IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jchals/v14y2022i1p1-d1008653.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

100 Important Questions about Bitcoin’s Energy Use and ESG Impacts

Author

Listed:
  • Murray A. Rudd

    (Independent Researcher Dartmouth, Southampton, NS B2Y 0E4, Canada)

Abstract

Bitcoin critics have argued that energy-intensive Bitcoin production and adoption will exacerbate global warming. Conversely, Bitcoin advocates have been dismayed by critics’ apparent lack of willingness to scrutinize Bitcoin’s potential role in helping to improve the economics of renewable energy investments, reduce net emissions from methane venting and flaring, increase electricity grid efficiency, and provide higher-order environmental, social, and governance (ESG) benefits. Given the disparate views, there is a pressing need to identify key knowledge needs regarding Bitcoin’s net energy use, carbon emissions, and direct and indirect ESG impacts. I used a variation on the ‘key questions’ horizon scanning approach to identify 100 questions that, if answered, could help provide credible evidence to support policymakers’, investors’, and research funders’ decision-making on issues relating to the impact of Bitcoin production and adoption. The questions are distributed across 13 themes (ranging from energy use to social impacts). The breadth of knowledge required to answer key questions highlights the need to build research capacity, encourage collaborative cross-sectoral and -disciplinary research, and develop a prioritized research agenda. Defensible evidence for investors, regulators, and policymakers needs to consider Bitcoin’s complex net impacts on energy use and environmental, social, and governance benefits.

