away, crypto is going away"

My take on this is that yes, while there will be less capital going forward, fiat is still created at the whim of commercials banks, therefore the idea of a digital cash that cant be debased is a powerful one. On future carbon taxes, which I agree with, the bitcoin network can easily operate on a fully renewable grid - the problem with renewables is they are intermittent and the energy requires storage. Neither of these limitations apply to the Bitcoin network.

at 53min 20 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aHUoMmKDLUI

[1715585337]

1715585337

[1715585337]

1715585337

[pooya87]

He goes on to say "crypto is the poster child for the environment from 1990 - 2022 when we had unlimited volumes of capital. Now with that the money is going away, crypto is going away"

But money is not going away, they are actually printing more of it and right now the "capital" is too scared to jump into bitcoin. Not to mention that certain events like FTX collapse have caused a small crash preventing the rise.
When the inflation+recession growth stops, things could go back to normal and bitcoin would go up again.

Keep in mind that governments have been printing money like maniacs that has and will crash fiat's value which would only contribute to bitcoin price rise.

On future carbon taxes, which I agree with, the bitcoin network can easily operate on a fully renewable grid

Since such things like "Carbon Tax" are not global, they won't affect bitcoin. They are also not applied in any place with high bitcoin hashrate to matter and even if they did, the hashrate would simply migrate to a region with vast amounts of ultra cheap energy .

[jackg]

Renewables needing to be stored and geographically diversified is something well known by most governments trying to invest in it. They're going to have to build the infrastructure for that anyway - most already know how to though from when it has been done with oil and coal (such as peak energy usage).

An international carbon tax targetting crypto sounds a lot like scapegoating though. Many other things release a lot more emissions for fewer people (such as private jets and the whole airline industry - the majority of commercial flights are filled more with frequent fliers for things like business than they are holidaygoers and that should be mostly considered unnecessary by now since the pandemic).

Such a tax would also have to provide exemptions for things like electric cars too and a lot of big battery production.

[bitmover]

On future carbon taxes, which I agree with, the bitcoin network can easily operate on a fully renewable grid - the problem with renewables is they are intermittent and the energy requires storage. Neither of these limitations apply to the Bitcoin network.

at 53min 20 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aHUoMmKDLUI

Carbon taxes is just a buzz word. Just like ESG.

But nobody can deny the reality for the long run, and fossel fuels aren't going to disappear.
 
Anyway  bitcoin can be mined with green energy sources ,  when their price becomes sustainable  and competitive

[zander1983]

Renewables needing to be stored and geographically diversified is something well known by most governments trying to invest in it. They're going to have to build the infrastructure for that anyway - most already know how to though from when it has been done with oil and coal (such as peak energy usage).

An international carbon tax targetting crypto sounds a lot like scapegoating though. Many other things release a lot more emissions for fewer people (such as private jets and the whole airline industry - the majority of commercial flights are filled more with frequent fliers for things like business than they are holidaygoers and that should be mostly considered unnecessary by now since the pandemic).

Such a tax would also have to provide exemptions for things like electric cars too and a lot of big battery production.

I mean there will be general carbon taxes across the US, Europe, parts of Asia and Australia (anywhere with strong social contracts). These will target anything using fossil fuels, not just bitcoin. But the bitcoin network as a whole can deal with the limits of renewables (transporting and storage) unlike manufacturing for example.

[zander1983]

On future carbon taxes, which I agree with, the bitcoin network can easily operate on a fully renewable grid - the problem with renewables is they are intermittent and the energy requires storage. Neither of these limitations apply to the Bitcoin network.

at 53min 20 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aHUoMmKDLUI

Carbon taxes is just a buzz word. Just like ESG.

But nobody can deny the reality for the long run, and fossel fuels aren't going to disappear.
 
Anyway  bitcoin can be mined with green energy sources ,  when their price becomes sustainable  and competitive

How long do you define long run? Fossil fuels are being taken out of the ground 10 million times faster than they were put in - and their usage increases every year. The long run isnt as long as  many seem to imagine IMO.

