So who wants to be a millionaire?
“Man, if I would have just bought it 5 years ago I could have been a millionaire!”, has been the recent thought of many in the crypto community. Seven years ago the value per coin was at $67.81, this month that value skyrocketing surpassing $40k per coin.
Bitcoin is undoubtedly getting more attention as investors are seeing it as digital gold. With its inherent nature of being a decentralized form of currency, a lot of people draw affinity towards this feature as it can potentially cut the middleman out of many transactions and exchange value more freely. However, there is a dark side to Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies. Author Luciano Floridi, from Ethics after the Information Revolution, explains how “ICT [Information and communications technology] are re-ontologizing the very nature of our infosphere”. I would also go on the argue that Bitcoin could be the most influential ICT in our generation. However, with all its potential for disruption, there is a side to Bitcoin that does not get talked about too much, its environmental effect on our planet.
If Bitcoin is going to be adopted by the common Populus, we should know its adverse effects. Bitcoin works in a way where miners get a share of a Bitcoin if they use their computational power to solve a tricky problem that the blockchain needs to survive. These problems often require loads of servers to be of value, therefore, using huge amounts of energy. A study done by Christian Stoll says that Bitcoin mining accounted for 0.2% of global carbon emission, which puts it between Jordan and Sri Lanka in terms of emissions. Luciano Floridi explains that “failing to negate a fruitful relationship between tech and nature is not an option”. At a time where carbon emissions are at extremely sensitive levels, pollution cannot simply be a trade-off, it has to be a deal-breaker. With all things considered, maybe becoming a millionaire is not worth the ethical and environmental hurdles.
