GreenPeace campaign fails to “demonize” Bitcoin

Recently, a new controversy over the energy consumption of bitcoin has (again) caused a lot of ink to flow. This time, at the heart of the controversy, we find Greenpeace's latest campaign USA, which has the slogan “Change The Code: Not The Climate”, or in French: Changer le code: Non le climat”.

The message could not be clearer, it is about urging the bitcoiner communitys to “change” the Bitcoin code to make it less energy-intensive. In other words, GreenPeace's goal is to modify the consensus protocol used by the Bitcoin network, namely “proof-of-work”.

This is then the very heart of Bitcoin and the technical foundations on which it is based (and been running for over 14 years now) that would need to be modified. So, “changing the code” is no easy feat because it is precisely this consensus that allows bitcoin to be decentralized and secure. It is not a question of changing just one line of code, but of taking the risk of destabilizing the entire robustness of the technical infrastructure of Bitcoin. For the bitcoin supporters, wanting to modify the “proof-of-work of bitcoin would amount to destroying it.

Moreover, this is not the first time that activists have insisted on modifying Bitcoin and each time, it has ended in failure. Presumably, the GreenPeace campaign will not lead to a change of code but perhaps to a change of mentality... Indeed, it seems that the campaign will allow - paradoxically - to better understand the issue of bitcoin on the one hand and to realize that bitcoin mining tends to become ever greener…

GreenPeace’s fight to “change the code” and the lobbies that support it

The campaign led by GreenPeace was partly funded by investor and entrepreneur Chris Larsen, who is the co-founder of the cryptocurrency Ripple. It is therefore important to emphasize that Ripple is a cryptocurrency which is intended to be a currency used by the traditional banking system. From this perspective, bitcoin is to some extent a competitor to cryptocurrency Ripple. So, for many people, financing this campaign is akin to lobbying. Chris Larsen would then seek, by denigrating bitcoin, to carve out a place of choice to introduce the cryptocurrency Ripple.

Moreover, Chris Larsen was a member of the Crypto Climate Accord, supported by the UN, which was convened in April 2021 with the aim of promoting more “ecological” blockchains” and “greener”, having the least environmental impact. In reaction to the event, considered by many bitcoiners as a space for the demonization of bitcoin, the Bitcoin Mining Council has been created. The goal then being to create a scientific council aimed at “defending bitcoin against ill-informed and hostile energy critics”.

Bitcoin consumes less than the consumption of Christmas lights

It is very likely that the desire to modify the Bitcoin consensus protocol is strongly inspired by the modification of the “code” recently made by the Ethereum blockchain. Indeed, the second cryptocurrency in terms of market capitalization now uses the “proof-of-stake” consensus, considered to be less energy-intensive. For Greenpeace, modifying the code would allow Bitcoin to “reduce its consumption” by more than 99%.

However, removing proof of work from Bitcoin would amount to making it as unreliable, from a technological and monetary point of view as other cryptocurrencies. For the most fervent supporters of bitcoin, who are called “maximalists“, bitcoin is not a cryptocurrency like any other. There is no legal entity that controls bitcoin and only proof-of-work (PoW) makes Bitcoin work. Even more, the complex and expensive mining process also helps to make it a sustainable currency (in the sense of “sound money“). It is precisely the proof-of-work that distinguishes bitcoin from other cryptocurrencies. Removing PoW would thus amount to stripping Bitcoin of everything that makes it unique.

Faced with such a state of affairs, it is not surprising that supporters of bitcoin fiercely oppose this change to the original “code” of Bitcoin. Even more, they like to point out that behind this demonization of bitcoin, there is data manipulation and ignorance. ecological innovations that Bitcoin continues to implement in order to reduce global warming.

Bitcoin consumes as much energy as Sweden…And as much as Christmas lights

Based on a study carried out by thecambridge university, GreenPeace claims that Bitcoin consumes as much electricity as Sweden. The campaign website, www.cleanupbitcoin.com, features other elements and infographics that list Bitcoin's energy consumption.

