Economy
How is it That Bitcoin is Becoming a Major Contributor to Carbon Emissions?
HUDSON VALLEY PRESS — t’s hard to believe that bitcoin could be the final nail in the coffin causing irreversible climate change
By EarthTalk
Dear EarthTalk: How is it that bitcoin, a virtual currency that few of us have heard of and no one I know uses, is becoming a major contributor to carbon emissions?
– Troy Sussman, Bowie, MD
It’s hard to believe that bitcoin, the best known of a group of new “cryptocurrencies” that many believe to be the future of money, could be the final nail in the coffin causing irreversible climate change. But a recent study from University of Hawai’i at Manoa researchers found that “projected bitcoin usage, if it follows the rate of adoption of other broadly adopted technologies, could alone produce enough carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions to push warming above 2°C within less than three decades.” According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), we can only hope to avoid the most cataclysmic effects of global warming if we can limit the rise in average global temperature to 2°C.
The reason bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies generate so much CO2 is that they require massive amounts of electricity, and our grid is still supplied primarily by fossil fuels. Bitcoin transactions are recorded and processed by dispersed individuals known as “miners” who group them together in blocks and add them to larger “chains” which serve as public ledgers of transactions.
“The verification process by miners, who compete to decipher a computationally demanding proof-of-work in exchange for bitcoins, requires large amounts of electricity,” reports study co-author Randi Rollins. Rollins estimates that bitcoin transactions accounted for some 69 million metric tons of CO2 emission in 2017 alone—and expects bitcoin-related emissions to rise sharply in the near future as the payment technology is adopted by millions around the world. If society adopts bitcoin as quickly as it adopted previous wildly popular “technologies” (e.g. credit cards, dishwashers), increased electricity demands could overwhelm efforts to curtail greenhouse gas emissions.
“We cannot predict the future of Bitcoin, but if implemented at a rate even close to the slowest pace at which other technologies have been incorporated, it will spell very bad news for climate change and the people and species impacted by it,” says the study’s lead author Camilo Mora.
“With the ever-growing devastation created by hazardous climate conditions, humanity is coming to terms with the fact that climate change is as real and personal as it can be,” she adds. “Clearly, any further development of cryptocurrencies should critically aim to reduce electricity demand, if the potentially devastating consequences of 2°C of global warming are to be avoided.”
Critics of the report counter that the global electric power sector—not to mention computers and cryptocurrency “rigs”—are getting significantly more energy efficient every year. Also, bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies might not be as widely adopted as researchers assume.
But isn’t it better we know now about the potential climate risks of bitcoin so we can work to direct the technology’s development in as environmentally friendly a way as possible? It certainly would be a shame to suffer the effects of runaway climate change after doing so much to lower our carbon footprints just because we neglected to hold cryptocurrencies to the same efficiency standards as the rest of the technologies we rely on.
Activism
OPINION: Your Voice and Vote Impact the Quality of Your Health Care
One of the most dangerous developments we’re seeing now? Deep federal cuts are being proposed to Medicaid, the life-saving health insurance program that covers nearly 80 million lower-income individuals nationwide. That is approximately 15 million Californians and about 1 million of the state’s nearly 3 million Black Californians who are at risk of losing their healthcare.

By Rhonda M. Smith, Special to California Black Media Partners
Shortly after last year’s election, I hopped into a Lyft and struck up a conversation with the driver. As we talked, the topic inevitably turned to politics. He confidently told me that he didn’t vote — not because he supported Donald Trump, but because he didn’t like Kamala Harris’ résumé. When I asked what exactly he didn’t like, he couldn’t specifically articulate his dislike or point to anything specific. In his words, he “just didn’t like her résumé.”
That moment really hit hard for me. As a Black woman, I’ve lived through enough election cycles to recognize how often uncertainty, misinformation, or political apathy keep people from voting, especially Black voters whose voices are historically left out of the conversation and whose health, economic security, and opportunities are directly impacted by the individual elected to office, and the legislative branches and political parties that push forth their agenda.
That conversation with the Lyft driver reflects a troubling surge in fear-driven politics across our country. We’ve seen White House executive orders gut federal programs meant to help our most vulnerable populations and policies that systematically exclude or harm Black and underserved communities.
One of the most dangerous developments we’re seeing now? Deep federal cuts are being proposed to Medicaid, the life-saving health insurance program that covers nearly 80 million lower-income individuals nationwide. That is approximately 15 million Californians and about 1 million of the state’s nearly 3 million Black Californians who are at risk of losing their healthcare.
Medicaid, called Medi-Cal in California, doesn’t just cover care. It protects individuals and families from medical debt, keeps rural hospitals open, creates jobs, and helps our communities thrive. Simply put; Medicaid is a lifeline for 1 in 5 Black Americans. For many, it’s the only thing standing between them and a medical emergency they can’t afford, especially with the skyrocketing costs of health care. The proposed cuts mean up to 7.2 million Black Americans could lose their healthcare coverage, making it harder for them to receive timely, life-saving care. Cuts to Medicaid would also result in fewer prenatal visits, delayed cancer screenings, unfilled prescriptions, and closures of community clinics. When healthcare is inaccessible or unaffordable, it doesn’t just harm individuals, it weakens entire communities and widens inequities.
The reality is Black Americans already face disproportionately higher rates of poorer health outcomes. Our life expectancy is nearly five years shorter in comparison to White Americans. Black pregnant people are 3.6 times more likely to die during pregnancy or postpartum than their white counterparts.
These policies don’t happen in a vacuum. They are determined by who holds power and who shows up to vote. Showing up amplifies our voices. Taking action and exercising our right to vote is how we express our power.
I urge you to start today. Call your representatives, on both sides of the aisle, and demand they protect Medicaid (Medi-Cal), the Affordable Care Act (Covered CA), and access to food assistance programs, maternal health resources, mental health services, and protect our basic freedoms and human rights. Stay informed, talk to your neighbors and register to vote.
About the Author
Rhonda M. Smith is the Executive Director of the California Black Health Network, a statewide nonprofit dedicated to advancing health equity for all Black Californians.
Activism
Oakland Hosts Town Hall Addressing Lead Hazards in City Housing
According to the city, there are 22,000 households in need of services for lead issues, most in predominantly low-income or Black and Latino neighborhoods, but only 550 to 600 homes are addressed every year. The city is hoping to use part of the multimillion-dollar settlement to increase the number of households served each year.

