The 4 greatest US-based mining operations – Core Scientific, Marathon Digital Holdings, Riot Blockchain, and Stronghold Digital Mining – got a letter from the House Committee On Energy and Commerce. The Committee wishes to know about their energy use and “how each company is mitigating those impacts and what steps are being taken to ensure their operations do not strain the energy grid or undermine our nation’s climate goals.”
Is this a teachable minute or an indication of things to come? Are Core Scientific, Marathon, Riot, and Stronghold gotten ready for the job? Could interest from the United States Government really be a favorable indication for the sector? Or are they tightening up steps to assault the bitcoin mining market? Why Core Scientific, Marathon, Riot, and Stronghold? Why now? Does it involve BlackRock offering bitcoin mining the thumbs-up? Or does it involve the extreme sanctions versus Tornado Cash?
SIMPLY IN – 4 U.S. #Bitcoin mining business consisting of Marathon, Riot, CoreScientific, and Stronghold have actually gotten a letter from the U.S. House Committee on Energy and Commerce requiring descriptions on energy use and e-waste. pic.twitter.com/IX4IHttG0b
— Dennis Porter (@Dennis_Porter_) August 19, 2022
In a news release, the House Committee On Energy and Commerce explained the Core Scientific, Marathon, Riot, and Stronghold cases as:
“Blockchain technology holds immense promise that may make our personal information more secure and economy more efficient. However, the energy consumption and hardware required to support PoW-based cryptocurrencies may, in some instances, produce severe externalities in the form of harmful emissions and excess electronic waste.”
Where does the House gets this details from? The entirely unmasked Digiconomist, possibly? Did they check out this letter 14 Members of Congress sent out to the EPA? Do they learn about how bitcoin can put methane to great usage and suppress gas flaring while doing so?
Background To The Core Scientific, Marathon, Riot, and Stronghold cases
Consider BlackRock’s current turnaround on their bitcoin policy:
“BlackRock has been a leader in the Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) movement. The firm and others have injected billions of capital into companies that meet their criteria. Bitcoin was thought to be outside of this movement due to its alleged high energy consumption.
Today’s announcement, coming from the largest investment firm in the world, sends a completely different signal to the financial world. According to analytics account MacroScope, BlackRock is waving the “green “BTC is ok” flag to the whole ESG-focused financial investment sector.”
However, likewise think about the seriousness of the sanctions versus Tornado Cash:
“This sanction came directly from the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), which is responsible for sanctioning countries and foreign entities that the US government has deemed enemies of the state or major criminals. So just as transacting with a country or organization sanctioned by OFAC is illegal, so is transacting with Tornado Cash or any funds associated with it.”
The concern here is: Does the Core Scientific, Marathon, Riot, and Stronghold case associates with the very first story or to the 2nd one? Is the United States ready to state the extremely successful activity of bitcoin mining as ESG-friendly? Or are they tightening up the screws?
BTC rate chart for 08/21/2022 on Bitfinex | Source: BTC/USD on TradingView.com
What Does The United States Government Want To Know?
The other quote in journalism release doesn’t sound great for bitcoin mining in the United States. The House Committee On Energy and Commerce informed Core Scientific, Marathon, Riot, and Stronghold:
“Given the existential threat posed by the climate crisis, we are deeply concerned about efforts like this that increase demand for fossil fuels, with the potential to put new strain on our energy grid. While blockchain technology is emerging as a potentially important tool in fighting climate change, increasing demand on the grid and burning more fossil fuels to power PoW cryptomining facilities only serves to undermine the potential climate benefits of blockchain technology and hold us back from achieving our climate pollution reduction goals.”
Consider, however, the findings of the Bitcoin Mining Council. “According to the BMC survey, participants are using electricity with 66.8% of the sustainable power mix. This represents an increase over Q1, 2022, data and records an estimate of 59.5% sustainable electricity mix across the entire Bitcoin network.” If the federal government makes an extensive examination and concludes this to be real, an entire market might get the stamp of approval it’s been waiting on.
However, the reverse is likewise real. It doesn’t matter how green the bitcoin network gets, this thing might go in either case.
The Exact Questions That Core Scientific, Marathon, Riot, and Stronghold need to address
The United States Government wishes to know:
- “How much energy did each of the company’s cryptomining facilities use during 2021?”
- “What are the energy sources used by utilities serving each of the facilities, including the energy mix of each?”
- “What is the proportion of energy used that is offset with renewable energy credits?”
- “In the last 12 months, how many days have the companies curtailed cryptomining to support grid stability?”
- “In 2021, what was the average cost per megawatt hour and per megawatt hour profit at each of the company’s cryptomining facilities?”
Do you truly believe Core Scientific, Marathon, Riot, and Stronghold aren’t all set for those concerns? They’ve been working towards those objectives because the very start. The House Committee On Energy and Commerce will be happily amazed.
Featured Image: House Committee On Energy and Commerce header | Charts by TradingView