However, many commentators were quick to compare bitcoin's energy consumption to other sectors of the industry. This type of comparison seems more relevant than reducing the figures to a country's consumption.

Thus, according to the Bitcoin Mining Council, the Bitcoin network would consume the equivalent of the electric lights that illuminate large industrial cities during the Christmas period.

It is important to remember that some data may be difficult to measure. Thus, depending on the institutes and depending on the interpretations, the scales and typologies of comparisons will be different.

However, what makes the debate interesting is certainly the observation of the progress of Bitcoin which is always more concerned about the environment. It is more on these points that supporters of Bitcoin are now seeking to emphasize and communicate.

How Bitcoin becomes ever more environmentally friendly?

Despite the redundant criticism, bitcoin mining proves every day that the network is ever more secure (Bitcoin has never experienced a hacking attack) and that miners are increasingly using renewable energies, at over 60%. . Likewise, mining also creates positive externalities as we were able to contact with the mining company Gridless, which is boosting remote African villages in Kenya.

Seeking to optimize electricity costs is the priority of bitcoin miners who are always looking for cheaper energy sources. However, renewable energy is cheaper than fossil energy and it is therefore natural that bitcoin miners are increasingly opting for this type of energy. In many cases, excess energy from renewable resources is sought by miners who use energy that would otherwise be wasted. Likewise, many mining farms like Giga Energy, in Texas, are using excess wasted natural gas as an energy source to mine bitcoin. Overall, more and more mining farms are contributing to reduce methane emissions in the world.

It is therefore important to update the data on Bitcoin mining and not just repeat accusations that are now outdated.

GreenPeace campaign highlighted Bitcoin’s ecological advances

Two days after the campaign was broadcast on social networks, the artist who created the work Skull of satoshi, commissioned by GreenPeace and supposed to symbolize the nuisance of Bitcoin, published on tweeter his final support for Bitcoin. By talking with members of the community, he would have “understood” the advantages of bitcoin and its reason for existence.

He affirmed that his work was never intended to be an “anti-bitcoin” work but that he would actually like to “preserve the code” while pushing bitcoin mining to be even more “green”. He expressed his wish, through his work, that the mining of “Bitcoin becomes CO2 negative by the end of the decade”.

GreenPeace commissioned environmental activist artist Von Wong to create an artwork to raise awareness about the energy consumption of Bitcoin. The artist created the work “Skull of Satoshi” which he made with recycled electronic waste. The “skull of Satoshi” measures more than 3 meters high and the skull is made with motherboards from used computers and the red eyes reflect bitcoin logos designed with red lasers. The skull then symbolizes pollution from fossil combustion used in bitcoin mining and the millions of computers used to validate network transactions.

Bitcoin, ever more resilient in the face of criticism

The comments of the bitcoiners who responded to the GreenPeace campaign therefore reflect the questioning of the figures cited and the fact that the energy consumption of bitcoinn is considered in isolation instead of being compared to other sectors that are much more polluting and energy-intensive, such as textiles for example.

Likewise, it must also be remembered that bitcoin miners also care about the environment throughuse of ecological innovations notably. Bitcoin mining is evolving positively in this direction and it would be more a question of encouraging this trend.

Also, it would be good to also consider the mission of Bitcoin which is not trivial and which consists of creating an efficient and inclusive global financial system. Bitcoin also has no reason to envy the traditional banking infrastructure which requires enormous resources with millions of branches, data centers, delivery logistics, ticket printing for relative efficiency…

In comparison, bitcoin requires fewer physical and personal resources to provide a global financial system, accessible every day of the week, 7 days a week...

And that’s well worth the electrical cost of a few Christmas lights, right?

See as well:

• Bitcoin Mining Council (BMC): Miners increasingly concerned about the environment
• This is how a small bitcoin mining farm is improving the economy of African villages
• Here are the different ecological innovations used by bitcoin miners