Bitcoiners Criticize House Democrats’ Letter to EPA
Bitcoiners Criticize House Democrats’ Letter to EPA

By Nathan Worcester

Jack Dorsey, Anthony Scaramucci, Michael Saylor, and other high-profile Bitcoiners have cosigned a letter to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) challenging House Democrats’ claims that their cryptocurrency threatens the environment.

Peter St Onge, an economist with the Heritage Foundation, voiced agreement with the letter in an interview with The Epoch Times.

“Bitcoin is orders of magnitude, probably 100 times cleaner than the legacy financial system,” St Onge said.

Francis Suarez, the Republican mayor of Miami, praised the Bitcoiners’ May 2 letter in a Tweet.

“As someone who is pro #bitcoin and cares about the environment, I urge you to read this letter that separates fact from fiction on bitcoin mining’s impact on the environment for U.S. miners,” wrote Suarez, whose city has emerged as a burgeoning tech hub at a time when Silicon Valley’s population is shrinking.

House Democrats including Rep. Jared Huffman (D-Calif.), Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), and Rep. Bobby Rush (D-Ill.) sent their Bitcoin letter to the EPA on April 20.

“The rapidly expanding cryptocurrency industry needs to be held accountable to ensure it operates in a sustainable and just manner to protect communities,” they wrote.

They also praised President Joe Biden’s recent cryptocurrency executive order.

The House Democrats warned that Bitcoin mining is “having an outsized contribution [sic] to greenhouse gas emissions,” an assertion the Bitcoiners strongly disputed.

“The statement above unfortunately confuses datacenters with power generation facilities. Power generation facilities are not datacenters. Datacenters which contain ‘miners’ are no different than datacenters owned and operated by Amazon, Apple, Google, Meta, and Microsoft,” they wrote, later adding that Bitcoin miners use more nuclear, wind, solar, or hydro energy than in the average U.S. energy mix.

“Miners can operate from anywhere in the world, and datacenters are able to target stranded or abundant renewable sources of energy,” they later added.

While Democrats claimed that Bitcoin mining generates over 30,000 tons of electronic waste every year, the Bitcoin advocates challenged the paper they cited, which assumed that the mining hardware Bitcoiners use depreciates in a mere 1.3 years.

“The claim that Bitcoin miners produce enormous quantities of e-waste is a purely academic fantasy,” they wrote.

Democrats also took issue with the proof-of-work (PoW) method for validating transactions, used by Bitcoin and many other cryptocurrencies, because of its heavy energy use.

One source, the Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance, estimates Bitcoin electricity consumption at 151.81 terawatt-hours (TWh) per year, within a possible range of 57.13 to 343.75 TWh annually.

That’s on par with what the nation of Poland uses every year.

“Less energy intensive cryptocurrency mining technologies, such as “Proof-of-Stake” (PoS), are available and have 99.99 percent lower energy demands than PoW to validate transactions,” the House Democrats wrote.

The Bitcoiners claimed that direct comparisons between PoS and PoW are “highly misleading,” as the two systems are different in kind—while PoW lets a miner collect Bitcoin if they solve a mathematical puzzle faster than all others attempting to solve it, PoS grants mining power based on how many coins a user can stake.

“Systems like Paypal or Venmo also use very limited amounts of energy, but these are not more ‘efficient’ than Bitcoin because they provide users with completely different assurances. Proof of Stake systems should be understood in the same way,” they wrote.

The Bitcoin advocates also warned that “the risk of corporate capture is extreme in Proof of Stake systems,” as such cryptocurrencies effectively favor miners who have more coins—a view shared by St Onge.

“You would not want to force the American public into using a PoS coin because almost certainly, it would be owned by one guy or a couple of guys. It would be a plutocracy,” he told The Epoch Times.

He agreed that politicians could support such a system if it allowed them to reinsert themselves as the authorities responsible for redistributing digital assets.

“This is an excellent way for the existing elite to transpose their domination into the next stage,” he said.

“PoS is simply central banking style governance; it’s dead out of the gate,” said Stephen Barbour, a signatory of the May 2 letter, in a message to The Epoch Times.

Barbour is president of Upstream Data Inc., a Canadian company that captures methane emissions to power distributed Bitcoin mining data centers.

He was equally dismissive of central bank digital currencies (CBDCs), a class of digital asset that Biden contemplated in his recent cryptocurrency EO.

Other countries around the world, including China, have been planning or piloting CBDCs.

“CBDCs is social justice money. I support PoW only. Sound money is produced by work, not by brrr,” Barbour told The Epoch Times.

Huffman declined to speak.

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

NH Politician

NH POLITICIAN is a New Hampshire based media company specializing in the collection, publication and distribution of public opinion information, local, national and world news. Our team of reporters,...