Greenpeace USA criticizes Bitcoin because of its environmental balance - but experts contradict experts

Greenpeace USA criticizes Bitcoin because of its environmental balance - but experts contradict experts

Greenpeace USA recently criticized Bitcoin because of its environmental balance, but experts contradict this claim. The organization claimed that large banks and payment settlers would contribute to the climate disorder by Bitcoin. But is that really that clear?

On July 18, Greenpeace USA announced that they used the “New York Skyline to criticize Blackrock, JP Morgan Chase and their Bitcoin-crazy CEOs for the climate effects of Bitcoin”. The organization claimed that these banks have connections to Bitcoin, even though they have made sustainability promises. As part of their campaign, they used the "Skull of Satoshi" picture to condemn Bitcoin. This work of art, which comes from the environmental artist Benjamin von Wong, was created for sustainable art and optimism in terms of environmentally friendly Bitcoin mining methods. This art project is celebrated in the Bitcoin community.

Greenpeace USA would like to intensify its campaign against the proof-of work consensus procedure. However, a recently published report suggests that further studies are necessary to avoid Greenwashing in Bitcoin mining.

ESG analyst Daniel Batten pointed to the irony of Greenpeace's statements. He claims that Bitcoin is positive for the environment overall, although Greenpeace USA claims the opposite. According to Batten, there is more and more evidence that Bitcoin mining promotes the expansion of renewable energies. He refutes the claims of Greenpeace USA and emphasizes that the organization rely on unfounded fears rather than specific evidence. In fact, the energy consumption of Bitcoin mining has decreased because Miner is increasingly switching to renewable energies.

To illustrate this, you should compare the energy consumption of the Bitcoin network with electricity consumption in the USA. While the Bitcoin network consumes 138 TWH annually, 206 TWH is wasted in the USA solely by electricity losses. This shows that the Bitcoin network consumes less electricity than American refrigerators and television.

it seems that the Greenpeace USA's claims regarding the climate effects of Bitcoin are not as clear as they represent. It is always important to have concrete evidence before attacking a global financial network. Experts believe that Bitcoin can have a positive impact on the environment as a whole, as it promotes the expansion of renewable energies and reduces the dependence on fossil fuels.