MemberAugust 18, 2021 at 9:46 am
Every product or structure has an environmental cost to its creation and maintenance. This gatekeeping of products like bitcoin because of their environmental impact is ridiculous. Unless it is something like a windmill or solar panel which has the explicit purpose of creating energy, then the energy cost to create that product is secondary to its function. The Aptera car’s first function is to drive you places. We don’t worry about how much energy it takes to create an Aptera because the function of driving needs to be met whether we like it or not.
Also, we don’t know that bitcoin is necessarily using more energy than its traditional counterparts. If we look at bitcoin as functioning as ONLY a bank vault and compare the respective energy costs Bitcoin isn’t a clear loser. Let’s just say a fictional bank owns ONLY solar-powered ATMs.
– It costs energy to produce each of those ATMs
– It costs energy to distribute, install, maintain, and replace those ATMs
– It costs energy to maintain the severe network that tracks the money running through them
– It costs energy to run the heavily armored vehicles needed to transport money between those ATMs and the local vault.
– It costs energy to maintain the business’s regional office and employees.
– The only energy cost to run bitcoin is the cost to run its servers and download the app on your phone.