Topic: Bitcoiners are protecting, while EU nations are destroying the environment (Read 377 times)

I see and think that the critics who always talks about protecting the environment and always corners bitcoin mining which they call not environmentally friendly. I think they don't talk because they love the environment. they only talk about things that are in their favor. like the case described by the OP. It is proof. the haters even turn a blind eye when in front of them it has been explained that many bitcoin miners are now using renewable energy that is more environmentally friendly. but they don't seem to want to see the goodness of bitcoin. they just keep seeing the bad side of it. they are constantly looking for loopholes to vilify bitcoin. so I think they are critics who always corner bitcoin for reasons of protecting the environment, actually they are talking not because they are environmentalists but because they do have an interest in it. and they are only selfish and don't really care about the environment. for example they close their eyes and close their mouths when there are other things that clearly damage the environment.

Do you really think that Putin is now sitting and crying that Europe wants to give up Russian gas? Russia is currently establishing a sales market in the eastern and southern countries. sales there will be much more than in Europe. The problems of Europe concern only the people living in it. And you can tell that you heat the stove with wood for any reason. Fact is fact. European countries are sliding into the abyss at a rapid pace and unfortunately this phenomenon is not temporary.

It's not that simple.
Iceland can do this because it sits in the perfect place and has an enormous population of 300 000 people.
All the renewables in Ireland produce 22Thw a year, from 775 MW geothermal capacity, the US has 3,567 MW installed.

What works on a small scale won't be able to function once you use it for large countries, you will need 100 times the entire production capacity of Iceland to keep lights running in Germany for example. Or a better example, Salvador has a potential or 644 MW of geothermal energy, all the potential energy explored won't cover even 60% of the consumption.

I always say that Bitcoin is at the bottom in terms of how much it contributes to environmental pollution, but surprisingly it is always at the top when someone should be blamed for rising temperatures, endless masses of plastic and waste in the oceans, or perhaps cutting forests in the heart of the Amazon or around the world. This imposition of guilt will not stop even if mining is switched to 100% renewable energy, one should not be deceived about it.
 

Iceland relies on hydro and geothermal energy, and the EU, as far as I know, has long since given up the construction of large hydropower plants, because regardless of the fact that they produce clean energy, the construction of such existences directly affects the environment, because large accumulation lakes have to be built, and that in most cases means relocating people from their homes - which is always a very sensitive issue.

As for geothermal energy, it is true that it has huge potential, especially in some parts of the EU - but the gas/oil lobby still does not allow this resource to be exploited.

I will not be claiming that Bitcoiners are protecting the environment, but it is a fact that the blame of exploiting the nature is tagged upon the BTCitcoin community for a while even though majority of the big miners are using renewable energy and it is sad to see that we still have a tag and gets blamed. 

EU nations has to find a renewable energy source and majority of the countries should follow Iceland as they have the highest share of renewable energy in Europe and hopefully we will stop hearing the blame game in the future.

This war has many negative effects, and among them is indeed the choice of getting back to bad sources of energy (relying on them more heavily than before) instead of trying to take it as a sign that it's time to finally abandon oil, gas and coal for better sources, even if it gets more expensive initially. And I do agree that it's unfair to turn a blind eye to these events while blaming the crypto industry which isn't as bad for the environment as many believe. That's why I think that the environmental legislation must target high-end consumers that get energy from sources with high environmental impact, not on Bitcoiners or crypto miners.

Well, maybe I should have been writing instead "we're all just as guilty as the politicians"...
The politicians (at least in my country) have noticed that the lack of (voters') education has a better chance to keep them re-elected. Of course, this also means that the newer politicians are also uneducated, especially as this situation exist for more than 30 years here. I'd expect it happens in a similar way in (too) many countries.
"The voters" are shocked because of their unrealistic expectations. As I said, politicians are.. politicians, not some smart technical people.


I've watched these days, yet again, The Hobbit movies. Just look at Alfrid Lickspittle character (nicely played by Ryan Gage). That's what most politicians are.