[zander1983]

He goes on to say "crypto is the poster child for the environment from 1990 - 2022 when we had unlimited volumes of capital. Now with that the money is going away, crypto is going away"

But money is not going away, they are actually printing more of it and right now the "capital" is too scared to jump into bitcoin. Not to mention that certain events like FTX collapse have caused a small crash preventing the rise.
When the inflation+recession growth stops, things could go back to normal and bitcoin would go up again.

Keep in mind that governments have been printing money like maniacs that has and will crash fiat's value which would only contribute to bitcoin price rise.

On future carbon taxes, which I agree with, the bitcoin network can easily operate on a fully renewable grid

Since such things like "Carbon Tax" are not global, they won't affect bitcoin. They are also not applied in any place with high bitcoin hashrate to matter and even if they did, the hashrate would simply migrate to a region with vast amounts of ultra cheap energy .

I dont see things going back to normal. Debt is growing at 4 times GDP and has been for a few decades. Bitcoin can grow, but not because things go back to normal, rather due to a collapse/recalibration which looks inevitable IMO.

[odolvlobo]

Simply stated, he believes that Bitcoin has no value because he is personally unable to see any utility, and everything else he said follows logically from that.

His statements prove his narrow-mindedness, his lack of imagination, his lack of vision, his ignorance, and most importantly his arrogance more than anything else.

[bitmover]

How long do you define long run? Fossil fuels are being taken out of the ground 10 million times faster than they were put in - and their usage increases every year. The long run isnt as long as  many seem to imagine IMO.

We are not going to see oil reserves depleted.  There is still plenty of oil. This is not what carbon taxes/credit is about

Carbon taxes exists because when we burn oil, some carbon goes to the atmosphere and this is, supposedly,  bad. And what those esg people are trying to impose is a new energy matrix based on green sources without fossil fuel.

What I am saying is that it is not possible for now, and Europe will just freeze to death without gas, people will have blackouts all over the world without thermal power stations, etc.

Just look at this chart.

https://ourworldindata.org/

And yes, there are plenty fossil fuels reserves

This is not bitcoins fault. Bitcoin miners will automatically use the cheaper energy available.

[zander1983]

Simply stated, he believes that Bitcoin has no value because he is personally unable to see any utility, and everything else he said follows logically from that.

His statements prove his narrow-mindedness, his lack of imagination, his lack of vision, his ignorance, and most importantly his arrogance more than anything else.

He's very very smart but I basically agree. His certainty over every prediction is a red flag.

[zander1983]

How long do you define long run? Fossil fuels are being taken out of the ground 10 million times faster than they were put in - and their usage increases every year. The long run isnt as long as  many seem to imagine IMO.

We are not going to see oil reserves depleted.  There is still plenty of oil. This is not what carbon taxes/credit is about

Carbon taxes exists because when we burn oil, some carbon goes to the atmosphere and this is, supposedly,  bad. And what those esg people are trying to impose is a new energy matrix based on green sources without fossil fuel.

What I am saying is that it is not possible for now, and Europe will just freeze to death without gas, people will have blackouts all over the world without thermal power stations, etc.

Just look at this chart.

https://ourworldindata.org/

And yes, there are plenty fossil fuels reserves

This is not bitcoins fault. Bitcoin miners will automatically use the cheaper energy available.

I agree mostly. In fact I believe there is no replacement for oil that doesnt involve lowering the worlds standard of living. Where I disagree is the plenty of reserves less. The EROI(Energy Returned on Energy Invested) of oil was 1/100, now its 1/15. That is about 100 years ago, for every 1 barrel invested we got 100 out of the ground, now its 15 (as its deeper and harder to get out, and its shale oil).

[BlackHatCoiner]

the problem with renewables is they are intermittent and the energy requires storage.