By Magaly Muñoz
The City of Oakland’s Housing and Community Development Department hosted a town hall in the Fruitvale to discuss the efforts being undertaken to remove lead primarily found in housing in East and West Oakland.
In 2021, the city was awarded $14 million out of a $24 million legal settlement from a lawsuit against paint distributors for selling lead-based paint that has affected hundreds of families in Oakland and Alameda County. The funding is intended to be used for lead poisoning reduction and prevention services in paint only, not water or other sources as has been found recently in schools across the city.
The settlement can be used for developing or enhancing programs that abate lead-based paint, providing services to individuals, particularly exposed children, educating the public about hazards caused by lead paint, and covering attorney’s fees incurred in pursuing litigation.
According to the city, there are 22,000 households in need of services for lead issues, most in predominantly low-income or Black and Latino neighborhoods, but only 550 to 600 homes are addressed every year. The city is hoping to use part of the multimillion-dollar settlement to increase the number of households served each year.
Most of the homes affected were built prior to 1978, and 12,000 of these homes are considered to be at high risk for lead poisoning.
City councilmember Noel Gallo, who represents a few of the lead-affected Census tracts, said the majority of the poisoned kids and families are coming directly from neighborhoods like the Fruitvale.
“When you look at the [kids being admitted] at the children’s hospital, they’re coming from this community,” Gallo said at the town hall.
In order to eventually rid the highest impacted homes of lead poisoning, the city intends to create programs and activities such as lead-based paint inspections and assessments, full abatement designed to permanently eliminate lead-based paint, or partial abatement for repairs, painting, and specialized cleaning meant for temporary reduction of hazards.
In feedback for what the city could implement in their programming, residents in attendance of the event said they want more accessibility to resources, like blood testing, and information from officials about lead poisoning symptoms, hotlines for assistance, and updates on the reduction of lead in their communities.
Attendees also asked how they’d know where they are on the prioritization list and what would be done to address lead in the water found at several school sites in Oakland last year.
City staff said there will be a follow-up event to gather more community input for programming in August, with finalizations happening in the fall and a pilot launch in early 2026.
Bay Area
State Orders Cleanup of Former Richmond Landfill
There is no immediate public hazard at the fence line of the site, which is located on the city’s southeastern shoreline, at the foot of S. 51st Street. However, the “site’s wastes pose an unacceptable long-term risk,” according to a CDTSC statement. Also, since the uncapped site sits along a creek and the Bay, wastes can wash off during each rain and high tide, the agency stated.

The Richmond Standard
The California Department of Toxic Substances Control (CDTSC) is ordering Union Pacific Railroad Company (UPRR) and Bayer CropScience, Inc. to clean up the former Blair Southern Pacific Landfill in Richmond due to findings of elevated levels of lead, banned pesticides like DDT, and radioactive material at the site.
There is no immediate public hazard at the fence line of the site, which is located on the city’s southeastern shoreline, at the foot of S. 51st Street. However, the “site’s wastes pose an unacceptable long-term risk,” according to a CDTSC statement. Also, since the uncapped site sits along a creek and the Bay, wastes can wash off during each rain and high tide, the agency stated.
Bayer and UPRR were ordered to clean up the site as it is their predecessor companies that are deemed responsible for the hazardous waste. The site was used from the 1950s to the 1980s, before modern environmental laws were in place, according to the CDTSC.
“During this time, the site was leased to landfill operators, who developed and operated the site as a series of landfills for disposal of industrial and non-industrial wastes,” the CDTSC stated.
The state’s order requires Bayer and UPRR to safely remove and dispose of the radioactive materials and includes penalties of up to $25,000 per day for noncompliance.
“There will be opportunities for public involvement during the development of the cleanup plan and at the Richmond Southeast Shoreline Community Advisory Group (CAG) meetings, which meet on Zoom the second Thursday of every month,” said Richmond City Councilmember Soheila Bana.
-
#NNPA BlackPress3 weeks ago
MLK Bust Quietly Removed from Oval Office Under Trump
-
Activism3 weeks ago
Oakland Post: Week of May 7 – 13, 2025
-
Activism3 weeks ago
Oakland Post: Week of April 30 – May 6, 2025
-
#NNPA BlackPress3 weeks ago
Trump Abruptly Fires First Carla Hayden: The First Black Woman to Serve as Librarian of Congress
-
Activism1 week ago
New Oakland Moving Forward
-
Activism1 week ago
After Two Decades, Oakland Unified Will Finally Regain Local Control
-
#NNPA BlackPress3 weeks ago
Black America Celebrates African Descent Heritage of Pope Leo XIV
-
Alameda County1 week ago
Oakland Begins Month-Long Closure on Largest Homeless Encampment
1 Comment