Posted on

Mr. Wonderful-Backed Green Bitcoin Mining Venture To Build $500M HQ In N. Dakota

Who’s putting his money where his mouth is? Mr. Wonderful AKA Kevin O’Leary is. As one of the main proponents of the industry’s need for green bitcoin mining, Mr. Wonderful invested in Bitzero. And now they’re announcing that the company will build its North American headquarters in North Dakota. Why is this news? Because of the things they’ll do with the heat that the data center will produce.

Heat is an unintended byproduct of bitcoin mining, and Bitzero Blockchain Inc. plans to use it to fuel the region’s food production throughout the year. The company will partner with MHA Nation’s greenhouse project to accomplish it. And they’ll use North Dakota’s abundant green energy resources to mine the bitcoin without even touching carbon. Mr. Wonderful is presenting us with a win-win situation right here. 

In a governmental press release, Hidatsa and Arikara (MHA) Nation Chairman Mark Fox said, “Bitzero is working with us to use our Western Area Power Administration hydroelectric power to reflect the company’s zero carbon mandate. The additional heat produced from the data center facility will be used for our MHA Nation’s Greenhouse Project currently under construction.”

Excited to announce that North Dakota emerged as the logical choice for @bitzerodotcom's headquarters due to alignment on the state’s goal of being carbon neutral by 2030, a robust energy industry, favorable tax and regulatory environment and access to top-tier talent. 1/ pic.twitter.com/GylnM1aNaO

— Gov. Doug Burgum (@DougBurgum) June 1, 2022

Out of the $500M for the North American HQ, the company already raised $100M. At one point over the next two months, Bitzero will host an IPO in Canada to get the rest. The green bitcoin mining company is originally from Namsskogan, Norway, where their data centers already work with hydroelectric power. That means, their operations run on 100% renewable energy. Using the heat for food production is a benefit on top of that. 

What Does Mr. Wonderful Have To Say About The Situation?

The plan was to announce the North American headquarters before the IPO, and Bitzero delivered. In what seems like a private event with entrepreneurs, politicians, and media, the North Dakota part of the venture came to life. Local radio station KVRR provides video and quotes Mr. Wonderful saying:

“Data is the new oil. This state has plenty of energy. Now, it has an opportunity to convert some of it and diversify into what every single sovereign wants. The value of having your data on your own soil. In a stable place because it’s the records of people, it’s the banking system. It’s all of the information that every single sector of the economy needs.”

For his part, Governor Doug Burgum said in a tweet, “excited to announce that North Dakota emerged as the logical choice for Bitzero’s headquarters due to alignment on the state’s goal of being carbon neutral by 2030, a robust energy industry, favorable tax and regulatory environment and access to top-tier talent.”

BTC price chart for 06/03/2022 on Cexio | Source: BTC/USD on TradingView.com
Other Projects in North Dakota

In the middle of April, just a couple of months ago, the government of North Dakota announced a visit by Mr. Wonderful and Bitzero CEO Akbar Shamji. The purpose of the visit was “to evaluate potential Bitcoin mining investment opportunities” in the state. Apparently, things went well. 

There's so much opportunity in Bitcoin mining using 100% sustainable green energy like wind, solar, nuclear and hydro.

— Kevin O'Leary aka Mr. Wonderful (@kevinolearytv) May 10, 2022

At the time, they announced two more things. First, “the bitcoin mining company has plans to build out 200 megawatts (MW) of power in data centers over the next two years.” So, this is just starting. Second, “in addition to the data centers, the company also plans to develop an assembly and distribution hub for graphene batteries technology.” So, there’s more coming. 

“There’s so much opportunity in Bitcoin mining using 100% sustainable green energy like wind, solar, nuclear and hydro,” Mr. Wonderful said recently in a tweet. Plus, in a Cointelegraph interview, Mr. Wonderful said, “Private capital must be compliant with environmental, social and governance factors. ESG was once a marketing term, but now it’s a real thing.” 

Even though not everyone in the bitcoin space agrees with him, it’s commendable that Mr. Wonderful is not just talking. He’s betting on a green future for bitcoin, and apparently, he’s betting big.

Featured Image by Tim Mossholder on Unsplash | Charts by TradingView

Posted on

Buenos Aires’ “Crypto Building,” Innovation Or Marketing Ploy? Here’s The 411

The Next Pampa 2.0 will be the world’s first “Crypto Building”. In the basement, there’ll be a bitcoin mining farm that will help pay for all the upkeep a modern building needs. They also plan to show NFTs in the lobby and whatnot. Is the real state project just trying to be “the world’s first” at something? Or are the builders on to something here?

The crypto building’s construction will begin in Belgrano, Buenos Aires, in Q2 2022. It will have “more than 100 apartments, with either 2, 3, or 4 bedrooms, and many of them have already been pre-sold” at around $120K for a 2-bedroom one. Does that price get you a share of a bitcoin mining operation for as long as you keep a property in the crypto building? That’s what it sounds like. 

According to Interesting Engineering, the Next Pampa 2.0 “can be described as a 24-floor “smart” building with a Bitcoin mining farm in its basement, the objective of which is to generate an income for the building’s operations, allowing it to cover the cost of the edifice’s maintenance and upkeep —and savings its residents the costs of having to do so themselves.” It’s worth noting that the crypto building “will also display different pieces of NFT art as decoration in its lobby.” So, it’s not a bitcoin-only project.

What About Bitcoin’s Volatility? 

To address the volatility issue, the publication consults with Damian Lopo, the Next Pampa 2.0’s main project developer. He knows what to do. “To deal with this, the plan is to calculate an average price for the Bitcoin over the last 12 months and use that average price to scale the mining farm in a way that theoretically will allow the mining operation to cover 100% of the cost of the building’s expenses.”

Also, David Farías, the CEO of Landium, the real estate agency behind the Next Pampa 2.0 thinks that the bitcoin mining operation will generate more than the building needs. “The surplus could then be distributed among the residents; the crypto building could end up “paying residents” for living in it. “It’s a way of giving back to our customers,” said Landium’s CEO.”