And the Bitcoin network is decentralized. Wherever might not have wind power, might have geothermal power, and wherever might not have solar energy, might have cheap electricity. The fact that renewables are intermittent would only matter if there was a single entity responsible for mining; there isn't. There are thousands of miners, all over across the world. Also, not all nations have carbon taxes, and those who do, don't have the same tax.

Simply stated, he believes that Bitcoin has no value because he is personally unable to see any utility, and everything else he said follows logically from that.

Why do these people never have a proper interlocutor?

[hatshepsut93]

Bitcoin's value is not driven by mining, mining is driven by Bitcoin value. If electricity prices rise, if there are anti-mining regulations, it would just result in migration of mining and maybe lower network hashrate. But unless this drop is very dramatic, it's not going to affect security, and if security is unaffected, the price is unaffected.

My take on this is that yes, while there will be less capital going forward, fiat is still created at the whim of commercials banks, therefore the idea of a digital cash that cant be debased is a powerful one.

Bitcoin still fails to exhibit anti-inflation or anti-crisis properties. It seems to be just as affected as the stock market and other mainstream investments. But on the other hand, the fact that Bitcoin is still alive and well means that the market indeed believes that Bitcoin has some pretty solid fundamentals.

[franky1]

Bitcoin's value is not driven by mining, mining is driven by Bitcoin value.

Bitcoin still fails to exhibit anti-inflation or anti-crisis properties.

you have things backwards

that guy in the video saying bitcoin has no cost no value and due to taxes is a negative.. has it completely wrong
if a miners electric increases due to wars, crisis or taxes. there is more cost. meaning the value rises

bitcoins value is derived from the entire planets lowest cost to acquire bitcoin
and if next year the cost is higher due to wars, crisis or taxes the value rises (it doesnt go negative)

bitcoins value is not derived from the ATH market price(many fools think it is)

there is a 3 layer to the methods of acquiring:
Premium rate- public speculation markets  \_
                                                               _> less efficient miners jump in and out of these groups
preferential rate- OTC platforms                /

value rate                                              - most efficient mining farms stay in this group

its like the retail market
retailer
wholesaler
farmer

bitcoin mining at the most efficient cost is the bottom. if you find the cheapest mining cost of bitcoin ON THE PLANET you find the bottom. yep if no one can acquire bitcoin for less. thats the bottom.
no one wants to sell for less. thus it becomes the ultimate support price for a bottom where people then sell for that amount or more. where there is then a premium for the supply/demand stuff ABOVE the bottom

this bottom can change if there was a PROLONGED hashrate competition drop. but the most efficient miners creating the bottom support do not play to daily whims,so it has to be a prolongs drop

they are not on daily-monthly electric bills. they purchase electric blocks of GW in 6-24 month chunks
their hardware is not running intermittently. it runs on a ~2year life cycle constantly, before selling hardware as second hand to altcoiners/hobbiests, and investing in next gen more efficient hardware

they cost out their costs over those periods and compare it to the coin they get over those periods.
which then calculate to a coin /cost bottom(based on a 6-24month) average

bitcoin value does not change in a volatile manner compared to the market premium, as the costs are semi-fixed for prolonged periods

things like electric rises and tax on electric actually add costs to the bottom. meaning the value rises.

bitcoin does not have negative value due to taxes at the electric(carbon) level. it has positive value or more precisely more premium due to those taxes raising the cost of electric

[dansus021]

But money is not going away, they are actually printing more of it and right now the "capital" is too scared to jump into bitcoin.
When the inflation+recession growth stops, things could go back to normal and bitcoin would go up again.

Keep in mind that governments have been printing money like maniacs that has and will crash fiat's value which would only contribute to bitcoin price rise.

This actually very true guys, gov is printing money like crazy. The news is all over the place is might the cause of global recession too. We can take one example US that print around 3 Trillion dollar in 2020 alone https://www.depledgeswm.com/depledge/the-us-printed-more-than-3-trillion-in-2020-alone-heres-why-it-matters-today/

that been using for stimulus and anything.

