There’s two ways to subsidize renewable energy:

1. By coercive force through politics
2. By economic incentive through Bitcoin

♻️

On both sides of the Atlantic, politicians and regulators are questioning the sustainability of Bitcoin mining. These positions knowingly or unknowingly use narratives and statistics that have been widely dispelled by authorities within our industry.

Bitcoin is cited as a major contributor to greenhouse gas emissions, ignoring the detrimental impact of the petrodollar and other institutionally accepted activities. Bitcoin transactions are disingenuously portrayed as being incredibly polluting; as Nic Carter stated “The question of Bitcoin’s energy footprint is riven with misconceptions.”

Usage of renewable power for Bitcoin mining is portrayed as being wasteful as though energy use is a zero-sum game, instead of Bitcoin being a flexible load facilitating increased investment and energy production.

Satoshi Nakamoto even foresaw energy use as being an issue. In August 2010 Satoshi posted “The utility of the exchanges made possible by Bitcoin will far exceed the cost of electricity used. Therefore, not having Bitcoin is a net waste.”

But, despite the obvious attributes of Bitcoin that mitigates its impacts, powerful stakeholders still use environmental FUD to undermine the industry. What if there was a way to explicitly make Bitcoin mining part of the ESG framework rather than having ESG weaponised against the industry? Such an idea would kick away the ladder for Bitcoin mining detractors. Meet Troy Cross.

In this interview, I talk to Troy Cross, a Fellow at the Bitcoin Policy Institute. We discuss his personal journey of reconciling Bitcoin’s energy footprint, the environmental FUD used against Bitcoin, how Bitcoin mining mitigates climate change, and the game-changing idea to incentivise sustainable Bitcoin mining.