They always find some very good reasons for they actions, and those actions do much more harm than necessary, those actions restrict the law abiding citizen more than they should just because the politicians cannot do better (or don't want to). Of course, in most cases the bad people have plenty of way to go around all the restrictions imposed, and the politicians get more power and also they give the impression they care and they do something.


There's nothing new, really. 25 years ago (or more) the same was happening with e-mails. You were writing that "my fart sounds like a bomb", you were becoming potential terrorist because you are mailing something about bomb. This is the same thing, just adapted to the new era.

It's sad that tools (operating systems, communication software) are created with holes into them specifically to help government keep an eye on people, then everybody is shocked that the holes are exploited by hackers.


All I can hope is that sooner or later the database will get more expensive than its use. Because I would not be surprised they want this information about all possible addresses 
But seriously, yes, this is the direction they take. Since they cannot do better in checking on how the bad guy get money and spend the money, they check everybody (of course excepting the actual bad guys, since those will know how to hide).


Your logic went to the correct point! Indeed, whoever wants to hide, has all the means. And even those who don't really want to hide, may do it simply because they get fed up with filling KYC info over and over again.
And, as I said, the wrongdoers do hide anyway (and most still use fiat, actually).

In all fairness, it's not as if this regressive step of turning back to the use of coal is something they want to do. Many of them have long been on the road to reduce, if not totally eradicate, the use of coal. But it seems they're left with no choice, at least for now.

To me, however, this is the right thing to do, the lesser evil, because the other option is to tolerate Putin's madness and desire to wreak violence and death on an independent nation and a peaceful people.

I believe this regression is merely an emergency step.

This is true. At a time when some countries are taking measures to save the environment, Europe is starting to heat the stove with coal. Wonderful! What can happen next? Start hunting for wild animals? Until countries come to a consensus on the environment and settle political conflicts, there is no need to talk about any environmental protection.

Politics is all there is at the international globe and  EU is not exempted from that. It's a great thing to know that cryptocurrency miners are doing all their best to create a mining system that is environmental friendly , that alone would to an extent shut the voice of Bitcoin critics at the end of the day when the plan is actualized to it's full potential.

The countries that have diverted to the use of coal for electricity production are also members of the EU and as such it's not surprising that no alarm has been made on the act, such actions could only discourage other countries struggling to develop renewal energy resources to drag feet.

On one hand, it's good to see that the bitcoin mining industry is taking measures to be more environmentally friendly. On the other hand, it's ironic that the European Union is reverting to using coal for power generation when they could be investing in renewable energy sources.
Either way, it's clear that the bitcoin mining industry is more environmentally friendly than the European Union.

The reason why these people(like Erik Thedéen) are so silent about Europe using coal for power generation is very simple, they are benefiting from it somehow.
And who ever took these environmentalists seriously lol
They all are jobless hippy bums

All valid points, but in regards to "it's not the fault of politicians", from what I hear a lot of voters are quite shocked because they would have expected quite the opposite from the people they put in charge in the past. They are going rogue in the EU right now. Not only do they crack down on Bitcoin through their TFR regulations for non-custodial wallets, but also are they going nuts with their approach to personal data. The law is almost for certain to soon come into effect that authorities can read any and all chats you have on your phone or any other device no matter whether there is end-to-end encryption or not. People are supposed to get installed a trojan on their phones either through ISPs/MSPs in order to make it possible for them to really see everything. They justify it with their fight against child pornography. Sure, the intent to fight child pornography is absolutely honorable and has all my support, but the technology is just not ready. They want to use AI and CEOs of data analytics companies already admitted the effective hit rate is still far far far from 100%. So if you send a picture of a little kid that's part of your family to your wife, the kid's grandma or whatever, your name might immediately be broadcasted to a list for potential criminals. In a worst case scenario the police shows up at your door and it turns out you haven't done anything wrong. Cool, but all the neighbors know the police showed up. Imagine these things happen in an environment where everyone knows everyone else, very small towns / villages.

It's crazy...

The non-custodial wallet regulation is also insane. If I understand that correctly, you need to go through KYC with a registered company for every single wallet you hold the keys to. Holy Christ. I guess you know how many wallets the old guys from this forum often have?

