A document acquired through a freedom of information request exposes the steps proposed by European Union authorities to cut down on Bitcoin’s energy consumption. Along with forcing the leading cryptocurrency to adapt to a Proof-of-Stake validation mechanism, the paper hints that there is very likely an outright ban on trading.
EU authorities are not fans of Bitcoin, the documents suggest.
Netzpolitik, a digital rights group, released a study outlining the scope of anti-Bitcoin discussions among European Union authorities. Numerous papers acquired via freedom of information requests display how talks on prohibiting Bitcoin mining and trade in the EU have proceeded.
One document, the minutes of an EU meeting with Sweden’s financial regulator and environmental agency, covered the country’s growing Bitcoin mining industry. One speaker inquired if authorities could coerce Bitcoin into adopting the more energy-efficient Proof-of-Stake validation mechanism.
“If Ethereum is able to shift, we could legitimately request the same from BTC. We need to ‘protect’ other crypto coins that are sustainable. Don’t see [the] need to ‘protect’ the Bitcoin community.”
Another speaker at the same conference questioned openly if the EU should prohibit trade in crypto assets based on Bitcoin’s Proof-of-Work mechanism. Although the response to this question was censored to safeguard the “ongoing decision-making process,” it demonstrates that such steps were certainly considered.
However, the most incriminating revelation came near the conference’s conclusion, when authorities considered the ramifications of a possible ban on crypto investors. “How would [the] disappearance of Bitcoin affect consumers?” inquired one participant. “Participants in BTC are fully aware of the volatility of the currency/investment risk. Do not need additional protection measures,” was written in response.
The participants in the debate seem indifferent about the thousands of people throughout the globe for whom Bitcoin serves as a lifeline. From Ukrainians utilising cryptocurrencies in their war efforts to Argentinians investing in Bitcoin to curb the inflation, the EU seems to concentrate only on Bitcoin’s energy consumption instead of the upsides of Bitcoin’s decentralised, peer-to-peer payment system.
The inherent lack of knowledge of cryptocurrencies was clearly shown when one of the participants inquired, “Which service does Bitcoin offer that Solana does not offer to society? If you can prove that other cryptocurrencies can operate without Proof-of-Work then why can’t Bitcoin?”
Solana is far more centralised than Bitcoin, functioning primarily under the Solana Foundation’s control. On the other hand, Bitcoin is far more decentralised, enables the conversion of surplus energy into a valuable asset, and provides a more stable and uncensorable method of peer-to-peer trading.
This similar lack of comprehension reveals itself in requests to “change the code,” referring to Greenpeace’s recent effort to convert Bitcoin from Proof-of-Work to Proof-of-Stake. While this mantra is common among European politicians and environmental organisations, they fail to recognise that any entity like Solana does not substantially impact Bitcoin. Bitcoin is a decentralised network of individual actors where you cannot persuade any to bend to your will.
The documents disclosed today by Netzpolitik cover a November 2021 gathering. Since then, the European Parliament has voted against measures to prohibit Proof-of-Work mining. However, the paper provides valuable insights into some EU officials’ approaches to Bitcoin regulation. While Proof-of-Stake cryptocurrencies seem secure, Bitcoin remains a contentious issue in European politics.
