Let's discuss how little you actually understand about economics and energy.

The first thing to understand is that energy is not globally fungible. Electricity decays as it leaves its point of origin; it’s expensive to transport. There is a huge excess (hydro) in many areas.

In other words, it can also be variable. It's estimated that in Sichuan there is twice as much electricity produced as is needed during the rainy season. Indeed, there is seasonality to how Bitcoin mining works. You can see here: https://t.co/dzPI5LAOln
Bitcoin EXPORTS energy in this scenario. Fun fact, most industrial nations would steer this excess capacity towards refining aluminum by melting bauxite ore, which is very energy intensive.

You wouldn't argue that we are producing *too much* electricity from renewables, right?
"But what about the carbon footprint! ITS HUGE!"

Many previous estimates have quite faulty methods and don't take into account the actual energy sources. Is it fair to put a GHG equivalent on hydro or solar power? That would seem a bit disingenuous, no?
Well that's exactly what some have done.

https://t.co/el1Zzy6g31

https://t.co/JSof31ObNs
Only a wholly uncritical mind would take dubious research like this and double down on a bad take. China's policy has largely veered towards keeping miners out of the 'steady' power grid that runs on coal simply because other productive industries are given preference by the CCP.
Let's consider the other sources of electricity which miners use now and may depend on at greater scale in the future:

Recently the petro industry has experimented with burning CH4 "flare-offs" to power Bitcoin miners, cutting methane emissions and reducing warming potential.
Solar is also free energy for most who are brave enough to commit to the cooling costs and infrastructural requirements. It's been done before and it will absolutely scale as panels become even cheaper.

https://t.co/WaleCRMh51
In fact, even if individuals and companies mining bitcoin do not shift to a renewable-based mining scheme, locales may just force them to do it. In Missoula, MT, miners must "either purchase or build renewable sources of energy that completely offset the electricity they consume"
Furthermore it is estimated that globally between 40-70% of all cryptocurrency mining powered by renewables. Of course this is up for debate and depends on who you ask.

It's fine to be critical of Bitcoin and the negative externalities, but it's worth being well informed.

More from Economy

1/ To add a little texture to @NickHanauer's thread, it's important to recognize that there's a good reason why orthodox economists (& economic cosplayers) so vehemently oppose a $15 min wage:

The min wage is a wedge that threatens to undermine all of orthodox economic theory.


2/ Orthodox economics is grounded in two fundamental models: a systems model that describes the market as a closed equilibrium system, and a behavioral model that describes humans as rational, self-interested utility-maximizers. The modern min wage debate undermines both models.

3/ The assertion that a min wage kills jobs is so central to orthodox economics that it is often used as the textbook example of the Supply/Demand curve. Raise the cost of labor and businesses will buy less of it. It's literally Econ 101!


4/ Econ 101 insists that markets automatically set an efficient "equilibrium price" for labor & everything else. Mess with this price and bad things happen. Yet decades of empirical research has persuaded a majority of economists that this just isn't

5/ How can this be? Well, either the market is not a closed equilibrium system in which if you raise the price of labor employers automatically purchase less of it... OR the market is not automatically setting an efficient and fair equilibrium wage. Or maybe both. #FAIL

You May Also Like