BTC price chart for 06/02/2022 on Eightcap | Source: BTC/USD on TradingView.com
The Crypto Building ’s Solar Panels

In some aspects, Argentina is good soil for the crypto building. For example, in the capital, the government subsidizes energy, and is thus cheap. In some other aspects, the bitcoin mining strategy might prove to be erroneous. “There are currently no laws regarding crypto mining, but Damián Lopo doesn’t rule out that possibility”. Argentina recently signed a deal with the IMF in which they promised to slow down crypto adoption in the country.

On the other hand, there are ESG risks. Some people think that bitcoin is not worth the effort and that participants in the network shouldn’t be allowed to use electricity. However, they ignore the subtle relationship that exists between bitcoin and green energy. They always show up hand in hand.

In this case, “Damián Lopo expects Next Pampa 2.0’s expenses to be up to 50% lower — as the building will be powered by solar panels in its totality, from LED lights in common spaces to pre-heating systems to heat the water that residents will use.” Green energy will power all that plus the bitcoin mining. Great, but, what’s the fundamental difference between the crypto building and a normal building with bitcoin home miners among the tenants?  

Featured Image by Nestor Barbitta on Unsplash | Charts by TradingView

Posted on

New Data Shows China Still Controls 21% Of The Global Bitcoin Mining Hashrate

China is back with a vengeance. The Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance, or CCAF, collected data “spanning the period from September 2021 to January 2022” for their latest study. The headline is that, ban or no ban, the Asian country controls 21% of the Global Bitcoin mining hashrate. Since June 2021, here in NewsBTC, we’ve been wracking our brains trying to figure out why did China ban bitcoin mining. Maybe we were barking at the wrong tree the whole time. 

According to the CCAF’s numbers, unsurprisingly the “US has remained at the forefront of Bitcoin mining and extended its leading position (37.84%).” For their part, “China has re-emerged as a major mining hub (21.11%). Kazakhstan (13.22%), Canada (6.48%), and Russia (4.66%) have been relegated to more distant places.” Let’s see what else can we learn from the CCAF’s numbers.

Is China All The Way Back? How Did This Happen? 

As it turns out, the CCAF analysis uncovered numbers that “strongly suggest that significant underground mining activity has formed in the country”. Can we be sure that the explanation is real? And if it is, how did the underground China bitcoin mining industry surge so fast?

“Following the government ban in June 2021, reported hashrate for the entire country effectively plummeted to zero during the months of July and August. Yet reported hashrate suddenly surged back to 30.47 EH/s in September 2021, instantly catapulting China to second place globally in terms of installed mining capacity (22.29% of total market).”

The report wonders what happened, “a comeback of this magnitude within the period of one month would seem unlikely given physical constraints, as it takes time to find existing or build new non-traceable hosting facilities at that scale”. And theorizes that maybe the underground miners were using VPNs to hide their location and then, suddenly, decided that they were safe enough to stop hiding. Which seems unlikely.

BTC price chart for 05/18/2022 on Bitfinex | Source: BTC/USD on TradingView.com
Non-China Countries

Sadly but predictably, the study also found out that “the hashrate recovery has not been distributed evenly”. How did the non-China countries in the Top 5 do?

  • The United States “surpassed the rest of the world in terms of hashrate growth. This is evidenced by installed capacity surging from 42.74 EH/s (35.40%) in August 2021 to 70.97 EH/s (37.84%) in January 2022.”
  • In Kazakhstan, for their part, “Total hashrate continued to increase in September and peaked at 27.31 EH/s in October, until repeated power outages towards the end of last year, and a week-long internet shutdown earlier this year, forced miners to temporarily suspend operations.”
  • Surprisingly, “Russia on the other hand not only experienced a substantial drop in relative hashrate share from 11.23% in August 2021 to 4.66% in January 2022, but also a significant decline in total installed mining capacity contribution from 13.56 EH/s to 8.74 EH/s over the same period.”
  • Last but not least, “Canada experienced only a moderate increase in its hashrate from 11.54 EH/s in August 2021 to 12.15 EH/s in January 2022, which resulted in a loss in market share from 9.55% to 6.48% as total network hashrate was growing significantly faster. ”

The CCAF Spreads FUD

Of course, the Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance couldn’t pass the opportunity to spread some unfounded rumors about bitcoin mining. This is what the CCAF said: 

“These geographic shifts in mining activities bring to the fore how relocations impact the overall sustainability of the network. For instance, recent research has suggested that the Chinese decision to ban Bitcoin mining has indeed worsened – rather than improved – Bitcoin’s environmental footprint.”

The CCAF is using this study’s findings, which basically says that they NOW believe what bitcoiners always said. That China was mostly using hydropower energy for bitcoin mining, and not coal. The fact is, as far as using green energy goes, bitcoin mining continues to be the cleanest industry in the world. 

Whenever we find intentional FUD spreading like this one right here, we have to check out who paid for the study. As it turns out, the numbers come directly from the Cambridge Digital Assets Programme. The CCAF host the CDAP “in collaboration with 16 prominent public and private institutions”. Among them, we find the International Monetary Fund (IMF), Mastercard, Visa, and the World Bank.

And right then, everything made sense.

Featured Image by PublicDomainPictures from Pixabay | Chart by TradingView

Posted on

Wikipedia Considers To Stop Accepting Crypto Donations Because Of The ESG FUD

Even Wikipedia fell for the environmental FUD surrounding Proof-Of-Work mining. A proposal to “stop accepting cryptocurrency donations” is currently under discussion. It starts with the same thin arguments that the whole mainstream media irresponsibly uses. However, it gets better and more interesting. In general, it’s amazing to see both sides of the argument unfolding. Even though there might be some information suppression going on.

Related Reading | Human Rights Foundation Accepts Fully Open Source Bitcoin Donations

Well do our best to summarize the whole thing, but people interested in the topic should take time to read it all. It’s full of twists and turns. The most amazing thing about the document is that real people wrote it. Wikipedia editors are not a sample of the world’s population, but, they’re heterogeneous enough to make the discussion interesting. 

Wikipedia Falls For The Environmental FUD

The original proposal poses three problems with receiving cryptocurrency donations, but, in reality, we can summarize them all in the ESG FUD category. The three points are:

  • “Accepting cryptocurrency signals endorsement of the cryptocurrency space.”

  • “Cryptocurrencies may not align with the Wikimedia Foundation’s commitment to environmental sustainability.”

  • “We risk damaging our reputation by participating in this.”

It’s a shame that, to try to prove their points, the original author uses a questionable source and a discredited one.

