Another Report Ruins the ‘Holy Grail’ of Bitcoin Critics: No, the Flagship Crypto Isn’t That Bad for the Environment
Bitcoin (BTC) is routinely slammed for high electricity consumption and a monstrous carbon footprint. But should we still listen to these tirades in 2022?
Bitcoin, aviation, gold or dryer: which is better for the environment?
According to the last Bitcoin mining network report by digital asset management veterans Coinshares, the effect of Bitcoin (BTC) on climate change is greatly overestimated if we compare it to certain industries, let alone certain nation states.
To start with, all Bitcoin (BTC) miners on Earth combined only utilize 0.05% of global electricity consumption. Bitcoiners are responsible for 89 TWh, while the world’s population consumes 162,194 TWh.
When it comes to carbon footprints (calculated in tons of carbon dioxide emitted by this or that industry in 12 months), Bitcoin (BTC) mining can’t even compete with certain segments.
Namely, it emits 50x less CO2 than aviation, 25 times less than air conditioners and half as much as the data center segment does. Even the tumble dryers of the world emit 12% more CO2 than Bitcoin (BTC) miners.
Bitcoin has every chance of completely offsetting its carbon footprint
Since Bitcoin (BTC) is often compared to digital gold, it’s worth admitting that the gold mining industry is three times more dangerous to the environment than Bitcoin mining. .
However, even these numbers can be reduced: the Bitcoin (BTC) mining segment can benefit from switching to flared and vented natural gas. Should this revolution take place, Bitcoin mining worldwide would become carbon negative.
As previously reported by U.Today, Bitcoin (BTC) promoter Alex Gladstein noticed that the carbon footprint of Bitcoin (BTC) can be compared to that of cruise ships.
