Quote from: o_e_l_e_o on Today at 06:10:56 PM

America consumes 12.5 billion kilograms of beef each year. Each kilo of beef produces around 25kg of CO₂, for a total of 312.5 billion kilograms. If ~10% of the US population stopped eating beef, it would offset the entire bitcoin network. We are not talking about global population, and we are not talking about all meat. Just beef in the US. Bitcoin produces the same CO₂ as 10% of one fraction of one sector in one country.

When it comes to electricity usage, what comes to my mind is that 'is it profitable to use electricity to mine bitcoin and gain'? Obviously yes. That is why counties like China have many miners. In that case, can bitcoin create energy? Obviously yes because miners mine and profit are made which are used to pay power company which will be used to pay workers and enlarge the power company which will lead to more generation of electricity.

People only focus on bitcoin mining and power usage because they believe electricity produces carbon which contribute to global warming, but in this case, there are many companies in the world that consume electricity, there are also many that produces green house gasses. I do not even think electricity production contributes to 30% of green house gasses production, how about deforestation which is also one of the major contributor and automobiles producing green house gasses that are have potent global warming effect. How about big companies making use of crude oil by products that constantly producing green house gasses, and many more.

If bitcoin generates electricity which is true, I think the question should be, what is the percentage contribution of bitcoin mining to production of green house gasses (carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, chlorofluorocarbons etc) which is causing global warming rather than commenting on the percentage electricity bitcoin uses so far miners mine and generate profit that can be paid to power companies to pay workers and generate more electricity.