Of course it is. I am saying a lot of companies may not adopt it as a payment method if its carbon footprint isn't addressed.
this is environmentalist drivel. The largest concentration of mining is in China which no one gives a fukk about. The size of normal electronic transfer systems used all over the world dwarfs bitcoin a thousand fold.
No one actually gives a fukk except the people complaining about the shortage of high powered processors (like people that want a PS5)
So are you saying that all of his is lies?
"A single transaction of bitcoin has the same carbon footprint as 680,000 Visa transactions or 51,210 hours of watching YouTube, according to
Cambridge’s Centre for Alternative Finances."
"A
paper from 2018 from the Oak Ridge Institute in Ohio found that one dollar’s worth of bitcoin took 17 megajoules of energy, more than double the amount of energy it took to mine one dollar’s worth of copper, gold and platinum. Another
study from the UK published last year said that computer power required to mine Bitcoin quadrupled in 2019 compared with the year before, and that mining has had an influence in prices in some power and utility markets."
“Bitcoin would not be able to fulfill its role as a secure, global value transfer and storage system without being costly to maintain,” reads a
defense against bitcoin criticism from Ria Bhutoria, director of research at Fidelity Digital Assets."
"“Computers and smartphones have much larger carbon footprints than typewriters and telegraphs. Sometimes a technology is so revolutionary and important for humanity that society accepts the tradeoffs,”
wrote investor Tyler Winklevoss on Twitter."
So even crypto advocates are admitting it has a giant ecological footprint. That's not too big a deal right now while crypto is a fringe currency that's barely circulated compared to fiat dollars, but if it becomes dominant, then what? Why not address a really serious question?