“Bitcoin and Ethereum are the two most highly-used cryptocurrencies, and are both proof-of-work, using an enormous amount of energy. You can read more about Bitcoin’s environmental impact from Columbia or Digiconomist.”

Counterpoint: That Data Is Compromised

 

Even though it’s widely cited, an “employee of the Dutch Central Bank” posing as a neutral journalist runs Digiconomist. That fact alone disqualifies him as a credible source. However, his data is also under question because the “Digiconomist Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index is not being driven by real world metrics and profitability as stated in the methodology.” So, we’re dealing with an intellectually dishonest individual who’s presumably paid to attack the Bitcoin network.

For more information on this shady character, go to the section “The Digiconomist is Disinformation.”

The Columbia report is newer, but it cites outdated data and debunked studies. Like the ridiculous one that doesn’t understand how PoW scales, or even works, and irresponsibly claims that crypto-mining could raise the Earth’s temperature by two degrees. Columbia’s main source, though, is the “University of Cambridge analysis.” That same organization literally said that “There is currently little evidence suggesting that Bitcoin directly contributes to climate change.” 

However, they suspiciously erased that part from their FAQ. They changed the wording and now it just contains a “radical thought experiment” in which “all this energy comes exclusively from coal.” Even under those extreme circumstances, which are far-far away from reality, the energy use would be marginal. “In this worst-case scenario, the Bitcoin network would be responsible for about 111 Mt (million metric tons) of carbon dioxide emissions1, accounting for roughly 0.35% of the world’s total yearly emissions.”

ETH price chart for 01/13/2022 on Poloniex | Source: ETH/USD on TradingView.com
Protecting The Process Or Information Suppression?

Under the whole thread, there’s a section called “Discussion moved from proposal section.” It contains several suppressed pro-cryptocurrencies arguments. The reason is that the accounts that made them had “no other editing records”. What do the people proposing that those opinions should be removed argue? That they “risk that both vote gaming and manipulation of discussion to introduce bias and fake “bitcoin” news.”

Coincidentally, those low-edit accounts are the ones bringing forward the information on how bogus the original poster’s sources are. Someone had to say it and they did. And the administrators removed them from the main thread. Is this really what Wikipedia is about. 

Luckily, other Wikipedia contributors managed to say that “Bitcoin is therefore a green energy stimulus, aligned with the Wikimedia Foundation’s commitment to environmental sustainability. “ Another user urged “everyone to understand more about Bitcoin as a whole package beyond its energy footprint (negligible when compared to the cost in oil and warfare of backing the US Dollar) as well as the continual exponential progress that has been made in making Bitcoin greener and greener.” Yet another one said “bitcoin core is a FLOSS project attempting to promote monetary freedom.”

In any case, the crypto detractors trying to game the vote might have a point. Except for the ridiculous “fake “bitcoin” news” claim. The header of the discussion says, “this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikimedia contributors”. And the administrator tells them that they can’t remove opinions or votes. However, “an optimal RfC scenario would not actively silence any voices, but would allow community members to inform each other which participants are not community members, who may have alternative interests.” That’s fair.

What About The Votes? Is Wikipedia Banning Crypto Donations?

The vote doesn’t look good for crypto donations, but that doesn’t mean Wikipedia will ban them. At the time of writing, the “support” votes are approximately double than the “oppose” ones. And roughly 150 Wikipedia persons have voted. Does this mean the ESG FUD worked and cast a shadow over the whole crypto space that will be hard to shake? Absolutely it does.

Related Reading | New Contender Emerges Despite Wikipedia’s Begrudging Listing of Cardano

It also means that people WANT to believe. And are not willing to accept the overwhelming evidence that points to PoW mining being a net positive for the environment.

Fortunately, Bitcoin doesn’t care. Tick tock, next block.

Featured Image by James on Unsplash | Charts by TradingView

Posted on

More Green Energy: Crypto Mining Saves A Hydro Power Plant In Costa Rica

Green energy powers most of Bitcoin mining and the world might as well face it. And the rest of the cryptocurrencies that use Proof-Of-Work might be right behind, because they follow the same incentives. In their quest for cheaper energy sources, they all reach the same conclusion. Humanity is wasting renewable energy all over the world. And wasted energy is the cheapest of them all. 

In today’s story, a hydropower plant that had to pause operations for nine months found cryptocurrency mining and got the dream client they needed. Reuters gives us the prelude to the story:

“The plant was forced to reinvent itself after 30 years because the government stopped buying electricity during the pandemic due to surplus power supply in the Central American country, where the state has a monopoly on energy distribution.”

How much green energy does a country has to have to just stop buying from a clean hydro plant? Well, according to hydropower.org: 

“At the end of 2016, Costa Rica reached a total installed hydropower capacity of 2.12 GW. The country dominated the headlines for the second consecutive year, achieving 100 per cent renewable electricity production for a total of 271 days.”

How Did Crypto Mining Enter The Hydro Plant’s Picture?

Every talking head and their grandmas spread ESG FUD through traditional media. And that spills into social media, where everybody is oh-so-sure that crypto mining is boiling the oceans. Because of that, Eduardo Kooper, the owner of the plant, doubted going the crypto mining route. However, they just had to pivot. They tried other ventures, like making frozen food, and none of them work. There was no other choice.

“I was very skeptical at first, but we saw that this business consumes a lot of energy and we have a surplus.”

The hydroelectric company, with its three plants valued at $13.5 million and a three Megawatt capacity, invested $500,000 to venture into hosting digital mining computers.”

Why would miners move their operation to a hydro plant, though? Wouldn’t it be more comfortable doing it at home? They are heavily incentivized to look for the cheapest energy possible, that’s why. And green energy is renewable. Coal is not. The Reuters report quotes one of the hydropower plant’s satisfied customers:

“Installing it in this place is much more profitable than at home,” at almost half the cost, he calculated, after connecting his computer to the network at the river-powered plant.”

Business is business.

BTC price chart for 01/12/2022 on OkCoin | Source: BTC/USD on TradingView.com
Green Energy And Crypto Mining, A Match Made In Heaven

We at NewsBTC have been telling you this. Bitcoin mining incentivizes the creation of green energy infrastructure. And it can finance green energy plants already in place. Mining provides both a buyer of first resort and a buyer of last resort. Three months ago, we wrote:

“A whitepaper by the Bitcoin Clean Energy Initiative from earlier this year had explained how bitcoin mining, when using renewable energy, “is especially suited to accelerate the energy transition” towards a cleaner electricity grid.”

