Environmentalists Attack Bitcoin – Bitcoin Magazine
This is an opinion editorial by Zack Voell, a bitcoin mining and market researcher.
For most of Bitcoin’s short history, discussions about how much energy the global network uses to process and record transactions have been a recurring topic. But today, the conversation is reaching new levels of intensity as recognized opponents who purport to be environmentally conscious attack Bitcoin in the public arena.
These attacks extend beyond subtle investment preferences, such as hedge funds allocation to coins or tokens that advertise “green” or “clean” infrastructure. And they can be even more direct than the World Economic Forum tweeting on Ethereum’s merger.
This article provides an overview of several long-running attacks on bitcoin mining’s energy use from just the past month, and advocates for bitcoin investors to educate themselves and act against these misinformed, yet influential, environmental attacks.
The White House weighs in on mining
One of the most prominent documented criticisms of bitcoin mining comes from the 46-page report published by the White House last month on the supposed negative environmental externalities caused by bitcoin. A detailed, annotated version of the report was published by crypto venture capitalist Nic Carter. And while the report is full of errors and misrepresentations, as Carter pointed out, it’s important to note that the underlying ideas it represents are the dominant view in Washington policy circles, such as the Bitcoin Policy Institute. noted on Twitter.
The amount of energy consumed by miners is criticized for potentially undermining US sustainability goals, noting the landmark example of China’s mining ban, which was allegedly due to “the incompatibility of large-scale Bitcoin mining with the country’s environmental goals,” according to the report. The report also calls for the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Energy to work with state and local officials to build standards for the mining industry.
“Should these measures prove ineffective in mitigating the impacts, the administration should explore executive action, and Congress may consider legislation, to limit or eliminate the use of high-energy-intensive consensus mechanisms for mining cryptoassets,” the report said.
Academics collect mining criticism
Academics from across the US wanted to have their say in the discourse on bitcoin and climate change last month. Two separate studies examined bitcoin mining’s energy use and estimated emissions to understand if and how it affects the environment.
From Cornell Engineering, a new faculty study on achieving carbon-neutral bitcoin mining was published in the September issue of the journal Energy & Environmental Science. The study suggests that states with low prices and large amounts of renewable energy in their power mix can help reduce “the environmental damage that cryptocurrency brings”. Like many other reports, this one starts with the one-line, quasi-prejudicial claim: “Bitcoin mining requires a significant amount of electricity to validate blocks, which increases greenhouse gas emissions.”
There is no room for nuance.
From the University of New Mexico Economics, three professors wrote a paper that “estimates the energy-related climate damages of bitcoin mining.” Again, because it consumes energy, it must be bad. The task also measures special calculations such as climate damage per mined coin. Ultimately, they draw bizarre conclusions such as that bitcoin contributes roughly the same amount of environmental damage as all beef, and internet money is “more like digital oil than digital gold” in a rhetorical slight against both bitcoin and fossil fuels. Tidbits from this study were headlined in nearly every major news publication that has ever written about bitcoin, including Bloomberg, The Verge, Time, Newsweek, The Hill, Forbes, The Daily Beast, and many more. It even made it to Smithsonian Magazine. In short, this bit of pop science was a hit.
Activists are also cracking down on Bitcoin mining
Earthjustice and the Sierra Club, two prominent environmental activist organizations, also rallied on the latest wave of public ridicule for bitcoin mining. The organizations collaborated on a 37-page report on the environmental impacts of bitcoin mining titled “The Energy Bomb” and claimed to “break down the nebulous and opaque industry and false claims of sustainability.”
For example, the report sounds the alarm about the fact that “the mining industry already uses half of the electricity of the entire global banking sector, and it will overtake the sector in two years if current trends continue”. The horror! (Just cancel banking instead.) The report also claims that “bitcoin emissions” rival driving six million cars. These talking points were repeated in mainstream media from The Verge to the Financial Times.
What Can Bitcoin Lawyers Do?
Frustration or demoralization are both unsurprising reactions to this onslaught of half-truths, prejudiced criticism, and consistent attacks on bitcoin mining. And it is noteworthy that all these reports, articles, studies, etc. are from the last month. So the battle is far from over.
One of the most important steps for bitcoin advocates to take today is self-education about electrical markets and energy. “What Bitcoin Did” has recorded a number of episodes dedicated to this topic. Braiins Mining has released an in-depth series on mining and energy grids. And this topic is discussed daily on Twitter. Bitcoin investors should take advantage of all of these educational resources.
Another step is to simply start mining. With $100 and a few hours of reading, anyone can start mining at home. Not only is this an educational exercise to learn the mechanics of mining, but it adds a more activist-proof hash rate to support the network.
Although daily mining earnings have dropped significantly, the educational value of mining remains constant. And home hash rate is more secure in many ways than corporate mining. Home miners are Bitcoin’s miners of last resort – the backbone of the network. If all else falls from climate hysteria or onerous regulations, miners will still be hashing (and possibly heating homes or greenhouses with the exhaust air).
Bitcoin will win. But its triumph will not come from passivity.
This is a guest post by Zack Voell. Opinions expressed are entirely their own and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of BTC Inc or Bitcoin Magazine.