I wonder whether these regulations actually foster tax evasion rather than prevent it. It is like a cat and mouse game. If regulation raises the bar for people to strike a balance between being honest and being private, isn't the question (of course varies from individual to individual): What does someone value more? If it is honesty, the person gives up privacy. But, also understandably, if it is privacy, the person is willing to give up honesty (or feels even forced to do so). And I must say that this choice between honesty and privacy isn't a trivial one. There are people who have good reasons to stay private, and that doesn't imply they are dishonest just because there is a need for staying private. Political activists, journalists, many others.

It is because of this that we must not take them seriously since we know they are not arguing their case in good faith, if those people actually believed what they said and had the wrong facts then we could correct them by presenting how environmentally friendly bitcoin really is, but they do not care, they have been paid and instructed to do a job and they will not stop regardless of the facts, so the campaign against bitcoin will continue even if bitcoin used 100% renewable sources of energy.

This discussion is always trending among crypto haters. they boast as if Bitcoin mining can damage the environment. well what happened in elsavador did they not see the situation there and what kind of impact after el savador used geothermal energy from the volcano to mine crypto currency, bitcoin. EU countries should see what el savador is doing there is nothing complicated in this matter they just have to agree that elsavador renewable mining can be a loophole in the crisis they are in and now bitcoiners are helping protect and those who are destroying nature.

^^This is very true, bitcoin is a danger to many rich people, and that means many powerful people who are in high places of politics also hates it since those rich people bribe them (or some nations have rich politicians directly without bribery but just taking the money directly from taxes) and all of this means that bitcoin needs to go.

If bitcoin and crypto goes well enough into the future, then these people will realize that they can't force people to use the fiat that they have an unfair advantage, and that is why people may run towards crypto, making those rich and powerful people, poorer and less powerful and that will cause a lot of trouble.

These are just anti-crypto people's excuses. As long as bitcoin exists, they won't stop attacking it. If it weren't for the reason bitcoin is dangerous for the environment, I'm sure they would find other reasons to blame bitcoin as well.

Europe is going through an unprecedented energy crisis, with the use of coal because it has no other choice. The war has been over 100 days with no end, I hope it ends soon and peace returns. It doesn't just affect the only EU, it affects all countries.

They will try to further promote their so-called green ideology because it is in their long-term plan and program and they can't just give it up, but they planned to achieve all that with cheap Russian gas and oil which is currently no longer a viable option. From the example I showed in the previous post, it is clear that green is not always good, whether it is the production of biodiesel, the construction of wind farms, or large solar power plants.

Wind farms change the environment, not only visually, but are devastating to all birds and bats - and solar power plants require large areas for solar panels - which means that in such areas all biodiversity disappears. I am always in favor of looking for alternative energy solutions, but the one that will have the least impact on the environment.

Europe has no other option, but to start using coal power plants again(for a while). Building new solar power plants and wind turbines would require lots of time and money. I'm no fan of green energy and the environmentalist fanaticism, but I'm sure that the European Union will stick to the "Green Deal" in the long term.
Unfortunately, the cryptocurrency miners will always be discriminated. First it was dirty energy. When the miners switch to 100% green energy, the anti-crypto haters will find another excuse to punish the crypto mining companies. For example, wasting too much energy for mining useless and worthless cryptocurrencies. This seems like a valid enough excuse to sanction the crypto miners.

I don't trust any studies that are done by people who were hired by the industry that they are studying, that's how we had studies that said that tobacco is harmless for health.

I'm not going to believe claims that Bitcoin miners are helping to switch electricity production to green methods, until I hear it from independent and reliable sources.

And as for EU - they are going through one of the largest energy crisises in their history, I think it's understandable that they have to take extreme measures like bringing back some coal plants.

Centralized institutions are to Leyen what a sugar daddy is to a h*e.  If Leyen stops supporting the dirty Fiat system, she will stop supporting her own source of income and what made her part of the wealth inequality's extremes.