And two months ago, in an article on how Bitcoin mining is helping the Navajo Nation in more ways than one, we told you:

“As the world is trying to phase out coal-powered energy, the Navajo innovate to keep up with the times. According to Walter Hasse, Navajo Tribal Utility Authority president, “I had excess electricity that I still had to pay for and deal with. Now, I want to build renewable energy to replace my lost coal resources that are throughout the nation. I need someone to consume that renewable energy resource.”

And with Bitcoin mining, they have that buyer. And now, the other PoW cryptocurrencies can follow Bitcoin’s example. In Costa Rica, the other side of the world, a power station manager reaches the same conclusion as the  Navajo Tribal Utility Authority president. Quoting Reuters again:

“Kooper said international cryptocurrency miners are looking for clean, cheap energy and a stable internet connection, which Costa Rica has plenty of. However, he said Costa Rica’s government should be more aggressive about trying to attract more crypto mining business, although he gave no specifics.”

The Green Energy Future We Deserve

Proof-Of-Work mining is a net positive for the planet. It will lead us to the green energy future that humanity’s dreaming of. It’s the only industry that can do so. And the revolution is already well underway. 

Featured Image: Screenshot from Reuters’ video report | Charts by TradingView

Posted on

ESG Organizations Send Letter To Congress About PoW Mining, Bitcoin Responds

Will the ESG FUD ever stop? As a Congressional subcommittee prepares to take a good look at Proof-Of-Work mining, “more than 70” national, international, state and local organizations wrote a letter to the “Congressional leadership.” In it, they use old and unreliable data to get their point across. They completely ignore all of 2021’s research and progress on the matter, because it would invalidate their argument.

The question is, will Congress buy their poorly researched, alarmist letter? The ESG FUD hit PoW mining like a ton of bricks in 2021. It might be based on a poor understanding of the subject at hand, but the public in general definitely bought it. And they quote the bogus numbers that their authorities invented left and right on social media. 

Related Reading | Despite Crackdown, Bitcoin Mining Is Still Alive And Well In China

Also, the whole argument completely ignores Bitcoin’s main virtue. The orange coin provides a framework and tools for the world’s transition to a disinflationary system. Paraphrasing “The Price Of Tomorrow’s” author Jeff Booth, in the inflationary system that we live in, there’s a clear incentive for consumption. If your money’s purchasing power decreases by the minute, everybody will logically buy, spend, and consume everything in sight. That is the real monster that the planet’s facing. And Bitcoin fixes it. 

In any case, Bitcoin’s resident ESG FUD expert, Nic Carter, took it upon himself to reply to the ESG organizations that sent misinformation to Congress. Let’s see how each part did.

The ESG Organizations Make Their Point, Nic Carter Counterpoints

The ESG organizations come out swinging from the introduction on: 

“We, the more than 70 climate, economic, racial justice, business and local organizations, write to you today to urge Congress to take steps to mitigate the considerable contribution portions of the cryptocurrency markets are making to climate change and the resulting greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, environmental, and climate justice impacts it will have.”

And their accuracies start from the get-go, also:

“In 2018, scientists writing in Nature warned that Bitcoin’s growth alone could singlehandedly push global emissions above 2 degrees Celsius within less than three decades.”

Those numbers are ridiculous. The study assumes a progression relative to the number of users of the network, and that’s simply not how Bitcoin works. Even if the whole planet adopted the Bitcoin standard, the network would still produce one block every ten minutes. Energy consumption is not directly related to the number of users.

What did Nic Carter respond? That the claim is “false, based on a debunked paper with a completely erroneous model of bitcoin.”

2. bitcoin's energy consumption will 'only get worse over time'

most likely will trail off over time, after peaking in the next decade (see https://t.co/8x0koM6nR9 for actually rigorous projections)

— nic carter (@nic__carter) January 6, 2022

Right after that, the ESG organizations even throw Ethereum under the bus:

“The Digiconomist’s Ethereum Energy Consumption Index estimates that the Ethereum blockchain will consume 71 terawatt-hours this year, nearly the same as the energy consumption of Colombia.”

Since the letter is about PoW mining, it makes sense. The Ethereum community seems to have completely ignored the letter, at least over at Twitter. 

BTC price chart for 01/07/2021 on Bitstamp | Source: BTC/USD on TradingView.com
Bitcoin Incentivizes Green Energy Infrastructure

The ESG organizations continue their poorly-researched attack with:

“The GHG emissions from this exorbitant and unnecessary energy consumption is staggering.”

It’s not unnecessary at all. In fact, PoW mining is absolutely essential for a decentralized, permissionless system. And the energy consumption is directly proportional to the security of the network. Plus, it anchors it to the real world. Not to mention the fact that Bitcoin actually incentivizes and finances green energy infrastructure.

Then, the ESG crowd accuses Bitcoin of “exacerbating” the global chip shortage:

“Increased demand for these machines are exacerbating a global shortage of semiconductors. A bipartisan bill by Senators Maggie Hassan and Joni Ernst has called for a report on how cryptocurrency mining operations are impacting semiconductor supply chains.“

With ease, Nic Carter counterattacks with: “Bitcoin miners are not tier 1 clients, they don’t compete with Apple/Qualcomm/NVIDIA for space; the shortage is due to money printing and the demand shock. See section on semis here.”

5. Atlas/ greenidge increased power prices in NY.

The Atlas mine brought back online a fallow coal plant (converted to natgas) which now provides energy to the grid (in addition to mining). That's energy supplied to the grid which wasn't being produced beforehand

— nic carter (@nic__carter) January 6, 2022

Texas Doesn’t Know What Its Doing, The ESG Crowd Does

Then, the ESG researchers make wild, unbacked assumptions about Texas power:

“Following a crackdown on cryptocurrency miners in China, many miners are moving to Texas, due to its deregulated grid, taking away the power that Texans need.”

This completely ignores the fact that the state of Texas went to great lengths to attract those miners. And that, unlike the ESG organizations that signed the infamous letter, power companies in Texas regularly attend Bitcoin meetings. They are making an effort to understand the technology and the opportunities it brings to them. Also, as Carter puts it, “Majority of mining is in west texas where transmission bottlenecks mean prices routinely go negative. Huge overcapacity and limited demand for power outside of mining.”

