The debate on consumption related to cryptocurrencies, It is on Bitcoin in particular, it seems destined to grow in intensity, with the same speed with which the sector is establishing itself not only among investors, but also in everyday life.
One is now joining the ongoing discussion Citigroup study, which seems to confirm the alarm that has emerged from various quarters. According to the report in question, in fact, the energy consumption connected to the Bitcoin network would be increased by 66 times compared to that needed in 2015. A fact on which we must certainly reflect.
The Citigroup report
Citigroup's report was the subject of an article published by Bloomberg. In which it is recalled that in mid-April, the global demand for energy by the Bitcoin network would have stood at 143 terawatt hours annually. Or about 4% more than Argentina's total electricity production in 2019, at least according to the numbers provided by Cambridge University Center for Alternative Finance.
Citigroup analysts added that given the fact that the extraction and use of digital money is undoubtedly energy-intensive, governments could soon find themselves forced to extend their regulatory control over the sector. Specifically it could be the United States and the China to proceed in this direction. With Beijing forced to do so in order not to compromise its environmental objectives.
Nic Carter disagrees
The opinion expressed by Citigroup analysts, however, it is not shared by Nic Carter, co-founder of Coin Metrics. According to which in the four Chinese areas in which the Bitcoin mining, there would be plenty of energy. Derived largely from solar, wind and hydroelectric energy.
An opinion aimed at clearly reducing the alarm on the climatic impact of cryptocurrencies. Which, however, continues to rise in public opinion, as confirmed by a recent survey by Credit cards, according to which 54% of respondents believe it is important to preserve the environment. A perception which has grown significantly after the advent of Covid.
An alarm, that for the environment, which seems to be shared by investors. As was recently stated by Andrew Ross Sorkin, creator and conductor of Squawk Box, on CNBC. Who published an article onInternational New York Times, in which he stated that investors could decide to abandon BTC if it proves to be environmentally deleterious.
In doing so, he quoted the statements of Lawrence FinkCEO BlackRock, which is one of the largest wealth managers in the world. According to which his company intends to make all future investment decisions taking into account their impact on the climate.
Tesla under indictment
Sorkin himself also indicated in Tesla, PayPal and Square companies that show great attention to the environmental impact of Bitcoin.
An indication, that on the company of Elon Musk, which is not shared by Ben DearCEO Osmosis Investment Management, a company committed to investments in environmentally sustainable products. Who told Reuters that Tesla should be very careful when it comes to Bitcoin. The purchase of which would deny the touted environmental responsibility of the company.
Yet another proof of how the topic linked to Bitcoin's energy consumption represents an extremely slippery ground.