[themodelplumber]

That's a really interesting take.

> So to sum up, part of the reason Bitcoin consumes so much electricity is because China lowered the clearing price of energy by overbuilding hydro capacity due to sloppy central planning. In a non-Bitcoin world, this excess energy would either have been used to smelt aluminum or would simply have been wasted.

The author goes on to explain that the bitcoin trading market becomes a worldwide distribution & settlement-input for the new energy distribution, if I understood correctly.

(I feel less confident in summarizing the carbon footprint points discussed)

> If Bitcoin ends up being worth substantially more in the future than it is worth today (say, by an order of magnitude), then the world will actually have received a discount on its issuance.

And this point seems a lot more intuitive.

Overall I have a lot of questions but am grateful for the shared insights from various positions. Thanks for sharing the article.

[martian]

That was my take as well. I'm not convinced that BTC is technically or ethically "worth" the energy usage either way, but this is a useful/nuanced perspective.

Energy usage is distributed across industries and sectors, and we frequently criticize oil/gas and automobiles. Other technologies, like batteries, seem to avoid the laser-focus of the eco-oriented press. Batteries are very energy-heavy/carbon-heavy to produce. For example, the total carbon impact of a Tesla may in fact be higher than a conventional automobile. [1]

Point is: understanding total environmental costs of any technology is a Hard Problem.

[1] https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/cleaner-cars-cradle-grave