Miners also participate in demand response, meaning they aren't online when the grid is overburdened. Their presence dramatically improves economics for renewables and does not compete with households during scarcity events.

— nic carter (@nic__carter) January 6, 2022

The state of Texas knows what it’s doing, they see Bitcoin’s future is bright. These ESG organizations think they know better, though:

“Adding more energy-guzzling crypto mining operations to Texas could exacerbate the sorts of blackouts the state already saw during the extreme cold in February — outages that reporting shows hit communities of color the hardest.”

Wow, playing the race card there. So low. And unrelated. Anyway, answering the claim that miners “could exacerbate” the February blackouts, Carter says. “Miners were/ would have been offline during this time, as we demonstrate here. They also help alleviate ‘black start’ issues through primary frequency response.” 

9. Stronghold mining with coal waste is bad (implied)

The coal waste was going to oxidize naturally. It was going to combust anyway. This is an incentive to clean up a nasty site leeching into groundwater etc. Neutral from a CO2 perspective and ++ from an ecology view

— nic carter (@nic__carter) January 6, 2022

Three Other Prominent Bitcoiners’ Response

Are these direct responses to the ESG organizations’ letter? It’s not clear, but the authors published them in the same timeframe. The first one refers to SHA256, the set of cryptographic hash functions that Bitcoin uses. Nunchuk founder Hugo Nguyen said, “Once you understand that SHA256 is close to being 100% efficient at what it does, you’d stop calling it a “waste”. In fact, 100% efficiency is the exact opposite of “waste”. There’s nothing else like it.”

Once you understand that SHA256 is close to being 100% efficient at what it does, you’d stop calling it a “waste”. In fact, 100% efficiency is the exact opposite of “waste”. There’s nothing else like it. https://t.co/SLuVrAPfU2

— Hugo Nguyen (@hugohanoi) January 7, 2022

For his part, Swan Bitcoin’s Brandon Quittem attacks the concept of energy consumption being inherently bad. “Energy consumption is directly correlated with GDP. Want to help developing countries? Help them harness more energy. Interestingly, Bitcoin acts as a free market subsidy for energy investment.”

3/ Energy consumption is directly correlated with GDP.

Want to help developing countries? Help them harness more energy.

Interestingly, Bitcoin acts as a free market subsidy for energy investment.

Incentivizes developing otherwise uneconomical energy sources. pic.twitter.com/DJ6yYoz6WO

— Brandon Quittem (@Bquittem) January 6, 2022

And Kraken’s Dan Held states that “Bitcoin’s energy consumption is not “wasteful.” Why? Because “It is much more efficient than existing financial systems.” And we’re talking orders of magnitude, here. Not only that, “No one has the moral authority to tell you what is a good or bad use of energy (ex: watching the Kardashians).”

1/ Bitcoin’s energy consumption is not “wasteful.”

– It is much more efficient than existing financial systems– No one has the moral authority to tell you what is a good or bad use of energy (ex: watching the Kardashians)

Let's debunk this FUD👇

— Dan Held (@danheld) January 6, 2022

Do you know how much energy American households use for their Christmas lights? As much as the whole Bitcoin network, that’s how much. 

Related Reading | Is This The Reason China Banned Bitcoin Mining? Carvalho’s Mind Blowing Theory

Where is the letter to Congress protesting  Christmas lights, ESG organizations?

Featured Image by Karsten Würth on Unsplash | Charts by TradingView

Posted on

Five Bitcoin Short Films For A Lazy Holiday Evening: Energy, Money, &… Basket?

Happy Holidays from the NewsBTC team. We come bearing gifts. The cure for those suffering from cryptocurrency withdrawal syndrome. Spend the evening learning about Bitcoin in the most relaxed way possible. These five films were released throughout 2021 and contain the alpha everyone needs for the years ahead. At least the first four do, the fifth one has nothing to do with Bitcoin except for one small detail.

Related Reading | The First Interactive NFT in the World – VR Movie on Mars

Our sister site Bitcoinist covered the films and most of the accompanying text comes from those articles. Is there a better time for these films to make an appearance in NewsBTC than this lazy evening? Grab your beverage of choice, heat up those leftovers, and hit play in the one that interests you the most. Chances are you’ll end up watching them all.

Once again, happy holidays and happy watching!

Bitcoin Short #1- “This Machine Greens” (38 mins)

Is Bitcoin mining’s energy consumption a bug or a feature? This documentary’s “thesis is that the process is “a net positive for the environment.” The aim was to “dispels many of the misconceptions about Bitcoin mining.” Directed by  Jamie King, of “Steal This Film” fame, and produced by Enrique Posner and Swan Bitcoin. 

From the Bitcoinist’s coverage, in Part 1 they focus on the Petrodollar system:

“Watch “This Machine Greens” to learn how the US Military literally backs the Petrodollar. And, of course, the US Military uses infinite energy year after year. Learn about the deal that the US made with Saudi Arabia. The US was to protect the Middle East. The Saudis promised that “The global oil market will be denominated in and conducted with dollars. Ensuring a constant global demand for the currency.” Think about the results of this crucial deal.”

From Bitcoinist’s coverage, in Part 2 they explain how Bitcoin mining will fund green energy initiatives:

“According to Alex Gladstein, Bitcoin can fund the “Electrification of new areas and creation of new economic activity.“ This machine greens, if you will. And if we’re talking infrastructure for clean energy, Magdalena Gronowska breaks it down:

 “It’s derisking constructions of renewable energy facilities. It’s derisking it because it’s willing to buy 24/7, 365. And when you have a predictable buyer, a predictable revenue stream, it’s easy to plan out your operations. And that certainty means that that site gets built.”

Bitcoin Short #2- “Human B” (73 mins)

This recent German documentary is one of the best introductions to Bitcoin produced to date. On top of that, directors Aaron Mucke and Eva Mühlenbäumer created a slick audiovisual piece that flows like a river and is an aesthetical pleasure to watch. 

In Bitcoinist’s coverage of the documentary, they introduce it like this:

“Human B” shows us how people in Germany and Austria view the Bitcoin phenomenon. This is a worldwide movement, and it’s important to listen to all the voices out there. In the documentary, we get to hear from Bitcoin authors like Der Gigi and Anita Posch. From economist and punk rocker Marc Friedrich and journalist Friedemann Brenneis. Plus, from a normal person like Jan, who ends up being the star of the show.

