3 ms·
If it was about the environment and not looking for a scape goat, then ban or simply tax the dirty energy sources. It makes no difference to the environment if
by swinglock 5y ago
If it was about the environment and not looking for a scape goat, then ban or simply tax the dirty energy sources.
It makes no difference to the environment if you burn coal to feed Bitcoin or a factory.
Higher taxes on dirty energy would make a huge difference to which power sources would be used by Bitcoin however as Bitcoin feeds on cheap energy, but why limit ourselves to Bitcoin anyway; it doesn't burn the coal.
- mrtksn 5y agoFossil energy sources is a necessary evil, the pollution we create results in cars, computers, food etc. You can't simply say that from now on you'll shut down the coal energy, that would be catastrophic. Instead, the governments are incentivising the cleaner sources over the other. At least the governments that have a mandate to do that. The problem with the energy spent on Bitcoin is that it produces a gambling marketplace and nothing else(okay, also some ransomware and illicit trade tools too but these are minuscule). Do we really need to have huge global gambling marketplace at the cost of the destruction of the environment? At the same destruction we could he better food, electronics cars etc. The same gambling marketplace infrastructure could be run for just a few kWh.