Bitcoin is Neither Gold nor Green

Bitcoin is unlike gold. Well, you knew that. What you may not have known is that Bitcoin is not green, either - as in environmentally friendly. The extent to which it is an environmental threat surprised me. Indeed, it may turn out to be an unexpected speed-bump in the cryptocurrency’s meteoric rise. If you’re one of the folks looking to put a nail in Bitcoin’s coffin, this might be one - and it comes from an unlikely source. An interesting article in arstechnica delves deeper into the subject of how Bitcoin’s insane electric appetite may impede its growth prospects.

Environmental Impact

According to Digiconomist, a website that tracks the subject, the Bitcoin network is consuming power at an annual rate that replicates about as much power usage as Denmark. The site estimates that a single Bitcoin transaction gobbles up enough to power homes for nine days. Apparently, the slow process of checking and rechecking transactions to authenticate their validity is energy-intensive. The entire Bitcoin network now consumes more energy than a number of countries, according to the International Energy Agency.

To give this voracious energy hunger some perspective, let’s compare it to another payment system.  All worldwide VISA card transactions - more than 80 billion annual transactions in 2016 - consumed electricity equal to only 50,000 US households.  Nor is that the worst of it. Bitcoin’s carbon footprint is also shockingly large because most of the energy it requires is produced by coal-fired plants in China.

Present owners of Bitcoin may pooh-pooh such information, but it does raise questions about the cryptocurrency's sustainability. Eric Holthaus, a writer for Grist, estimates that, at current growth rates, the Bitcoin network will "use as much electricity as the entire world does today" by early 2020. This is clearly problematic and an impediment to Bitcoin's growth. Adding to the dilemma is that these projections are likely to be even worse if cryptocurrencies hold or add to their store of value.

More Mining

This will encourage more mining and, thus, even more electricity consumption. In this highly competitive environment, it's possible that miners' electricity costs will end up roughly on par with their revenues. That's clearly an unsustainable proposition for any manufacturing entity.

The ars article on which this piece is based attempts to even out its dire premise by pointing out that there are various “awards” or bonuses that miners can accrue, which may make it possible for more transactions that don’t necessarily increase electricity consumption nor lead to an environmental Armageddon. Despite that, the “growing use of the network could push up Bitcoin's price, which in turn would increase energy use.”

Prophets of doom for Bitcoin argue that eventually governments will step in and regulate cryptocurrencies. This would end the party: prices will fall, the bubble will burst. These pessimists will point out that the environmental fiasco attendant to mining Bitcoin and the like will only hasten government intervention. But the author disagrees, positing that governments may be powerless here, as they would simply chase mining operations to other jurisdictions and are incapable of coordinating a global effort.

Of course, if the price of Bitcoin declines, that would provide an immediate solution - unpalatable for many as that might be.

Alternative Solutions

Usually, when a potential crisis like this arises, industries find a way to adapt. History is rife with such instances. When whale oil became scarce and grew in price, the discovery of oil and its refining led to substitutes for it. I’m sure you can readily think of other examples. Personally, I think that the blockchain technology behind cryptocurrencies may provide a clue, if not the answer.

If established industries like the banks and investment sectors see the financial rewards that could be reaped by adopting and adapting the technology to grow their bottom lines, they'll probably find a way to make it more economically feasible. If that happens, cryptocurrencies may benefit without having to increase mining and thus energy consumption.

But that’s for tomorrow. For today, Bitcoin mining is an environmental stain on the planet at a time when the world is begging for a reduction in the amount of carbon being released into the atmosphere.

Opinions are the writer's own.

Image credit: By Scharfsinn/

Written by: Stan Ward

Stan Ward has enjoyed writing for 50 years. Writing has been a comfortable companion to a successful business and teaching career for him.


Charles James Bewlay
on December 15, 2017
Well, that makes no sense at all to me. You don't even quote a single source for these crazy allegations. According to your reckoning every time I Google something I'd be shifting off another 5 tonnes of polar ice cap.
Douglas Crawford replied to Charles James Bewlay
on December 18, 2017
Hi Charles, values Stan's contributions because they often provide an alternative insight into issues we write about every day, and helps to ensure we don't become victim of living in a filter bubble. I believe he based this article on a piece by Ars Technica (which is linked to in the article above), which includes all relevant links.
Got Something to Say?

Write Your Own Comment

Your comment has been sent to the queue. It will appear shortly.

Your comment has been sent to the queue. It will appear shortly.

Your comment has been sent to the queue. It will appear shortly.

  Your comment has been sent to the queue. It will appear shortly.

We recommend you check out one of these alternatives:

The fastest VPN we test, unblocks everything, with amazing service all round

Large brand with very good value, and a cheap price

One of the largest VPNs, voted best VPN by Reddit

One of the cheapest VPNs out there, but an incredibly good service