比特幣「環境殺手論」劇增！中本聰早想到：「不用 BTC，才是純粹的浪費」

比特幣「環境殺手論」劇增！中本聰早想到：「不用 BTC，才是純粹的浪費」

對一些人來說，比特幣預示嶄新的未來金融體系；但也有很多人視為環境災害。比特幣愛好者或許會對抨擊方不屑一顧，可若要讓比特幣大規模普及，勢必得逐一排除反對者的質疑。

比特幣今年迎來睽違已久的牛市，眾人對其增加的「碳足跡」也倍感擔憂。一度對比特幣立場轉為中立的微軟聯合創辦人比爾蓋茲（Bill Gates），2 月受訪時就又表示不支持比特幣，主因便在挖礦產生大量碳足跡。

理論來說，比特幣是完全數位化的類貨幣，乍聽之下似乎是有史以來最環保的貨幣。畢竟與紙幣不同，比特幣不需靠砍伐樹木生成，且供應量有限，不會有增發情況發生。

但是，主流媒體對比特幣是否消耗巨大能源的擔憂卻與日俱增。

《衛報》2 月便以《為何比特幣對地球有害》為標題做影片報導；路透社則抨擊特斯拉（Tesla）一方面提倡潔淨能源，另一手又向「能源密集」的比特幣投入 15 億美元；《華盛頓郵報》也指出，以比特幣購買特斯拉車對環境有負面影響。

比特幣可能永遠要消耗大量能源

無論以哪種指標比較，比特幣都確實消耗大量電力。原因就在比特幣採用名為 PoW 的共識機制，讓礦工以競爭方式解決密碼學問題，凡搶得首位，即能領取該區塊的獎勵。

為了保持競爭力，礦工硬體設備也被迫加入軍備競賽；使用更強大的計算機，消耗的能源自然也會增加。加拿大比特幣挖礦公司 Bitfarms 高層就承認，只要依然使用比特幣，就可能永遠要耗費大量能源。

BBC 報導，劍橋大學最近分析報告結果指出，比特幣一年消耗的能源總量，比阿根廷、荷蘭等國家還多，約每年 121.36 太瓦時（TWh）。假如把比特幣視為一國，耗電量將躋身世界前 30 大。

不過進入網路時代後，無論寄電子郵件、使用社群媒體、銀行網路業務，都在增加人類碳排放。在這環境下，比特幣難道真是碳排放的主要貢獻者？認為惡化環境的責任都在它是否誇大？

中本聰早想到了

外界對比特幣的批評，也讓一則比特幣創造者中本聰（Satoshi Nakamoto）2010 年在比特幣論壇 BitcoinTalk 發表的言論被翻出來。之後中本聰便從人們視野消失，至今仍沒有人知道「他」，或「他們」的真實身分。

中本聰寫道：

比特幣讓交易成為可能，效益要遠高於電力成本。因此，沒有比特幣才是純粹的浪費。

比特幣誕生以前，數位貨幣的概念早已出現，也曾付諸實踐，但從沒取得如比特幣的巨大成功。中本聰認為，比特幣「必須」涉及可證明的能源消耗，否則沒有其他方法能以去中心化方式，向全世界公平分配數位單元價值。

中本聰以黃金為例解釋：

（比特幣挖礦）與黃金和開採金礦的情況相同。挖出黃金的邊境成本往往會趨近黃金價格。開採金礦也是資源浪費，但這浪費的後果遠遠低於將黃金當作交換媒介的效益。

和比特幣類似，開採金礦也是能源密集型產業，並有大量資本支出。此外，採礦業是完全自由的市場，礦工往往被剝削，使真正從事辛苦工作的人賺到的反而是最低的薪水。

除此之外，中本聰也已預見未來將有無數開發者在比特幣區塊鏈上建立 Layer2 第二層解決方案，不傷害比特幣交易透明度的前提下，提升能源使用效率和交易速度等。Liquid、Lightning Network 等 Layer2 研究也行之有年。

此外，礦工能源消耗採可再生能源的比例也持續上升。根據劍橋大學替代金融中心（CCAF）去年 9 月發表的《全球加密貨幣指標研究》，高達 76% 礦工使用的電力包含可再生能源，甚至有 39% 礦工「只」使用可再生能源。

不過，可預見的未來，對比特幣造成環境危害的指控想必仍會持續出現。

（本文由 動區動趨 授權轉載；首圖來源：Unsplash）

延伸閱讀：

Bitcoin consolidates above $55,000 as a huge month beckons for crypto - CityAM

Bitcoin’s rollercoaster journey through March is drawing to a close with relative calm as the market-leading cryptocurrency appears to be consolidating.

Following weeks of remarkable highs and mystifying dips, Bitcoin now looks to have settled above the $55,000 line.

A period of sideways movement could be just the tonic that traders have been clamouring for after repeated attempts to climb above $60,000 lost their grip since setting an all-time-high of $61,701 more than two weeks ago.

Despite taking the landmark figure with some conviction, the high didn’t last long as the market became overheated and overstretched, tumbling back to $56,000. A week of volatility chased the peak with further dips and fruitless lifts.

Over the last week, the narrative has been set to backdrop of uncertainty surrounding US bond yields and options closures looking like the teeth of bears which threatened to signal a sizeable correction for Bitcoin.

Some commentators were even suggesting a massive drop was on the horizon, while others had more conservative views that a quiet spell beckoned before the wave of institutional investment carried BTC to new highs.

