Comment
Author: Admin | 2025-04-28
The environment.”Economist James Broughel has criticized the proposal, arguing in Forbes that it would make more sense to tax the greenhouse gas emissions from crypto mining, rather than electricity usage. In other words, why penalize crypto mining companies that use clean energy?The Hardin Generating Station, a coal-fired power plant that is also home to the cryptocurrency mining operation Big Horn Data Hub, in Hardin, Mont. (Matthew Brown/AP)The White House counters that any increase in electricity use makes it harder to green the grid because it means that much more clean energy is needed.Of course, there are other energy-intensive industries, such as manufacturing of chemicals and steel, that are not being targeted with a tax on their electricity use. But the White House argues that crypto mining doesn’t necessarily generate the same benefits, including creating jobs and supplying essential products, as those other sectors of the economy. At the same time, the price volatility of crypto — the value of one bitcoin has fluctuated between $15,000 and $40,000 over the last year — may pose risks to the financial system.“It’s not yet clear what the economic benefits of this activity are,” the White House economist said of cryptocurrency. “At the same time that the benefits have not been fully documented, there are concerns about risk to financial stability, and certainly the environmental concerns.”Advocates for the cryptocurrency industry say it does have benefits for its users.“Millions of people are using this to transact around the world,” Mapes said. “It’s an opportunity for the unbanked or underbanked to bank, and it’s a way to send money across borders without having to pay a middleman.”Mapes argues that the White House is selectively picking winners and losers among industries.“It seems like there’s an outsized focus on us,” he said.
Add Comment