This is an honest assessment of #Bitcoin PoW based on the actual present impacts, not a potential future. See Section VIII for responses to enviro arguments in favor of PoW. My main critique is that they don't even address the idea of landfill CH4 mining.
earthjustice.org/sites/default/…
earthjustice.org/sites/default/…
https://twitter.com/Nick_Thorpedo/status/1573336752789618689
"In the year prior to July 2022, Bitcoin consumed an estimated 36 billion kilowatt-hours (kWh) of electricity, as much as all of the electricity consumed in Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, and Rhode Island put together in that same time period."
As far as I can tell, this is a relatively accurate portrayal of the existing condition of Bitcoin's energy consumption and CO2 emissions. This is not to say that advocates' projections of Bitcoin becoming a net positive technology aren't technically possible in the future.
It's just that those technologies, like mining Bitcoin from landfill methane or behind the switchyard co-location have not yet been implemented at scale yet. And until they are, the impact remains significantly negative.
I appreciate the fact that the report is relatively constructive, providing policymakers and utilities with actionable recommendations "shy of a complete moratorium," which they implicitly acknowledge is unlikely to work. earthjustice.org/sites/default/…
It could be required by regulators that all new PoW facilities install the annual generation capacity of renewable energy on-site or else use methane capture technologies. Advocates point to these technologies, but they would also most surely be against their forced adoption.
There are 270 sources cited in this report. Eight are from Alex de Vries @DigiEconomist or cited as derivative of his work. So the dismissal of this report as FUD should not be accepted at face value.
It's possible that the report has it entirely wrong and I still withhold judgement on whether the future of Bitcoin can be a part of the climate solution, but it seems rather thorough and earnest, despite the few areas where their priors are obviously showing.
For some well informed criticism of the report see
https://twitter.com/jyn_urso/status/1574503471621062657?s=20&t=hCdumbLf9yT9Wg1mPpEYyw
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