It is more than evident that supporters of centralized institutions are going to keep FUD'ing Bitcoin only exposing either partial truths or full out lies while continuing to kiss the butt cheeks of whatever institution or corporation it is they are working for.  It is so annoying that you nowadays have everyone being told what to think, support and believe when we should all have a free mind and find the truth ourselves.

If you want to know how much they truly care about the damaged environment.  Then look up the way world leaders are meeting at these conferences and meetings.  Ironically, choosing private airplanes to meet up with world leaders to talk about combating climate change and suggesting citizens to stop using airplane as a travel choice is so conflicting.

-
Regards,
PrivacyG

Sorry but this is stupid!

Using simple logic, if Bitcoiners are using 100Twh of green energy it simple means somebody else has to use dirty energy, if they shut down 100 Twh a year operation using renewables it would mean 100 Thw renewables would be available and 100Twh of dirty energy could be shut down as it would not be needed anymore.


Yet when asked where their mix comes from, real details, ...crickets.
When New York says they will stop granting licenses to miners mining on non-renewables look what the Blockchain association said:
https://twitter.com/jchervinsky/status/1533493490562236416


So why would those eco-friendly green rainbow-powered miners build in other places? Because the truth is that:
Coal is the cheapest form of energy, then hydro, then nuclear, then gas and no nobody is mining by relying on a giant ball of fire in the sky!
And miners, and I'm speaking as one will only care about that, miners are a business, they either make a profit or they go bankrupt, they are not here to save the world or anything else!

I would not say that bitcoiners protect the environment. They do not cause much damage to the environment, but do not protect it. But the transition to non-renewable energy sources spoils the environment. The process of burning coal or firewood releases a lot of greenhouse gases and they contribute to global warming. When burning, a lot of gases are also released and enter the human body with breathing, this can contribute to genetic diseases in the future. Mining on such a scale is not carried out and therefore produces less harm to the environment.

The fact is for them having energy in any way possible is a necessity , whereas bitcoins is an alternative leisure which also means that I do support if they are trying to use the fossil fuels but at the same time I do not support them in general saying how harmful bitcoin mining is, which is definately not really scoring great on the green energy quota but at the same time, it's something that is evolving, there are many countries which are limiting the energy as well for the legal mining farms which will definitely lead to a collapse, what countries can do is to categorize the resources and have various ways through which the miners can get a viable renewable source. Rest for them they have to make sure this war does not extend further.

It's just one more example of bad and rushed politics. If, instead of basically forcing everybody use mostly Russian gas for everything (with thier hasty green deal), they would have been investing first into infrastructure (from transporting gas from multiple sources to good methods for storing energy/electricity obtained from regenerable sources) we would not be in this situation (maybe even the war would have been avoided)

Of course, now they turn back to coal and atomic energy because they don't have much of a choice.
And of course, they will point fingers to the war, to Bitcoin and so on, not their lack of vision.


But I don't think it's the fault of politicians. The politicians' only goal is to be elected. They are not some smart professionals. When the world wakes up and get (probably not in my lifetime) to put in charge smart people who know what to do instead of people from this or that circle of influence, they would do better. I fear that it may be too late though.

A high percentage of coal powered bitcoin mining was state subsidized. Virtually all cases of bitcoin miners using dirty coal energy where instances of governments arranging it to boost local economies and create jobs. Geothermal, hydroelectric and wind power are the most sought after sources of power for crypto miners, due to them generally being cheaper in contrast to coal.

More recent studies have concluded as much as 70% of bitcoin mining is done using renewable forms of energy. Crypto miners high mobility translates to them targeting surplus forms of renewable energy. Which in turn helps fund the expansion of renewable power across the globe. Not only is bitcoin mining and proof of work not destroying the environment. It is also one of the most environmentally friendly industries in the world.

The EU isn't the biggest offender as far as climate change goes. Landfills and unsecured oil wells are definitely more destructive to the environment than the average consumer. Trillions of tons of waste decomposing in landfills produce massive quantities of greenhouse gases. That alone should eclipse any concern about crypto mining.

