> Is there any more to discuss on the topic of Bitcoin being outrageously wasteful? Or is this pretty much the final word? Its not the final word, but it is so

> Is there any more to discuss on the topic of Bitcoin being outrageously wasteful? Or is this pretty much the final word? Its not the final word, but it is something to vigilantly monitor in case the following changes: Most bitcoin energy use is from mining, and that mining uses renewable energy or energy waste byproducts. Source: my experience with mining companies that don't publicly disclose how they do this profitably. So for now, try to corroborate it yourself. I would say that 70-80% of bitcoin mining is not a wasteful use of energy and that merely estimating the energy numbers doesn't tell you anything about the source. What I mean by "not wasteful" means that it isn't pulling away from another use of energy that was ever going to happen. This wasted energy is usually in the form of byproducts around other power facilities that cannot be economically converted and transported to residential and commercial areas. This is where bitcoin mining shines: Bitcoin mining does not need a robust internet connection and does not need to occur in residential or commercial areas. A computer with a satellite connection can submit hashes to the bitcoin network, and pools further make it practical to have lower latency, because they merely pay out based on your contribution to the pool. So miners that use energy waste byproducts (converting those byproducts to electricity at the source and taking transformers there) often times are doing a favor to the power company or whoever is there. What to monitor: if nation states start competing over power of this network, they may disregard the economic feasibility of doing so, and then it will be incredibly wasteful uses of electricity.