For one, miners are already deployed to use up flared oil wells and landfills which mitigates methane emissions which is very important in terms of reducing tot

For one, miners are already deployed to use up flared oil wells and landfills which mitigates methane emissions which is very important in terms of reducing total impact of GHG emissions. Otherwise miners are buying cheap energy anywhere they can find it, and using waste energy on the grid, of which there's tons. The idea that they're going to spike demand isn't even correct because mining can scale to any level of power generation. Also mining does not cause emissions, mining simply purchases generated power, and emissions are caused by power generation from non-renewables. If mining is emitting GHGs you could say the same thing about EV cars or any other power consumer. But like I said at least bitcoin as a consumer can be ideally placed ANYWHERE especially where energy is plentiful but not easily used otherwise. > Do note that the article mentions that the largest clusters are in, um, Texas and the Appalachians, and their providers of electricity seem to largely be, uh, natural gas and coal power, respectively. So does driving an EV car in those areas amount to being a horrible person too under that logic?