[pooya87]

I dont see things going back to normal. Debt is growing at 4 times GDP and has been for a few decades. Bitcoin can grow, but not because things go back to normal, rather due to a collapse/recalibration which looks inevitable IMO.

When economy collapses, things eventually go back to normal. Have you forgotten what happened in 2008? Look it up. There was chaos as economy was collapsing (bitcoin was created during that time too) and things went back to normal and most people forgot that their centralized monetary system is seriously flawed and corrupted. Those who didn't forget started adopting bitcoin.

[inthelongrun]

I really disagree. Many people are suffering from this economic downturn but it doesn't mean that there is no money. I believe that there are more governments nowadays that are printing more money than ever. Big companies are still big and even some of them are taking advantage of this current situation. It is all about opportunities and these giant corporations are capable of doing so because they have the needed capital and influence. Let's just say that what happened to LUNA and FTX are the main reasons the market is still down. Not saying that bitcoin should pump and regain its previous highest price but without that bad news, bitcoin should've been at the $20k level something.

When this world economic crisis ends, ordinary people will once again have excess money to invest in bitcoin. Bitcoin network depending on energy is not a big deal since there are always places on earth that are conducive for it. Fiat's value will continue to decline while bitcoin will continue to increase due to its limited supply and decentralized manner.

[davis196]

The "dirty" electricity produced by burning coal is already "carbon taxed". There's a market for carbon emissions and the coal burning power plants have to buy carbon emission permits, in order to sell their electricity.
The BTC/crypto miners, who are buying such "dirty" electricity had already paid the carbon tax, because the carbon tax is included in the price of the "dirty" electricity. This Peter Zeihan guy is talking BS. Crypto mining should not be taxed twice, because this would be unfair.
I agree that the "easy money" era is temporarily gone, and this is what causes the crypto winter, but the fiat financial system cannot survive without money printing.

[avikz]

He goes on to say "crypto is the poster child for the environment from 1990 - 2022 when we had unlimited volumes of capital. Now with that the money is going away, crypto is going away"

Doesn't make sense! Money isn't going away! We are going through a mild crypto winter and the situation will be normal again and we will see an influx of capital sooner than expected. It's just that FTX collapse and ongoing legal investigations against Binance are putting the market at risk and that's why a lot of investors are pulling away their capital. They will be back shortly.

On future carbon taxes, which I agree with, the bitcoin network can easily operate on a fully renewable grid - the problem with renewables is they are intermittent and the energy requires storage. Neither of these limitations apply to the Bitcoin network.

The problem with renewable energy is that they require a large amount of investment, to begin with. Once it is set up and running, the operating cost is much lesser than any conventional source of energy. Such kind of large investment is usually out of the reach of a startup or a small company. We may see a completely different picture if the market comes back to its former glory so that mining companies are able to collect the fund. Right now it's somewhat dicey.

[zander1983]

I dont see things going back to normal. Debt is growing at 4 times GDP and has been for a few decades. Bitcoin can grow, but not because things go back to normal, rather due to a collapse/recalibration which looks inevitable IMO.

When economy collapses, things eventually go back to normal. Have you forgotten what happened in 2008? Look it up. There was chaos as economy was collapsing (bitcoin was created during that time too) and things went back to normal and most people forgot that their centralized monetary system is seriously flawed and corrupted. Those who didn't forget started adopting bitcoin.

If normal is 1990 to 2020, I dont see us ever going back. I agree with Macron, we are likely at the end of the age of abundance due to climate change, international conflict and continued supply chain issues. Im trying to figure out can Bitcoin survive in the new era of scarcity of everything due to aforementioned issues - which has already begun IMO. It must become a true inflation hedge if it is to.

https://www.connexionfrance.com/article/French-news/Macron-France-is-at-the-end-of-its-age-of-abundance