14 EPA Fellows from the US Congressional School on Bitcoin Mining and Green Energy
The Environmental Protection Agency or EPA continues to receive mail. This time, 14 members of Congress offered the counterpoint and highlighted the environmental benefits of bitcoin mining. They also highlighted how crucial this industry is and the damage the United States would inflict on itself if it were to ban it. Additionally, they educated the EPA on how much energy from renewable sources is already at stake across the industry.
BREAKING: 14 members of Congress send a letter to the EPA, informing them of the beneficial environmental and financial impacts of #Bitcoin proof-of-work mining. pic.twitter.com/LCrZ1nhgd9
— Dennis Porter (@Dennis_Porter_) June 16, 2022
Bitcoin cultural commentator and podcaster Dennis Porter broke the news and provided the full text. It starts with a bang, the argument for natural gas instead of burning. “As you know, a substantial part of the energy consumption of digital asset miners is based on renewable sources. Additionally, many miners use other energy sources, such as natural gas, that would otherwise go unused. By using gas that would otherwise be flared, it is more than carbon neutral or net zero, it is effectively climate positive.
Then the 14 members of Congress hit the EPA with real results. “Bitcoin mining using flared gas also reduces methane emissions in Texas, New Mexico, Colorado, West Virginia, Ohio, and North Dakota.” It’s like ESG analyst and ClimateTech VC, according to the recent study by Daniel Batten:
“And Batten and his company say it’s ‘the only way’ because bitcoin mining has ‘the unique combination of being location agnostic, mobile and preemptible makes bitcoin mining the only economically feasible use case for two major sources of leaky methane emissions discussed in this article.”
In addition to the obsolescence of methane burning, bitcoin mining has another tangible benefit the EPA might want to know about: grid stabilization. “Digital asset mining can have a substantial stabilizing effect on energy networks. Maintains solid base load levels, but can quickly shut down during peak demand. »
Does the EPA care about the economic future of the United States?
One thing is for sure, governments can’t really ban bitcoin mining. They can only refrain from mining bitcoins. Does it provide a net benefit to the trying country? Or does it only harm citizens and put them at a clear disadvantage? The text from the 14 members of Congress to the EPA is for the United States only, but people in other countries may want to take notes.
“Most importantly, digital assets and their related mining activities are critical to the economic future of the United States. Other countries are rapidly adopting digital assets and attracting large amounts of capital and talent in hopes of developing their own financial services sectors, as digital assets and distributed ledger technology become widely adopted over the next decade.
What “other countries” are they referring to here? Will it be El Salvador, the little locomotive that could? Or are they talking about the Central African Republic, which has just started its bitcoin journey? The next decade will be interesting, to say the least. Then the 14 members of Congress shock the world by not throwing proof-of-stake systems under the bus in front of the EPA.
“Treasury Secretary Yellen said it best last week when she said that regulation should also be ‘technology neutral.’ Favoring one technology over another, including proof-of-work versus proof-of-stake, can stifle innovation, erode future economic gains, and limit member efficiencies.
Let the market decide, EPA. Do it for innovation.
BTC Price Chart for 2022-06-18 on BinaceUS | Source: BTC/USD on TradingView.com
This is the third letter the EPA has received
The 14 members of Congress end their statement to the EPA on a patriotic note:
“American leadership in digital asset technologies is critical to ensuring that the next generation of Americans can enjoy the prosperity and opportunity our country has been blessed with. In assessing potential environmental issues related to digital assets, the critical role that responsible innovation will play in our long-term economic future cannot be overlooked.
It makes a lot more sense when you realize that this letter is a response to a previous one the EPA received. In April, other members of Congress demonstrated their lack of honest investigation in an embarrassing letter filled with lies like this one:
“PoW-based cryptocurrencies include Bitcoin, Ethereum, Monero, and Zcash. A single Bitcoin transaction could power the average American household for a month. According to the researchers’ estimates, Bitcoin annually produces carbon emissions comparable to those of Greece. Less power consuming cryptocurrency mining technologies such as “proof of stake” (PoS) are available and have 99.99% lower power requirements than PoW to validate transactions. »
How can officials use ridiculous and obviously discredited statements like “a single Bitcoin transaction could feed the average American household for a month”? Don’t they know that Digiconomist, the uncredited source, works for the Dutch Central Bank? Conflicts of interest aside, your numbers will never add up. Because they are lies.
In any case, the Bitcoin Mining Council responded to the wild inaccuracies in this letter in a second letter to the EPA signed by Michael Saylor and Jack Dorsey. However, they did not cover the benefits that the bitcoin mining industry offers the world. And that is why this third letter was necessary.
Featured image of jplenio from Pixabay | Charts by TradingView
- Click to share on Twitter (Opens in a new window)
- Click to share on Facebook (Opens in a new window)
- Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in a new window)
- Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in a new window)