The documentary takes a surprising left turn when it travels to Caracas, Venezuela. There, we hear from Alessandro Cecere AKA El Sultán del Bitcoin, and from Juan José Pinto from Doctorminer.”

#3- “Hard Money” (34 mins)

This one is not about Bitcoin per se. This Bitcoin short is about money. To understand why Bitcoin is so important for the planet, people might need a refresher course on what money actually is.  This documentary is analogous to the first few chapters of Saifedean Ammous’ “The Bitcoin Standard,” and features sound bites from some of the most important Bitcoin philosophers out there. Directed by Richard James.

In Bitcoinist’s coverage of the film, they convince you to watch it with this:

“Watch the “Hard Money documentary and you’ll be able to answer these questions: Why was gold chosen as the premier form of hard currency? What were gold’s “severe flaws”? What is inflation and how does the government hide it? How breaking the relationship between the Dollar and gold broke the relationship between the market and reality. What is low and high time preference?  What does fractional reserve banking create? Why are the institutions that issue debt effectively printing new money?”

BTC price chart on Bitbay | Source: BTC/USD on TradingView.com
Bitcoin Short #4- “Bitcoin Is Generational Wealth” (15 mins)

This one is not a documentary, even though it uses some of the genre’s techniques. Also, this is the only specimen on this list that didn’t get a positive review from Bitcoinist. Why is that? We won’t spoil it for you. Watch the film first and then read the linked text. Directed by Matt Hornick. Written and narrated by Tomer Strolight.

In Bitcoinist’s bad review of the film, we find this quote:

“Half speculative fiction, half predictive programming, “Bitcoin is Generational Wealth” is in a genre of its own. Using high-quality stock footage to produce a professional montage, the film should work. But it doesn’t. Is the script to blame? Probably. The film shows an idyllic future that every Bitcoiner has dreamt about, but it doesn’t explain how we get there. It takes the “Bitcoin fixes this” meme to its ridiculous extreme.”

#5- “Lynchpin” (21 mins)

This one is about amateur basketball. Its only link to Bitcoin is that Swan and the Bitcoin Movie Club financed and produced it. Is this the first of many or a one-time thing? Word on the street is that the companies will finance several chapters of this story, but don’t quote us on that. “Lynchpin” was supposed to be a TV show, so it sounds possible on that end. We’ll keep you all posted. Directed by Mike Nicoll.

In Bitcoinist’s presentation of the short film, they introduced it as follows:

“Compton Magic’s Etop Udo-Ema, “America’s most recognized basketball powerbroker,” is “Lynchpin’s” star. Before Covid hit, this charismatic man receives an offer that he can’t refuse. The whole short film follows him trying to change sponsors and create a league. That carries Etop to Roc Nation and its boss Jay Z, who happens to be Puma’s creative director. The whole enterprise seems to be on its right track. No one could predict the monkey wrench that hit the world’s engines.”

Related Reading | Miramax Sues Quentin Tarantino Over “Pulp Fiction” NFTs. Tarantino Moves Forward

And that’s enough Bitcoin for tonight. Happy holidays!

Featured Image by Bru-nO on Pixabay | Charts by TradingView

Posted on

Lessons From Reason’s “The Fake Environmentalist Attack on Bitcoin” Mini-Doc

Phenomenal piece by Reason Magazine. We at NewsBTC have been countering the Bitcoin-is-bad-for-the-environment narrative for a while now. Now, we have a new tool. A short and sweet documentary that rests on a devastating premise. “Such environmentalist attacks on bitcoin are best understood as a strategy by economic, media, and political elites to undermine a powerful new form of money that they can’t control.” Boom! That’s exactly what’s happening.

Related Reading | Bitcoin Mining Vs. The World: BTC Leads Sustainable Energy

Let’s explore the idea further, but first, let’s let Reason Magazine define who they are and what they stand for:

“Reason is the planet’s leading source of news, politics, and culture from a libertarian perspective. Go to reason.com for a point of view you won’t get from legacy media and old left-right opinion magazines.”

You’ve been warned. This is the perspective you’ll get from this article and from “The Fake Environmentalist Attack on Bitcoin” Mini-Doc:

The mini-documentary starts with the filthy propaganda the state usually serves:

“Cryptocurrencies like bitcoin are terrible for the environment,” declares Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.). “It’s an extremely inefficient way of conducting transactions,” pronounces former Federal Reserve Chair and current Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen. “It’s a way to both hide dirty money and destroy the environment at the same time,” says Daily Show host Trevor Noah.

Reason Magazine Summarizes The Government’s Perspective

Then, Elizabeth Warren brings up the most ridiculously flamboyant stat ever uttered. According to the Senator, a single Bitcoin transaction uses the same amount of energy that an average house uses in 53 days. WHAT? Couldn’t these government people control themselves and provide a more plausible number? Do people actually believe these made-up stats? Apparently, they do, as the Discord story proves. 

“Discord’s founder and CEO Jason Citron hinted at possible integration with the Ethereum ecosystem, with NFTs, and with the incoming Web3. And all hell broke loose.
Discord fanatics spammed Citron’s replies and canceled their subscriptions to their Nitro premium service. Discord’s own employees took to social media to express their discomfort. Video game culture influencers rallied the masses and gathered hundreds of Likes and Retweets. What were their reasons? Environmental concerns.”

Back to Reason’s documentary, Bitcoin spokesperson Nic Carter dismantles the government’s techniques. They establish an exaggerated per transaction cost, and then “extrapolate Bitcoin’s transactional load to hundreds of billions per year.” They’re not dumb, they know that “The electricity consumed by mining isn’t used to power individual transactions.” However, the average citizen doesn’t. Nic Carter closes with, “Bitcoin’s transactions and Bitcoin’s energy use are not really correlated.”

They aren’t. Bitcoin produces one block full of transactions every ten minutes on average. If we reduced the mining to only one machine, Bitcoin would still produce the same amount of blocks in the same amount of minutes. 

