So it’s okay for crypto to consume more energy than banks because… Banks somehow limit the purchasing power of the poor?
I don’t think I’m understanding your argument.
Lets talk about the bank branchs, data centers, and energy consumption vs crypto.
"Research has found that bitcoin miners alone consume approximately between 60 to 125 TWh of energy annually, which is equivalent to around 0.6% of global electricity
“Traditional banks’ total annual energy consumption of traditional banks is around 26 TWh on running servers, 26 TWh on ATMs, and 87 TWh from an estimate of 600k+ branches worldwide. Totaling 139 TWh.”
Not to mention banks impact on people’s lives. Limited purchasing power of the poor and soon to join them middle class… to purchase disposable products. Like the old tale of buying a expensive boot vs a cheap one.
I’m all for less power usage … but seems like a witch hunt compared to what banking gets away w. It’s the the first time banks can point the finger at someone other then themselves.
calcopiritus@lemmy.world 4 months ago
clgoh@lemmy.ca 4 months ago
A system used by everybody, and a system still used by a tiny fraction of the population are using a comparable amount of energy?
orrk@lemmy.world 4 months ago
hey, most of the crypto fans are all temporarily embarrassed billionaire libertarians anyway, so the bottom 99.5% can all eat shit and die