The bitcoin mining community leans on an oft-repeated, but so far mostly unsupported, claim that their activities could actually expedite the construction of new solar and wind farms without diverting power from other uses-houses, hospitals, warehouses, electric vehicles, literally almost anything that uses electricity. So the question becomes subjective: How much energy use is justifiable for a fledgling industry that benefits only a relatively tiny number of speculators?
Of course, traditional banks serve vastly more people than bitcoin. A May analysis by the crypto firm Galaxy Digital, for example, pointed out that bitcoin consumes a lot less electricity than the ATMs and data centers of traditional banks. Bitcoin’s energy use vs the ATMs and bank data centersīitcoin advocates argue that all industries use a lot energy, and that it’s unfair to single out bitcoin. For example, hydro power is more readily available in China during Sichuan’s rainy season. But it’s important to note that these numbers are all informed guesses, based on a lot of assumptions, and liable to fluctuate seasonally and with the price of bitcoin. Altogether, annual global emissions from the network are about equal to the London metro area, according to a March article in the journal Joule. According to Cambridge, 62% of global miners rely on hydropower for at least some of their electricity 38% use some coal, and about 39% use at least some combination of solar, wind, or geothermal.
0 kommentar(er)
