Jun. 10, 2021
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Bitcoins role in global pollution is overstated, Banning Bitcoin would have negligible effects on the environment. https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-56012952 https://ourworldindata.org/energy-production-consumption according to this data, The total global energy expenditure for the year 2017 was 166,824 TWh and for 2018 it was 171,240 TWh, The entire Bitcoin network is projected to use around 121 TWh per year or the equivalent of 0.07% of the global energy consumption in 2017. From 2017 to 2018, total energy consumption increased by 4416 TWh, If Bitcoin used 121 TWh of energy in 2017 and then was banned at the beginning of 2018, then instead of total global energy expenditure growing by 4416 TWh it would grow by 4295 TWh. https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/maprod/documents/Energy_Savings_Light_Emitting_Diodes_Niche_Lighting_Apps.pdf a 2008 study by the department of energy found that decorative Christmas lights have an annual energy expenditure of 6.6 TWh, Would banning Christmas light be an effective way of fighting pollution? The majority of energy produced in the US is wasted, America has an energy efficiency rating of 42%, Focusing on Banning Bitcoin and Banning Decorative Christmas lights wont bring us any closer to solving climate change, because the next year humans will just find a new way of expending a massive amount of energy. Instead, of trying to eliminate bitcoin mining and energy intensive cryptocurrencies, we can incentivize miners to use clean; renewable or carbon neutral energy to mine bitcoin. and then penalize miners that have a negative carbon footprint until they are no longer profitable. Bitcoin miners will even be motivated to fund the development of new sources of clean renewable energy, all miners strive to find the cheapest source of energy and utilize this energy is the most efficient way possible so they can be profitable, if the current supply of renewable energy is too low to meet their demand then eventually it becomes cost effective to fund new sources of clean energy than it is pay a higher price for electricity on existing sources..