The Environmental Protection Agency or EPA retains receiving mail. This time, 14 members of Congress offered the counterpoint and singled out the environmental advantages of bitcoin mining. They additionally made a degree about how essential this business is, and the harm the USA would inflict on itself by banning it. Plus, they schooled the EPA on the quantity of renewable source-based power already in play all around the business.
BREAKING: 14 members of Congress ship letter to the EPA, informing them of the helpful environmental and monetary impacts of #Bitcoin Proof-of-Work mining. pic.twitter.com/LCrZ1nhgd9
— Dennis Porter (@Dennis_Porter_) June 16, 2022
Podcaster and bitcoin cultural commentator Dennis Porter broke the information and offered the total textual content. It begins with a bang, the instead-of-flaring pure gasoline argument. “As you know, a substantial portion of digital asset miners’ energy use is based on renewable sources. Additionally, many miners use other power sources, like natural gas, that may otherwise go unused.” Using gasoline that in any other case could be flared is greater than carbon-neutral or net-zero, it’s successfully local weather constructive.
Then, the 14 members of Congress hit the EPA with real-life outcomes. “Bitcoin mining that utilizes flared gas is also reducing methane emissions in Texas, New Mexico, Colorado, West Virginia, Ohio, and North Dakota.” It’s as ESG Analyst and ClimateTech VC, Daniel Batten’s recent study places it:
“And Batten and company say that’s “the only way” as a result of the bitcoin mining business has “the unique combination of being location-agnostic, mobile and interruptible makes Bitcoin mining the only economically feasible use case for the two major sources of leaking methane emissions examined in this paper.”
Besides obsoleting methane flaring, bitcoin mining has one other concrete profit that the EPA may need to find out about: stabilizing the grid. “Digital asset mining can have a substantial stabilizing effect on energy grids. It maintains robust baseload levels, yet it can be switched off quickly in times of peak demand.”
Does The EPA Care About The Economic Future Of The USA?
One factor’s for certain, governments can’t actually ban bitcoin mining. They can solely ban themselves from bitcoin mining. Does that present a internet profit for the nation that tries? Or does it simply harm the residents and put them at a transparent drawback? The textual content from the 14 Congress members to the EPA is just concerning the USA, however individuals from different international locations may need to take notes.
“Most importantly, digital assets, and their related mining activities, are essential to the economic future of the United States. Other countries are rapidly moving to adopt digital assets and are attracting large amounts of capital and talent in the hopes of growing their own financial services sectors as digital assets and distributed ledger technology are widely adopted in the coming decade.”
What “other countries” are they referring to right here? Could or not it’s El Salvador, the little engine that would? Or are they talking concerning the Central African Republic, which simply began its bitcoin journey? The “coming decade” will likely be fascinating, to say the least. Then, the 14 members of Congress shock the world by not throwing Proof-Of-Stake techniques below the bus in entrance of the EPA.
“Treasury Secretary Yellen articulated it best last week when she stated regulation should also be “tech neutral.” Favoring one know-how over one other, together with proof-of-work versus proof-of-stake, can stifle innovation, erode future financial positive factors, and restrict affiliated efficiencies.”
Let the market determine, EPA. Do it for innovation.
BTC value chart for 06/18/2022 on BinaceUS | Source: BTC/USD on TradingView.com
This Is The Third Letter The EPA Gets
The 14 members of Congress finish their EPA plea with a patriotic tone:
“American leadership in digital asset technologies is essential to ensuring the next generation of Americans can enjoy the prosperity and opportunity that our country has been blessed with. As you evaluate the potential environmental issues surrounding digital assets, the critical role that responsible innovation will play in our long-term economic future cannot be overlooked.”
That makes rather more sense once you notice that this letter is a response to a earlier one the EPA obtained. In April, different members of Congress confirmed their lack of trustworthy analysis in an embarrassing letter that’s stuffed with lies like this few:
“PoW-based cryptocurrencies include Bitcoin, Ethereum, Monero, and Zcash. A single Bitcoin transaction could power the average U.S. household for a month. According to estimates by researchers, Bitcoin produces annually carbon emissions comparable to Greece.”
How can the individuals in cost use ridiculous and evidently debunked statements like, “a single Bitcoin transaction could power the average U.S. household for a month”? Are they not conscious that Digiconomist, the uncredited supply, works for the Dutch Central Bank? Conflict of curiosity apart, his numbers won’t ever add up. Because they’re lies.
In any case, the Bitcoin Mining Council responded to that letter’s wild inaccuracies in a second letter to the EPA signed by the likes of Michael Saylor and Jack Dorsey. They didn’t cowl the advantages that the bitcoin mining business presents the world, although. And that’s why this third letter was obligatory.
Featured Image by jplenio from Pixabay | Charts by TradingView