The narrative of the Crypto Critics will never stop, it will continue and influence the thinking of any country that tries to support Bitcoin mining. The reason it will stay the same year after year is bitcoin mining destroys the environment blah blah blah and blah. It is indeed their duty when they are not paid in fiat. No wonder every crypto critic appears, that's where ban after ban must have linked the issue of unfriendly Bitcoin mining.

Why are they silent on giant corporations? even Securities wilted to speak. You know they have a stake in it and keep it profitable long term. The EU countries have to clean up the madmen if they are to grow in terms of future economic growth mechanisms.

Ursula, or as some prefer to call her, Gertrud, is a woman who should be in pre-trial detention or at least fired for a scandal involving ordering covid vaccines in a way that she did so by texting the boss of a large pharmaceutical company. The damage done is measured in billions of euros because far more vaccines have been ordered than needed, and now they still have to pay for these vaccines to be safely disposed of because they have expired. To make matters worse, new vaccines are constantly being delivered even though there is no need for them at the moment.

If such a woman has the main role in the EU, then we can rightly ask what others like her are doing for a salary of 10 000 EUR and much more. Nothing can surprise me from such people, because there is the saying "they turn as the wind blows", and they will do everything to stay in their comfortable armchairs.

A few years ago, I watched a documentary that showed what kind of environmental crimes are being done in the name of green projects, and Germany was especially mentioned because of its insane bio fuel production policy. To produce it in large quantities, they turned huge areas into corn fields, and they went so far as to even take parts of national parks for arable land.

When they tell you that Bitcoin is dangerous to the environment, show them the following article ->

The comparison is incorrect and unfair. For example, most of the decisions taken by politicians. These people will lose their position if energy prices rise significantly or are absent, but they will not lose their jobs if mining is banned. In other words, just as Europe is trying to find an easy solution by returning to coal, it chooses the easy solution by banning mining.

If there is a heavy use of Bitcoin and a part of Parliament in Europe is interested in Bitcoin, you will notice that the votes against this ban will be higher.

True that.

Bitcoin is green energy friendly. The most environment friendly corporation on earth (which is Tesla btw) is investing in bitcoin because they know how green bitcoin is. I don't know what that bitch's problem is with bitcoin. She is probably afraid of bitcoin because it might take away her lunch when all the central banks collapse and lose their privileges over common people. That would make Ursula a commoner, that's why she is barking like a mad dog.

Recently European Commission Chief Ursula von der Leyen raised an alarm that because of Russia’s war in Ukraine most European nation are reverting to using coal for power generation. He retreated that instead of investments in gas infrastructure, renewables or other alternatives, the extension of coal mining is considered the quickest and most viable solution for these European countries. We all understand that these EU nations need alternative source of power but the truth is that they are destroying the environment they claim to love dearly.
 
If it was Bitcoin operations, the entire so-called environmentalist would raise alarm and propose the ban of mining. This year Erik Thedéen , the vice chairman of the European Securities and Markets Authority mentioned that bitcoin mining was doing harm to the environment and was setting back efforts to combat climate change. He further suggested outright ban of all forms of bitcoin mining that uses up an excessive amount of energy because it poses a threat to the continent’s climate goals. Crypto critics would quickly publicize  the claim that cryptocurrencies was now consuming more electricity than Argentina , New York or Belgium. Now all of them are silent that instead of investing in other green energy source, Europe is destroying Mother Earth with coal. Where is Bill Gate, Fahad Kamal, Nouriel Roubin, Elon Musk and other environmental champions? They are all silent.

But cryptocurrency mining industry has embarked on a rebranding effort to challenge the prevailing view that its electricity-guzzling computers are harmful to the climate. All five of the largest publicly traded crypto mining companies say they are building or already operating plants powered by renewable energy, and industry executives have started arguing that demand from crypto miners will create opportunities for wind and solar companies to open facilities of their own. According to the Bitcoin Mining Council , the worldwide Bitcoin mining sector is being powered by an estimated 58.5 per cent renewable energy by the fourth quarter of 2021.  Its now very clear that Bitcoiners are now more environmntal friendly than EU.