Still, there is a fixed amount of hydro power available, short of building new dams. This puts Bitcoin's toll on fossil fuel.

(If Bitcoin didn't exist, the hydro power would still be there and would be used for something else, therefore less fossil fuel would have to be burned in its place.)

> If Bitcoin didn't exist, the hydro power would still be there and would be used for something else

That's not a good assumption. There are many power plants in China in the middle of nowhere unconnected to much. It's completely plausible that the entire bitcoin network could run on clean energy that otherwise couldn't be used for much else because it's too remote (geothermal in Greenland or something).

I hope we're not building hydro power plants for the sole purpose of supporting the Bitcoin network. The energy may be "clean", but these projects have their own impact on the surrounding ecosystem.

So far they're built next to pre-existing ones and using excess power

There's huge energy oversupply in Sichuan province, you can't just keep storing hydropower infinitely, it has to be released to protect the dams.

All this outrage is misguided, the market incentives mean miners go to where the cheapest power is, all the industrial scale mining is located next to large renewables sources in China, Pacific NW, Scandanvia/Iceland.

The largest ethereum mine in the world is 100% renewable.