[HN Gopher] Bitcoin's Climate Change Impact Is Under Scrutiny
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Bitcoin's Climate Change Impact Is Under Scrutiny
        
       Author : jacksonpollock
       Score  : 7 points
       Date   : 2021-03-12 21:05 UTC (1 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.nytimes.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.nytimes.com)
        
       | 7_my_mind wrote:
       | The fact that nobody can simply say, "here is what Bitcoin does,
       | this is why the energy consumption is justified" is a strong
       | indictment against the supposed value that Bitcoin brings.
       | 
       | But, there is no legal mechanism that measures the utility of
       | commercial activities, and which dictates that energy should be
       | consumed only by enterprises that have a certain utility. This is
       | unprecedented territory.
        
       | rootsudo wrote:
       | And, so what?
       | 
       | Is everyone going to stop like how "gas" is under scrutiny? No.
       | 
       | Replace with coal, or any other commodity. Copper, Gold, Silver,
       | Platinum, etc.
       | 
       | "the annual carbon emissions from the electricity required to
       | mine Bitcoin and process its transactions are equal to the amount
       | emitted by all of New Zealand. Or Argentina."
       | 
       | So? When did comparing to a country become a metric of success or
       | for cause of concern? We can say the same/use the same metric for
       | Gold, Silver. In general an economic indicator of prosperity is
       | energy usage.
       | 
       | If anything this sounds like a marketing piece for the companies
       | cited in the article vs a rag on bitcoin itself.
        
         | amznthrwaway wrote:
         | We get it: BTC holders like you will argue for the wholesale
         | destruction of the planet, before you'll argue for a transition
         | to proof of stake coins.
        
       | rawtxapp wrote:
       | The thing is either Bitcoin is successful which means the value
       | settled on it's blockchain will be very substantial, so the
       | electricity used to secure that value will be worth it.
       | 
       | Or it fails as many on HN predict in which case you have nothing
       | to worry about because this electricity usage would only be
       | temporary, no miner would spend energy securing an unused
       | blockchain.
        
         | amznthrwaway wrote:
         | Or, hopefully, smart people will realize that proof of stake is
         | a better solution, and this will go into the past.
         | 
         | Unfortunately, the world is filled with dishonest, disgusting,
         | malevolent sociopaths such as yourself who would rather watch
         | the oceans turn to acid than transition between asset classes.
        
         | mandelbrotwurst wrote:
         | It's not guaranteed that the value of securing the network will
         | be worth its cost even if the value it provides is very high -
         | the cost could be many times higher still!
         | 
         | I don't say to this to argue that the energy consumption either
         | is or is not worth it, just calling attention to a gap in your
         | logic here.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-03-12 23:02 UTC)