When Chris Precht, an Austrian architect and artist, first learned about infallible signs, the digital collectibles that are storming the art world by storm, he was so enchanted, he said he ‘like a little kid again felt it ‘
Precht, known for his work on ecological architecture, was therefore devastated to learn that the artworks, known as NFTs, have an environmental footprint that is just as astonishing as the gold rush that swept them.
“The numbers are just crushing,” he said in his studio in Pfarrwerfen, Austria, announcing that he was canceling his plans, one of a growing number of artists insulting NFTs, despite the sky-high amounts some have achieved at auctions. . “I can not hurt it as much financially and mentally as it does.”
Sign up for The Morning New York Times newsletter
For sure financially. Last month, an art montage turned into an NFT by digital artist known as Beeple sold for more than $ 69 million at a Christie’s online auction. (Last month, an NFT was also sold from a New York Times technology column for more than $ 500,000, with proceeds from the Neediest Cases Fund, a charity to Times.)
According to Precht’s own calculations, the creation of the 300 articles of digital art he planned to sell – 100 each of three works of art – would have burned through the same amount of electricity that an average European would otherwise use over two decades, he said. late last month in an Instagram video.
What in the (hot) world?
An NFT is a piece of artwork stamped with a unique code code and stored on a virtual ledger, ‘blockchain’. Interest in the NFT market has increased through viral marketing, hubris and perhaps some kind of pandemic, which has pushed the price of digital artwork to fantastic levels.
But blockchain technology, which also forms the basis of cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin, has enormous emissions of greenhouse gases.
In a nutshell, when an artist loads a work of art and clicks on a button to “coin” it, he or she begins a process known as mining, which involves complex puzzles, tremendous computing power, and a involves large amount of energy. This is because Ethereum, the preferred platform for NFTs, uses a method called ‘proof of work’ to create digital assets such as non-flammable tokens.
To successfully add an asset to the blockchain ledger, miners must compete to solve a cryptographic puzzle, and their computers quickly generate numbers in a furious race of trial and error. According to trading platform Blockchain.com, as of mid-April, miners had made more than 170 million efforts to build new blocks. (A quintillion is 1 followed by 18 zeros.)
The miner who first comes up with the correct answer is the winner and gets his or her asset at the blockchain.
The system is deliberately designed to be cumbersome, ostensibly to make it transparent and competitive and to prevent fraud. Bitcoin, the largest crypto-currency, also uses the energy-intensive proof-of-work model.
According to an estimate supported by independent researchers, the creation of an average NFT has an amazing environmental footprint of more than 200 kilograms of planetary warming carbon, equivalent to driving 500 miles in a typical American gasoline-powered car.
Other attempts to calculate the energy consumption of blockchain have also reached large amounts. Researchers at the University of Cambridge estimate that Bitcoin mining uses more electricity than entire countries such as Argentina, Sweden or Pakistan. A recently published article in the journal Nature Communications warned that cryptocurrency mining in China could undermine the country’s climate goals if left unchecked.
“I know it’s hard to understand,” says Susanne Köhler, an expert in life cycle analysis at the University of Aalborg in Denmark, who conducted a life cycle analysis of blockchain technology. “You just click a button or type a few words and then all of a sudden you burn so much energy.”
The problem is exacerbated, Köhler said, that solving the riddles becomes more competitive and difficult as interest in blockchain increases and more people start mining. “It will therefore not become more energy efficient over time, as other technologies do,” she said. “It only leads to a greater impact on emissions, unless their energy is carbon-free.”
This is not the first time that the art world has struggled with its role in climate change. There is concern at art museums about funding fossil fuels, and some are choosing to end the lucrative sponsorships for the oil company.
But NFTs have been particularly controversial, as the hype surrounding digital tokens has been seen as a long-awaited shot for many smaller artists to eventually gain more exposure, recognition and serious money for their work.
‘Why is it when the little ones get a foothold,’ said designer Gareth Stangroom, also known as @fire_hydrant_man, in response to Precht’s announcement, ‘everyone agrees on its ethics – instead of criticizing the big players who have been abusing our planet for decades? ”
Joanie Lemercier, a French artist known for his futuristic light sculptures, was one of the first to examine the environmental effects of the NFTs. He has just released six videos featuring a sign, inspired by platonic solids, recorded by buyers. But he heard of the growing alarm over Bitcoin’s energy consumption, which worried him: Lemercier was also involved in climate activism and campaigned for the move away from coal.
He turns to Memo Akten, a computer engineer and artist who performs the first calculations based specifically on NFTs and on a website he calls CryptoArt.wtf.
“It appears that my release of six crypto artworks over the past two years has consumed more electricity in ten seconds than the entire studio,” Lemercier wrote on his website. He said he would wheel future NFT releases. “It felt insane to consider continuing with the practice.”
‘It’s really a big boom and the prices have gone crazy. But it can not continue like this, “said Lemercier. ‘So there is a feeling that there is very limited time to make as much money as possible. This is why many people reject this energy impact. ”
The fallout has spread. Last month, the art app ArtStation canceled a drop of NFTs from a group of popular artists just hours after it was announced, after a setback was formed over the impact on the environment.
“Obviously this is not the right time,” ArtStation said. “It is our hope that at some point in the future we will be able to find a just and ecological solution.”
The environmental issues were pushed back. In a recent Medium post titled “No, CryptoArtists Aren’t Harming the Planet”, the NFT trading platform Super Rare drew attention to what it claims were misconceptions about the tokens’ emissions footprint. Blockchains like Ethereum were more like a train that ran all day, the authors said, and the transactions like seats in the train. NFTs therefore do not add emissions, they argued, just as a train would continue to ride no matter how many passengers were on board.
Alex de Vries, a Dutch data scientist whose website, Digiconomist, monitors the sustainability of digital currencies, said that analogy does not last. “If one person does not take a plane, it may not make any difference,” said de Vries, using a slightly different analogy. “But when a lot of people take planes, there are more emissions from flying.”
Promises from some platforms to invest in carbon acceleration have been met with skepticism, given the enormous amount of carbon footprint of NFTs.
And said, ‘Do not worry! We will pay for carbon offsets ”is equivalent to lighting a house and then a single potted plant on the burned property as ‘compensation’, freelance illustrator Bleached Rainbows said on Twitter.
Ethereum said it was reducing its footprint by moving to another model called “proof of stake”, which does not require miners to compete to add assets to the blockchain. The new model rewards miners instead based on how much cryptocurrency they already own, significantly reducing computer work and adding to its release.
But since the idea was announced a few years ago, Ethereum has been vague about when the change will actually take place. Dankrad Feist, a researcher at the Ethereum Foundation, a non-profit company working with the network on the switch, said in an email that the effort would take another six to twelve months.
“Switching to a proof of interest is not unimportant for a network that currently secures hundreds of billions of dollars in value, so unfortunately it can not happen overnight, otherwise there is a high risk of failure,” he said. Feist said. “I’m quite impatient about this and try to strengthen the merger as much as possible without compromising Ethereum’s safety too much.”
Some smaller NFT platforms, including one known as Hic Et Nunc, have already started using proof of the game and attracted artists like Lemercier.
By reducing the required number of shortcuts, Hic Et Nunc not only reduces energy consumption; according to Rafael Lima, the founder of Hic Et Nunc, it also wants to reduce the cost of listing NFTs, which can reach many hundreds of dollars. “It’s just a more efficient algorithm,” he said.
This article originally appeared in The New York Times.
© 2021 The New York Times Company