Suggested Citation

  • Murray A. Rudd, 2022. "100 Important Questions about Bitcoin’s Energy Use and ESG Impacts," Challenges, MDPI, vol. 14(1), pages 1-16, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jchals:v:14:y:2022:i:1:p:1-:d:1008653
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2078-1547/14/1/1/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2078-1547/14/1/1/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. P. Bousquet & P. Ciais & J. B. Miller & E. J. Dlugokencky & D. A. Hauglustaine & C. Prigent & G. R. Van der Werf & P. Peylin & E.-G. Brunke & C. Carouge & R. L. Langenfelds & J. Lathière & F. Papa & M, 2006. "Contribution of anthropogenic and natural sources to atmospheric methane variability," Nature, Nature, vol. 443(7110), pages 439-443, September.
    2. Adrien Vogt-Schilb & St�phane Hallegatte & Christophe de Gouvello, 2015. "Marginal abatement cost curves and the quality of emission reductions: a case study on Brazil," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(6), pages 703-723, November.
    3. Cheryl Doss, 2013. "Intrahousehold Bargaining and Resource Allocation in Developing Countries-super-1," The World Bank Research Observer, World Bank, vol. 28(1), pages 52-78, February.
    4. Oliver E. Williamson, 2000. "The New Institutional Economics: Taking Stock, Looking Ahead," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 38(3), pages 595-613, September.
    5. Davoodi, Hamid & Zou, Heng-fu, 1998. "Fiscal Decentralization and Economic Growth: A Cross-Country Study," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 244-257, March.
    6. James Ford & Diana King, 2015. "A framework for examining adaptation readiness," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 20(4), pages 505-526, April.
    7. Regina Birner & Heidi Wittmer, 2004. "On the ‘Efficient Boundaries of the State’: The Contribution of Transaction-Costs Economics to the Analysis of Decentralization and Devolution in Natural Resource Management," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 22(5), pages 667-685, October.
    8. Johan A. Oldekop & Lorenza B. Fontana & Jean Grugel & Nicole Roughton & Emmanuel A. Adu-Ampong & Gemma K. Bird & Alex Dorgan & Marcia A. Vera Espinoza & Sara Wallin & Daniel Hammett & Esther Agbarakwe, 2016. "100 key research questions for the post-2015 development agenda," Development Policy Review, Overseas Development Institute, vol. 34(1), pages 55-82, January.
    9. Camilo Mora & Randi L. Rollins & Katie Taladay & Michael B. Kantar & Mason K. Chock & Mio Shimada & Erik C. Franklin, 2018. "Bitcoin emissions alone could push global warming above 2°C," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 8(11), pages 931-933, November.
    10. Nicholas Stern, 2013. "The Structure of Economic Modeling of the Potential Impacts of Climate Change: Grafting Gross Underestimation of Risk onto Already Narrow Science Models," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 51(3), pages 838-859, September.
    11. Heymann, Daniel & Leijonhufvud, Axel, 1995. "High Inflation: The Arne Ryde Memorial Lectures," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198288442, Decembrie.
    12. Julie A. Caswell & Eliza M. Mojduszka, 1996. "Using Informational Labeling to Influence the Market for Quality in Food Products," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 78(5), pages 1248-1253.
    13. Stern,Nicholas, 2007. "The Economics of Climate Change," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521700801, December.
    14. Lei, Nuoa & Masanet, Eric & Koomey, Jonathan, 2021. "Best practices for analyzing the direct energy use of blockchain technology systems: Review and policy recommendations," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    15. Doss, Cheryl, 2013. "Intrahousehold bargaining and resource allocation in developing countries," Policy Research Working Paper Series 6337, The World Bank.
    16. Eric Masanet & Arman Shehabi & Nuoa Lei & Harald Vranken & Jonathan Koomey & Jens Malmodin, 2019. "Implausible projections overestimate near-term Bitcoin CO2 emissions," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 9(9), pages 653-654, September.
    17. Lawton, Ricky N. & Rudd, Murray A., 2013. "Crossdisciplinary research contributions to the United Kingdom′s National Ecosystem Assessment," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 5(C), pages 149-159.
    18. Peter D. Gluckman & Anne Bardsley & Matthias Kaiser, 2021. "Brokerage at the science–policy interface: from conceptual framework to practical guidance," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-10, December.
    19. Nicolas Houy, 2019. "Rational mining limits Bitcoin emissions," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 9(9), pages 655-655, September.
    20. Zhang, Tao & Zou, Heng-fu, 1998. "Fiscal decentralization, public spending, and economic growth in China," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(2), pages 221-240, February.
    21. Nicolas Houy, 2019. "Rational mining limits Bitcoin emissions," Post-Print halshs-02386472, HAL.
    22. Adele Parmentola & Antonella Petrillo & Ilaria Tutore & Fabio De Felice, 2022. "Is blockchain able to enhance environmental sustainability? A systematic review and research agenda from the perspective of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(1), pages 194-217, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Juan Ignacio Ibañez & Alexander Freier, 2023. "Bitcoin’s Carbon Footprint Revisited: Proof of Work Mining for Renewable Energy Expansion," Challenges, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-21, August.
    2. Casey Watters, 2023. "When Criminals Abuse the Blockchain: Establishing Personal Jurisdiction in a Decentralised Environment," Laws, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-16, April.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hector F. Calvo-Pardo & Tullio Mancini & Jose Olmo, 2022. "Machine Learning the Carbon Footprint of Bitcoin Mining," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-30, February.
    2. Schinckus, Christophe, 2021. "Proof-of-work based blockchain technology and Anthropocene: An undermined situation?," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 152(C).
    3. Sergio Luis Náñez Alonso & Javier Jorge-Vázquez & Miguel Ángel Echarte Fernández & Ricardo Francisco Reier Forradellas, 2021. "Cryptocurrency Mining from an Economic and Environmental Perspective. Analysis of the Most and Least Sustainable Countries," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-22, July.
    4. Alexandre Olbrecht & Gina Pieters, 2023. "Crypto-Currencies and Crypto-Assets: An Introduction," Eastern Economic Journal, Palgrave Macmillan;Eastern Economic Association, vol. 49(2), pages 201-205, April.
    5. Agur, Itai & Lavayssière, Xavier & Villegas Bauer, Germán & Deodoro, Jose & Martinez Peria, Soledad & Sandri, Damiano & Tourpe, Hervé, 2023. "Lessons from crypto assets for the design of energy efficient digital currencies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 212(C).
    6. Rao, Nitya, 2017. "Assets, Agency and Legitimacy: Towards a Relational Understanding of Gender Equality Policy and Practice," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 43-54.
    7. Astrid Sneyers & Anneleen Vandeplas, 2013. "Girl Power in Agricultural Production: How Much Does it Yield? A Case-Study on the Dairy Sector in India," Working Papers id:5562, eSocialSciences.
    8. Melissa Dell & Benjamin F. Jones & Benjamin A. Olken, 2014. "What Do We Learn from the Weather? The New Climate-Economy Literature," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 52(3), pages 740-798, September.
    9. Dietz, Simon & Gollier, Christian & Kessler, Louise, 2018. "The climate beta," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 258-274.
    10. Sheng, Yu & Xu, Xinpeng, 2019. "The productivity impact of climate change: Evidence from Australia's Millennium drought," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 182-191.
    11. Martinez-Vazquez, Jorge & McNab, Robert M., 2003. "Fiscal Decentralization and Economic Growth," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 31(9), pages 1597-1616, September.
    12. Asiedu, Elizabeth & Azomahou, Théophile T. & Getachew, Yoseph & Yitbarek, Eleni, 2021. "Share the love: Parental bias, women empowerment and intergenerational mobility," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 191(C), pages 846-867.
    13. Whitney Buser, 2011. "The impact of fiscal decentralization on economics performance in high-income OECD nations: an institutional approach," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 149(1), pages 31-48, October.
    14. Juan González Alegre, 2010. "Fiscal decentralization and intergovernmental grants: the European regional policy and Spanish autonomous regions," Working Papers 2010/6, Institut d'Economia de Barcelona (IEB).
    15. Franziska Piontek & Matthias Kalkuhl & Elmar Kriegler & Anselm Schultes & Marian Leimbach & Ottmar Edenhofer & Nico Bauer, 2019. "Economic Growth Effects of Alternative Climate Change Impact Channels in Economic Modeling," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 73(4), pages 1357-1385, August.
    16. Pezzey, John C.V. & Burke, Paul J., 2014. "Towards a more inclusive and precautionary indicator of global sustainability," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 141-154.
    17. Ligthart, Jenny E. & van Oudheusden, Peter, 2015. "In government we trust: The role of fiscal decentralization," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 116-128.
    18. Stefan Dercon, 2014. "Climate change, green growth, and aid allocation to poor countries," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 30(3), pages 531-549.
    19. Mook Bangalore & Stephane Hallegatte & Laura Bonzanigo & Tamaro Kane & Marianne Fay & Ulf Narloch & David Treguer & Julie Rozenberg & Adrien Vogt-Schilb, 2016. "Shock Waves," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 22787, August.
    20. Wilman J. Iglesias & Alexandre B. Coelho, 2020. "Poverty and inequality within Brazilian households: an application of a collective consumption model," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 58(4), pages 1923-1952, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jchals:v:14:y:2022:i:1:p:1-:d:1008653. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.