BTC price chart for 11/19/2021 on Capital.com | Source: BTC/USD on TradingView.com
The Media Claims Are Outlandish, To Say The Least

The mini-documentary’s host is Nick Gillespie, Reason’s Editor At Large. He admits “The energy used by Bitcoin mining has increased significantly and it will continue to grow, but the media claims are outlandish.” As an example, he offers this ridiculous 2017 Newsweek article titled “Bitcoin Mining on Track to Consume All of the World’s Energy by 2020.” As you might suspect, Newsweek’s prediction didn’t come true.

Then, it’s time for some real stats. According to the Cambridge Center for Alternative Finance, Bitcoin consumes “just over a hundred terawatt-hours per year.” That’s 117.02, to be exact. That’s on the high end of the spectrum of Nick Hansen’s estimations. According to him, “most likely, the Bitcoin network is between 4.2 and 14.2 Gigawatts” per hour. If the network consumed the full 14.2 Gigawatts per hour, that would amount to 124 terawatt-hours per year. However, it’s probably considerably less if Hansen’s stats are right.

Pick the number you trust the most, it’s still a worthy investment considering everything Bitcoin offers the world.

Critics Tend To Ignore These Facts

Reason defines mining as “the process through which a global network of computers maintains the bitcoin network through computation. Though energy-intensive, this process is what makes bitcoin a truly decentralized monetary system.” And that’s a fact. Proof-Of-Work is essential to decentralization. There is no alternative. A little later, Reason’s Nick Gillespie hits us with another home run, “the work being carried out by this global computer network is what allows Bitcoin to be controlled by mathematical rules instead of human actors vulnerable to government or corporate control.”

Then, the documentary presents another crucial fact, “Miners are incentivized to use energy that would otherwise go to waste.” The Human Rights Foundation’s Alex Gladstein puts it in another way, “Bitcoin miners need energy that nobody else wants.” Why? Because it’s cheaper. The incentives are clear as day.

After that, Reason brings out the ace under Bitcoin’s sleeve, “In the Western United States, mobile Bitcoin miners are already running on electricity derived from unused natural gas from oil wells that can’t be captured because there are no pipelines to carry it.” Luckily for the government, Reason doesn’t bring up everything Bitcoin mining is doing for the Navajo Nation.

Reason Closes It Off With Even More Stats 

In a questionable move, Reason quotes the Bitcoin Mining Council controversial report. That one puts Bitcoin’s sustainable energy use at around 56%. Let’s quote NewsBTC’s report on that number.

“The good news is, there’s data to show that Bitcoin’s “mining electricity mix increased to 56% sustainable in Q2 2021.” Is that data valid? That’s another question altogether. The Bitcoin Mining Council elaborates on the results:

The results of this survey show that the members of the BMC and participants in the survey are currently utilizing electricity with a 67% sustainable power mix.”

Related Reading | Power Ledger Blockchain Firm Signs Deal with Japanese Green Energy Supplier

We can say that because, here at NewsBTC, we’re partial to Bitcoin. Was it a good idea for Reason to use it? Maybe not, but notice that they used the conservative 56% figure and not the aspirational 67% one. The magazine knows what it’s doing. That’s why they brought back Nic Carter to close the documentary, “Bitcoin is a vote of no confidence in the monetary and financial system that exists today.”

That’s exactly what it is. Among other things.

Featured Image: Screenshot from the documentary | Charts by TradingView

Posted on

The Navajo Nation Is Mining Bitcoin With Sustainable Energy. Here’s How

The Navajo Nation’s Bitcoin story might be the most wholesome of the last few months. The mine isn’t only providing employment within the reservation, it’s helping them transition from providing coal-powered energy to renewables. Another case study that proves Bitcoin incentivizes and funds green energy. Another story of Bitcoin helping the disenfranchised people of the world to find their footing.

Related Reading | New To Bitcoin? Learn To Trade Crypto With The NewsBTC Trading Course

How disenfranchised are the Navajo? “The Federal Government took away all the land rights away from the Navajo people,” says a disembodied voice in the Compass Mining mini-documentary. According to it, among the Nation:

  • 48% are unemployed
  • 40% live without running water
  • 32% live off the grid
  • 33% live below the poverty line

“But the Navajo are resilient people who’ve claimed the desert Southwest as home since time immemorial,” said director Will Foxley via Twitter. And now, they have Bitcoin on their side.

The First Bitcoin Mine In Navajo Territory

The audiovisual piece comes with this text as a companion, which tells the story of how the first Bitcoin mine came to be:

“In 2017, a small Canadian firm named West Block approached the Navajo about building a mine on Navajo land. At 8 megawatts (MW) in size after the initial round, the Navajo invested in an equity stake in the mine during the bear market of 2018. Three years later, Bitcoin mining has turned a corner to become one of the most profitable sectors of Bitcoin itself.”

Apparently, 58% of the mine’s energy already comes from the depicted solar farm. “The Bitcoin mine is incentivizing renewables to be built on Navajo country to replace coal,” says the mini-documentary’s narrator. Foxley claims that “the Bitcoin mine uses Navajo energy on Navajo land for Navajo employment.” However, the text states that “The Navajo chose to divest themselves at a profit.” The move was positive, though, because it ended up “placing the money back Navajo peoples hands with investments into the public utilities.”

Not only that, the mine uses renewable energy from the abundant Navajo sun. Nearby cities used to take Navajo energy (coal) off the reservation.

But the Bitcoin mine uses Navajo energy on Navajo land for Navajo employment. pic.twitter.com/NZUwigZ4vP

— Will Foxley 🧭 (@wsfoxley) November 4, 2021

The Navajo Nation’s Transition To Clean Energy 

In the past, the Navajo have had their runnings with dirty forms of energy. The text summarizes them this way.

“The Navajo story of the 20th century is fraught with energy abuse, including malpractice in coal and uranium extraction for people off the reservation. Today’s generation of Navajo continue to live with these negative externalities, such as heightened levels of radiation in well water.”

However, as the world is trying to phase out coal-powered energy, the Navajo innovate to keep up with the times. According to Walter Hasse, Navajo Tribal Utility Authority president, “I had excess electricity that I still had to pay for and deal with. Now, I want to build renewable energy to replace my lost coal resources that are throughout the nation. I need someone to consume that renewable energy resource.”

Who could consume that energy,? we wonder. What industry is mobile enough to move to the desert and start making money for everyone around right away? Well, the mini-documentary is all about exactly that exact phenomenon.