Of particular interest to many long-term investors is the fact that this has been one of the first spells of weekend trading in months that hasn’t been wildly eventful. On the few occasions where weekend trading has been flat, it has often signalled a robust consolidation or even coiling prior to a significant rise in price.

Too much, too soon

One factor many observers have agreed upon with BTC’s numerous and unsuccessful assaults to hold ground above $60,000 has been the issue of overstretching and the movement being too much, too soon.

Under normal circumstances, a sustained period of relatively horizontal trading heralds the return of confidence to an unsettled market. However, in the case of Bitcoin, it is likely that the bigger investors are anticipating an event.

In mainstream stock markets, a similar pattern to what is shaping up in the cryptocurrency charts often occurs while traders are waiting on certain pieces of information – such as an earnings report. Stock markets will also experience low trading volumes during this kind of sideways movement.

Bitcoin’s trading volume – although often low over weekends – has been showing signs of erosion of late, and seems to be echoing a stock market awaiting news.

Quite what that news might be is something of a mystery. However, it is likely that BTC just needs a rest after a lot of activity and the crescendo of $6bn options expiring on Friday.

There was huge concern that the options expiry might send BTC into a much-anticipated freefall and, as yet, no cracks appear to be showing on the surface.

Instead, the market is looking relatively calm which, as many experienced traders will be aware, is often a signal in itself that something is looming on the horizon.

Past options expirations, albeit none as sizeable as Friday’s, have largely been followed by a pump – something which seems to work against the current narrative of expecting a correction.

Key moment coming up

As always, the volatility of cryptocurrencies mean it is almost impossible to decipher market intentions, but there is a key moment coming up that should be watched very closely.

The close of April will see another significant options expiry and it is shaping up to bigger than Friday’s event. Interestingly, many data collection sites are finding the majority of bets on Bitcoin’s price high in April are centred around $80,000.

Notably, there are also a significant number of traders placing their expectation chips at $120,000 – twice as many, it should be highlighted, as those who are favouring the odds at $60,000.

Considering the fact BTC has ultimately failed to hold above $60k so far, the level of confidence in $80,000 seems almost inconceivable. However, it is desperately hard to ignore the numbers.

A “disastrous direction of travel”: Why bitcoin is now on a collision course with ESG

The soaring price of bitcoin is putting the world’s foremost cryptocurrency on a direct collision course with ESG-focused investments, as allocators increasingly want portfolios to be managed responsibly, says Robert Furdak, chief investment officer for ESG at Man Group.

The two major investment trends looming large over the hedge fund and asset management world – bitcoin’s stratospheric surge and investors’ rush towards responsible investing across all mandates – are now set for a “head-on clash”, Furdak said.

Hedge funds are continuing to profit from the ongoing surge in the cryptocurrency sector, as more managers pour money into digital assets’ record rise this year. At the same time, though, an increasingly large number of investors are calling for hedge funds to take a sustainability-based stance and implement ESG-compliant factors in their portfolios.

In an in-depth market commentary this week, Furdak – ESG CIO at London-listed global hedge fund and alternative investments giant Man – explored how bitcoin is already bumping against the range of environmental, social and governance factors that investors increasingly look for in their allocations.

On the environmental theme, Furdak noted how bitcoin mining will continue to require substantial energy consumption for as long as the digital currency’s price remains high, both in absolute and relative terms. He added that the majority of bitcoin mining takes place in south-east Asia, where coal-fired power stations remain dominant.

“Currently, one bitcoin transaction requires the same energy as processing 500,000 Visa transactions,” Furdak observed, highlighting a study by the University of Cambridge’s Centre for Alternative Finance which estimated that bitcoin mining energy now exceeds the annual consumption of countries such as the Netherlands and the United Arab Emirates, and is approaching that of Norway and Pakistan.

“The direction of travel is a disastrous one,” he added. “Either the energy consumption increases with severe environmental consequences, or the bitcoin price collapses – which helps the environment but undermines the case as a good investment.”

Furdak’s commentary also explored the social consequences of trading bitcoin, which he considers less stable and “significantly more volatile” than traditional investor safe havens such as gold, bonds or the Swiss franc. Unlike commodities or precious metals, he maintains bitcoin ultimately has “no intrinsic value.”

“If there is little fundamental justification for institutional investors to hold bitcoin, the cottage industry of encouraging retail investors to bet on cryptocurrencies can have even less justification,” he said, citing advertisements which offer bitcoin trading with up to 100x leverage directly to retail investors.

“This kind of promotion is irresponsible to the point of immoral,” he added. “Whether or not bitcoin does become mainstream, at this point in time it remains a speculative investment. And history tells us the bursting of bubbles almost always has consequences, with late-joining retail almost always hit the hardest.”

The note also flagged up governance concerns within the cryptocurrency, which Furdak described as “pseudo-anonymous.”

“A lax regulatory and enforcement framework makes bitcoin attractive to those who would avoid the network of regulations and sanctions that govern orthodox currencies and financial markets,” Furdak contended.

He also pointed to the vulnerability of bitcoin wallets to hacking, as well as a lack of enforcement surrounding transactions, various clearing issues, and data protection and privacy concerns stemming from its reliance on public ledgers.

“Bitcoin’s energy consumption is well-known to investors. However, concerns about its deleterious social consequences and poor governance protocols may have fallen off the radar,” he added. “One possible solution to these issues is a path taken by responsible investors in public markets: engagement. However, for now, the ESG and cryptocurrency megatrends are heading for a collision course.”