The graphic from @ShaunEnergy below shows how Bitcoin miner Lancium use their software to precisely scale up or down power use to help grid operators keep the grid stable
Can't do that with a steel mill: its on or off
So,
1. without 10x more demand response we cannot achieve the renewable transition (IEA data)
2. without Bitcoin miners, we don't have our #1 form of demand response
If renewable transition is our WHAT, Bitcoin miners are an essential part of our HOW.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
@woonomic was in the country, so we teamed up to create something we've planned for a bit:
4 Dynamic Bitcoin ESG Charts
Whatever your view of ESG, Govt & Institutional Investors need this data. Now we have it
1. shows Bitcoin's progress to 52.6% sustainable energy
👇
2/4 Total Emissions
This shows that since the China-ban the previous rising emissions trend has reversed.
Network emissions are trending downwards, even as hashrate and electricity consumption increase
Miners switching to sustainable energy is a big driver for this
3/4 Emissions per dollar of market cap are decreasing.
This chart shows that unlike the current global financial system where GDP-growth is tethered to rising emissions, Bitcoin's market cap can grow while emissions do not.
#Bitcoin has grown its sustainable energy mix @ 6.2% p.a from Jan 2020
* 6.2% growth rate is faster than any major industry
* 52.6% Sustainable mix is ⬆️ any major industry
🧵
2/4
Bitcoin Emissions have trended down since the China ban
Due to known model omissions, CCAF (over)estimates emissions at 58.58 MTCO2e (ccaf.io/cbeci/ghg/index)
With off-grid mining factored in, the figure is 33% lower at 39.33 Mt CO2e
(0.079% of global CO2e emissions)
3/4
Bitcoin emission intensity is decreasing
This measures emissions per KWh. A Coindesk article picked up Cambridge data to suggest that emissions intensity "may be increasing" coindesk.com/business/2022/…
This is again incorrect. It has been trending down for at least 3.5 yrs
1/24
On Jan 31 @greenpeaceusa continued it's paid campaign against a technology that the research consistently says is net environment positive with its most sensationalist and ludicrous heading yet
Rather than research you've actually doubled down on more paid (& failed) misinformation, courtesy of $5+1 Million from billionaire altcoiner Chris Larsen who has a vested interest attacking Bitcoin
Faux environmental concern: his pretext
You've become his paid attack dog
3/24
But I go further, clear one or two things up.
In my three decades as a climate activist and environmental campaigner I’ve never seen such a large volume of misinformation has has been launched against Bitcoin