It’s as reliable as the changing of the seasons: another year, another Earth Day, and another misguided missive about crypto’s outrageous energy consumption.
Last week, the New York Times published a piece in their “Climate and Environment” that sought to remind readers of the “astonishing environmental costs” of cryptocurrency mining. It’s a prime example of what’s quickly becoming an editorial subgenre, including references to dubious research claiming that Bitcoin mining alone will push global warming above Paris Agreement levels, and perhaps most bafflingly a misspelling of “Ethereum.”
For those who believe in the transformative power and potential of blockchain, these often-misguided or under researched criticisms are difficult to take in — difficult primarily due to the rank hypocrisy from the critics.
Many of those who argue that digital currencies are both superfluous and wasteful tend to overlook the impact of their own preferred mediums of exchange. Printing physical currency contributes mightily to rampant deforestation, but even worse, as historian Stuart