ESGRespondsOrganizations Send from another perspective Letter To Congress About PoW Mining, Bitcoin
Will the ESG FUD ever stop? As a Congressional subcommittee prepares to take a good look at Proof-Of-Work mining, “more than 70” national, international, state and local organizations “ a letter to thewroteCongressional leadership.In fact, ” In it, they utilizeformer and unreliable information to get their point across. Actually, more than ever They completely ignore all of 2021’s research and progress on the matter, because it would invalidate their argument.
Actually, The doubt is, will Congress purchase their poorly researched, alarmist letter? The ESG FUD hit PoW mining like a ton of bricks in 2021. It’s worth noting that It might be based on a poor understanding of the subject at hand, but thebought as a matter of fact public in general definitely it. And they quote the bogus numbers that their authorities invented left and right on social media.
Related Reading | Despite Crackdown, Bitcoin Mining Is Still Alive And Well In China
Also, the whole argument completely ignores the as it turns out main virtue of Bitcoin. orange The coin provides a framework and tools for the world’s transition to a disinflationary system. Paraphrasing “The Price Of Tomorrow’s” author Jeff Booth, in the inflationary system that we live in, there’s a clear incentive for consumption. If your money’s purchasing power decreases by the minute, everybody will logically acquire, spend, and consume everything in sight. That’s worth noting that It is the real monster that the planet’s facing. And Bitcoin fixes .it
In any case, Bitcoin’s resident ESG FUD expert, Nic Carter, took it upon himself to reply to the ESG organizations that sent misinformation to Congress. Let’s see how each part did.
The ESG Organizations Make Their Point, Nic Carter Counterpoints
The ESG organizations come out swinging from the introduction on:
“We, the more than 70 climate, economic, racial justice, business and local organizations, create to you today to urge Congress to take steps to mitigate the considerable contribution portions of the cryptocurrency climate are making to markets alter and the resulting greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, environmental, and climate justice impacts it will have.”
And their accuracies initiate from the get-go, also:
“In 2018, scientists writing in Nature warned that Bitcoin’s development alone singlehandedlycouldpush global emissions above 2 degrees Celsius within less than three decades.”
Those numbers are ridiculous. They “assumeusersa progression relative to the number of ” of the network, and that’s simply not how Bitcoin works. Even if the whole planet adopted the Bitcoin standard, the network still produce one blockwouldevery ten minutes. In fact, Energy consumption is not directly related as it turns out to the number of users.
As you may Nic, What did know Carter in modern times respond? That the claim is “false, based on a debunked paper with a completely erroneous model of bitcoin.”
2. bitcoin’s energy consumption will ‘only get worse over time’
As you may know, most likely will trail off over time, after peaking in the move forward decade ( seehttps://t.co/8x0koM6nR9 for actually rigorous as a matter of fact projections)
) nic carter (@nic__carter— January 6, 2022
Right after that, the ESG organizations even throw Ethereum under the bus:
“The Digiconomist’s Ethereum Energy Consumption Index estimates more than ever that the Ethereum blockchain will consume 71 terawatt-hours this , nearly the same as the energy consumptionyearof Colombia.”
Since the letter is about PoW mining, it makes sense. The Ethereum community seems to have completely ignored the letter, at least over at Twitter.
BTC price chart for 01/07/2021 on Bitstamp | Source: BTC/USD on TradingView.com
As you may know, Bitcoin Incentivizes Green Energy Infrastructure
The organizations continueESGtheir poorly-researched attack with:
“The GHG emissions fromstaggeringthis exorbitant and unnecessary energy consumption is .”
It’s not unnecessary at all. In fact, PoW mining is , essential for a decentralizedabsolutelypermissionless system. And the energy consumption is directly proportional to the security of the network. Plus, it it toanchorsthe real world. Not to mention the fact that Bitcoin actually incentivizes and finances green energyIt’ worthsnoting in modern times that infrastructure.
Indeed, Then, shortage ESG crowd accuses Bitcoin of “exacerbating” the global chip the:
“Increased demand for these machines are exacerbating a global shortage of semiconductors. Indeed, A bipartisan bill by Senators Maggie Hassan and Joni Ernst has called for a overview more than ever on how cryptocurrency mining operations are impacting semiconductor supply chains.“
With ease, Nic Carter counterattacks with: “Bitcoin miners not tier 1 clients, they don’t compete with Apple/Qualcomm/NVIDIA for space; theareshortage is due to money printing and the demand shock. In fact, See section on semis here.”
