[Timja]

The idea that Bitcoin "needs" a lot of energy is also a misconception.

How much resources are used to produce something is determined by the value of that something. At the moment, about $6B worth of Bitcoin is mined per year. So roughly $6B of resources are used to mine Bitcoin. About half of it is hardware and half of it is energy.

At the same time, about $150B of gold is mined every year. So roughly $150B of resources are put into gold mining. Energy, dynamite, melting, transportation etc. The use of these resources is just as "bad" for the climate.

So if you wanted to do something for the climate, going against gold mining would be more than 20x more effective than going against Bitcoin mining.

Additionally, the production of Bitcoin is halving every 4 years. While the production of Gold will go on indefinitely.

[dmitriid]

> How much resources are used to produce something is determined by the value of that something.

How much resources are used to produce something is defined literally by How much resources are used to produce something.

> about $150B of gold is mined every year. So roughly $150B of resources are put into gold mining.

Kid. Go and read something about a thing called "Value added".

> So if you wanted to do something for the climate, going against gold mining would be more than 20x more effective thatn going against Bitcoin mining.

No, it wouldn't.

[croes]

You do realize that gold has a lot more use cases beside payment after it is mined?

Bitcoin can't compete with that.

Even if tomorrow nobody accepts gold you can still use it in electronics and such.