1/ This thread is full of non-sequitirs and flawed arguments. Analysis: https://twitter.com/yassineARK/status/1360343382556483587

2/ "We need it" is not an argument for Bitcoin being positive for the environment.

3/ See #2.

The "stranded energy source" argument is common, but I'm yet to see anything that claims to quantify this. What are all these stranded energy sources, and why are people building them if they can't do anything with the energy?

4/ Go on...

5/ In other words, Bitcoin consumes over 7% as much energy as the entire financial sector, while handling far, far less than 7% of its volume.

Measuring efficiency in cost per GJ is absurd, like saying cars in the US are more efficient because gas is cheaper there.

6/ Another common trope - used to assert Bitcoin is primarily mined with renewables, but always without citation or quantification.

7/ More mysterious energy sources that people built out despite having no consumers for them!

[Citation Needed] on the energy mix.

8/ This is referencing a tiny operation with a half-dozen clients. At best what they do is use stranded energy - using the gas in generators is no more environmentally friendly than flaring it. Oh, and the owner wants to use the tech to restart defunct oil fields!

9/ If the bitcoin price goes up, so does the mining reward - and so the energy spent on mining bitcoin will increase too.

10/ Mining is required not to issue coins, but to ensure a stable view of the order of transactions. If bitcoin is to remain secure, miners will have to receive significant revenue indefinitely.

12/ In summary, yes it does.