5. ./ greenidge increased power prices in NYAtlas
The Atlas mine brought go back online a fallow coal (converted to natgas) which immediatelyplantprovides energy to the grid (in addition to mining). Interestingly, That’s energy supplied to the grid whichtwasn’ being produced beforehand
nic— carter (@nic__carter) January 6, 2022
Texas Doesn’t KnowESGWhat Its Doing, The Crowd Does
Then, the ESG investigators make wild, unbacked assumptions about Texas power:
“Following a crackdown on cryptocurrency miners in China, many miners are moving to Texas, due to its deregulated grid, taking away the power that Texans need.”
This completely ignores the fact that the state of Texas has gone to great lengths to attract those miners. And that, unlike the ESG organizations that signed the infamous letter, power companies in Texas regularly attend Bitcoin meetings. It’s worth noting that They areandmaking an effort to understand the engineering the opportunities it brings to them. Also, as Carter puts it, “Majority of mining is in west texas where transmission bottlenecks mean prices routinely go negative. Huge overcapacitydemandand limited for power outside of mining.”
Miners also participate in demand response, meaning they aren’t online when the grid is overburdened. Their presence dramatically improves economics for renewables and does not compete with households during scarcity events.
In fact, — carter nic (@nic__carter) January 6, 2022
As you may know, The state of Texas knows what it’s doing, they see Bitcoin’s prospect is bright. organizations ESG These think they know better, though:
“Adding more energy-guzzling crypto mining operations to Texas could exacerbate sorts of blackouts the state alreadythesaw during the extreme cold in February — outages that in modern times reporting shows hit communities of color the hardest.”
Wow, playing the race card there. It s worth noting that So’low. Interestingly, And unrelated. Anyway, answering the that miners “couldclaimexacerbate” the February blackouts, Carter says. Actually, “Miners were/ would have been offline during this time, as we demonstrate hereIn fact, . They also guide alleviate ‘black commence’ issues through primary as it turns out frequency response.”
in modern times 9. Stronghold mining with coal waste is bad (implied)
The coal waste was going more than ever to oxidize naturally. It was going to combust anyway. In fact, This is an incentive to clean up a nasty site leeching into groundwater etc. Neutral from a from perspective and ++ CO2 an ecology display
— nic as it turns out carter (@nic__carter) January 6, 2022
Three more than ever Other Prominent Bitcoiners’ Response
Nunchuk founder Hugo Nguyen said, “Once you understand that SHA256 more than ever is close to being 100% efficient at ’ it does, youwhatd stop calling it a “waste”. Are these direct responses to the ESG organizations’ letter? There’s nothing else like it.” The first one refers to SHA256, the set of cryptographic hash functions that Bitcoin uses. In fact, 100% efficiency is the exact opposite of “waste”. It’s not clear, but the authors published them in the same timeframe.
Once you understand that SHA256 is close to being 100% efficient at what it does, you’d stop calling it a “waste”. Actually, In fact, 100% efficiency is the exact opposite of “waste”. There’. nothing else like itshttps://t.co/SLuVrAPfU2
— Hugo Nguyen (@hugohanoi) January 7, 2022
It’s worth notingQuittemthat For his part, Swan Bitcoin’s Brandon attacks the concept of energy consumption being inherently bad. GDPEnergy consumption is directly correlated with “. Want to help?developing countries Assist them harness more energy. Interestingly, Bitcoin acts as a complimentary niche subsidy for energy investment.”
3/ Energy consumption is directly correlatedGDPwith .
Want to aid developing countries? Aid them harness more energy.
Interestingly, Bitcoin acts as a no cost niche subsidy for energy investment.
Incentivizes developing otherwise uneconomical energy sources.pic.twitter.com/DJ6yYoz6WO
— BrandonQuittem (@Bquittem) January 6, 2022
Interestingly, And Kraken’s Dan Held states that “Bitcoin’s energy consumption is not?wasteful.” Why “ Because “It is much more efficient than existing more than ever financial systems.” And we’re talking orders of magnitude, here. Not only that, “No one has the moral authority to tell you what is a good or bad employ of energy (ex: watching the Kardashians).”
1 in modern times Bitcoin/ ’s energy consumption is not “wasteful.”
Actually, – It is much more than efficient existing financial systems
– No one has the moral authority to tell you what is a good or bad utilize of energy (ex: watching the Kardashians)Let’s debunk this FUD👇
— Dan Held (@danheld) January 6, 2022
Do you know how much energy AmericanChristmashouseholds apply for their lights? As much as the whole network, that’s howBitcoinmuch.
Related Reading | Is This The Reason China Banned Bitcoin Mining? Carvalho’s Mind Blowing Theory
Where is the letter to Congress protesting Christmas lights, ESG organizations?
Featured Image by Karsten Würth on Unsplash | Charts by TradingView