BTC price chart for 11/06/2021 on CEXIO | Source: BTC/USD on TradingView.com
Jobs For The Navajo People

Traditionally, the Navajo don’t want to leave the reservation. However, there are not many employment choices there. Until Bitcoin came along, that is. According to Foxley, the mine now hosts around 3,000 machines. According to the text, “The facility currently employs two full-time employees. With the expansion, that number will grow to eleven. That money then flows from the mine into local jobs creating even more buzz.” Not only that, the documentary’s narrator promises “more mines scheduled to come online in the coming months.”

Related Reading | Bitcoin Mining Vs. The World: BTC Leads Sustainable Energy

Considering a mining company commissioned both the audiovisual piece and the text, we could assume who’s behind those “more mines scheduled.” And we salute them.

Featured Image: Screenshot from the mini-documentary | Charts by TradingView

Posted on

“The Death Of China’s Bitcoin Mining Industry,” 7 Takeaways From The Article

Did China make the mistake of a lifetime by banning Bitcoin mining or do they have a secret plan? That’s the question the whole Bitcoin ecosystem is struggling to answer. And today, we got another piece of the puzzle. In the article titled “It’s Over, It’s All Over” – The Death Of China’s Bitcoin Mining Industry,” a pseudonymous manager by the name of Ye Lang tells his story. And in his tale, a bigger story is reflected.

Related Reading | Bitcoin Hash Rate Goes On Death Spiral Post China’s Crackdown On Miners

On May 21st, in a “meeting of the State Council’s Financial Stability and Development Committee, a top-level economic and financial policymaking body chaired by Vice Premier Liu He,” China decided to ban Bitcoin mining. Less than a month later, on June 19th, the Sichuan government ordered “the closure of Ye’s facility, along with 25 other cryptocurrency mining projects in the province.”

That story started like this:

Ye decided to jump on the Bitcoin mining bandwagon in 2018 when he closed down the majority of his internet café business, mortgaged his apartment in Anqing, Anhui province, borrowed money from relatives and left his wife and daughters to move to Sichuan

What can we learn from Ye’s first-hand experience?

1.- It Only Takes 80 Employees To Manage An 80,000 Bitcoin Miners Operation

At the peak of the facility’s Bitcoin mining operations, Ye was in charge of 80 employees and a total of 80,000 mining machines, with the entire project estimated to be earning more than 90 million yuan ($14 million) during the peak six months when Sichuan’s rivers are glutted and electricity is especially cheap

The numbers are staggering. Evidently, supersizing mining operations offers a huge advantage. Especially in regions with cheap electricity.

2.- Clean An Renewable Energy Didn’t Save Sichuan

The fact that the electricity for crypto mining in Sichuan came from clean hydropower meant that many thought the province would be a safe haven for Bitcoin miners. As pressure on local governments to cut carbon emissions mounts, projects were successfully shuttered in some other provincial-level regions — such as Xinjiang and Inner Mongolia — where the mining was chiefly fueled by coal. 

The only thing we can know for sure about the Chinese government’s plan is this: the environment is not on their radar. They’re closing these mining operations for other reasons altogether. 

3.- Bitcoin’s Energy Use Is Not The Issue

The fact that the Sichuan crackdown was about to hit, confirms what everyone has known: the “justification” for cracking down bitcoin miners, the cold shoulder on bitcoin by social luminaries (such as Elon Musk) and the use of the ESG bullshit excuse that crypto is “dirty” have always been merely a socially-acceptable smoke screen for a regulatory crackdown on cryptos when they become too big.

Enough said. ZeroHedge nailed it on the head. 

It’s also worth noting that Nic Carter also nailed it on the head regarding China’s energy mix when it came to Bitcoin mining.

4.- Individuals Can Still Mine Bitcoin In China

Despite the government’s hardline approach, Ye is determined to carry on: “This industry is extremely volatile. High emotions and stress are involved, but that’s also its appeal. Companies are banned from mining Bitcoin, but individuals aren’t,” Ye said, adding that he plans to turn around his operation by purchasing old equipment and downsizing.

The Chinese government was only worried about industrial-sized private mining operations. The question is why. What are they planning? Nobody seems to have figured that out.

5.- One Owner Mined Between 70 and 80 Bitcoins Per Day

Another character enters the scene, the owner of the mine. We’ll call him Liu Weimin, also a pseudonym. 

Liu owned more than 10 Bitcoin mining farms, which industry insiders estimated accounted for one-eighth of the total electricity consumed by all Bitcoin mines in the province.

During peak seasons, Liu said his farms could mine 70 to 80 Bitcoins every day. About 900 Bitcoins are issued each day globally, according to an industry information platform.

Almost 10% of the total daily issuance seems like too much for a single individual. The Bitcoin world scored a huge win with the Chinese ban on Bitcoin mining. 

BTC price chart on Bitstamp | Source: BTC/USD on TradingView.com
6.- A Industrial-Sized Mine Can Break Even In A Year

“Mining farms are somewhat like conventional crop farms. No matter how the Bitcoin market changes, the mining process remains. Opening such facilities is a relatively stable investment, and I can generally break even in a year,” Liu told Caixin.

There are few businesses in the world that can give you that ROI. At least among the legal ones. Food for thought for the young entrepreneurs out there.

Related Reading | How China Bitcoin FUD Is Lowering The Cost To Produce BTC

7.- Bitcoin Mining Used To Be A Respected Business In China

Thanks to the Sichuan government’s mining-friendly policies back then, Liu’s business continued to flourish for the past three years. He quickly made a name for himself, and was a frequent guest at government events and meetings, where he was recognized as one of many model energy consumers who had helped lift locals out of poverty.

From a respected businessman to a social pariah. It would be easy to feel sorry for Liu if he wasn’t on his way to restore his business.

Following the government’s May 21 crackdown announcement, he arranged teams of employees to scout for new venues in North America and Kazakhstan. In mid-June, his company bought an oilfield in Canada that could potentially provide fuel for his Bitcoin mining business.

So, why did China banned Bitcoin mining? We have no idea. We know, however, that their hold over the industry was already waning and that entrepreneurs are selling small hydropower stations. And we have both Ye and Liu’s stories. Is the picture clearer? Are we closer to the real deal?

Featured Image by Лечение Наркомании from Pixabay – Charts by TradingView