The whole anthropogenic global warming debate is nothing more than a very smart way of making the people of the world pay government cronies for the right to breathe. Several doomsday scenarios were predicted to have struck midnight by the year 2016, and none of them have come to pass. Natural climate change is much, much more powerful than 0.01% changes in CO2 atmospheric composition that burning fossil fuels has contributed; Bitcoin mining compares to the previous 2 factors as an infinitesimally small blip. OP is FUD.
Did you read and understand the research? The author is hardly a "Nazi environmentalist". There are other journals out there which suggest the same. Though they seem to be a little bias. Which part of the research do you disagree with?
No, I did not. I don't need to: energy might be finite, but it's also pretty abundant. It only really makes sense to start comparing between energy used mining Bitcoin and other large scale utilisations of energy if you make either or both of the following 2 assumptions:
- Energy is scarce
- Anthropogenic climate change is significant
And because neither of those 2 assumptions are valid (and are indeed, easily disproved), any research examining Bitcoin mining from the "uses too much energy" perspective is predicated on false premises. [/thread]