The 4 greatest US-based mining operations – Core Scientific, Marathon Digital Holdings, Riot Blockchain, and Stronghold Digital Mining – acquired a letter from the House Committee On Energy and Commerce. The Committee needs to learn about their vitality utilization and “how each company is mitigating those impacts and what steps are being taken to ensure their operations do not strain the energy grid or undermine our nation’s climate goals.”
Is this a teachable second or an indication of issues to come back? Are Core Scientific, Marathon, Riot, and Stronghold ready for the duty? Could curiosity from the US Government truly be a constructive signal for the sector? Or are they tightening up measures to assault the bitcoin mining business? Why Core Scientific, Marathon, Riot, and Stronghold? Why now? Does it should do with BlackRock giving bitcoin mining the inexperienced gentle? Or does it should do with the extreme sanctions in opposition to Tornado Cash?
JUST IN – 4 U.S. #Bitcoin mining corporations together with Marathon, Riot, CoreScientific, and Stronghold have obtained a letter from the U.S. House Committee on Energy and Commerce demanding explanations on vitality utilization and e-waste. pic.twitter.com/IX4IHttG0b
— Dennis Porter (@Dennis_Porter_) August 19, 2022
In a press launch, the House Committee On Energy and Commerce described the Core Scientific, Marathon, Riot, and Stronghold instances as:
“Blockchain technology holds immense promise that may make our personal information more secure and economy more efficient. However, the energy consumption and hardware required to support PoW-based cryptocurrencies may, in some instances, produce severe externalities in the form of harmful emissions and excess electronic waste.”
Where does the House will get this info from? The fully debunked Digiconomist, maybe? Did they learn this letter 14 Members of Congress sent to the EPA? Do they learn about how bitcoin can put methane to good use and curb fuel flaring within the course of?
Background To The Core Scientific, Marathon, Riot, and Stronghold instances
Consider BlackRock’s recent reversal on their bitcoin coverage:
“BlackRock has been a leader in the Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) movement. The firm and others have injected billions of capital into companies that meet their criteria. Bitcoin was thought to be outside of this movement due to its alleged high energy consumption.
Today’s announcement, coming from the largest investment firm in the world, sends a completely different signal to the financial world. According to analytics account MacroScope, BlackRock is waving the “green “BTC is ok” flag to the whole ESG-focused funding sector.”
However, additionally take into account the severity of the sanctions in opposition to Tornado Cash:
“This sanction came directly from the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), which is responsible for sanctioning countries and foreign entities that the US government has deemed enemies of the state or major criminals. So just as transacting with a country or organization sanctioned by OFAC is illegal, so is transacting with Tornado Cash or any funds associated with it.”
The query right here is: Does the Core Scientific, Marathon, Riot, and Stronghold case pertains to the primary story or to the second? Is the US about to declare the extremely worthwhile exercise of bitcoin mining as ESG-friendly? Or are they tightening the screws?
BTC worth chart for 08/21/2022 on Bitfinex | Source: BTC/USD on TradingView.com
What Does The US Government Want To Know?
The different quote within the press launch doesn’t sound good for bitcoin mining within the US. The House Committee On Energy and Commerce instructed Core Scientific, Marathon, Riot, and Stronghold:
“Given the existential threat posed by the climate crisis, we are deeply concerned about efforts like this that increase demand for fossil fuels, with the potential to put new strain on our energy grid. While blockchain technology is emerging as a potentially important tool in fighting climate change, increasing demand on the grid and burning more fossil fuels to power PoW cryptomining facilities only serves to undermine the potential climate benefits of blockchain technology and hold us back from achieving our climate pollution reduction goals.”
Consider, although, the findings of the Bitcoin Mining Council. “According to the BMC survey, participants are using electricity with 66.8% of the sustainable power mix. This represents an increase over Q1, 2022, data and records an estimate of 59.5% sustainable electricity mix across the entire Bitcoin network.” If the federal government makes a radical investigation and concludes this to be true, a complete business might get the stamp of approval it’s been ready for.
However, the alternative can be true. It doesn’t matter how inexperienced the bitcoin community will get, this factor might go both approach.
The Exact Questions That Core Scientific, Marathon, Riot, and Stronghold should reply
The US Government needs to know:
- “How much energy did each of the company’s cryptomining facilities use during 2021?”
- “What are the energy sources used by utilities serving each of the facilities, including the energy mix of each?”
- “What is the proportion of energy used that is offset with renewable energy credits?”
- “In the last 12 months, how many days have the companies curtailed cryptomining to support grid stability?”
- “In 2021, what was the average cost per megawatt hour and per megawatt hour profit at each of the company’s cryptomining facilities?”
Do you actually assume Core Scientific, Marathon, Riot, and Stronghold aren’t prepared for these questions? They’ve been working in direction of these targets for the reason that very starting. The House Committee On Energy and Commerce will likely be pleasantly stunned.
Featured Image: House Committee On Energy and Commerce header | Charts by TradingView
