 Hello, Andreas. People here in MTL are very obsessed by Bitcoin's overconsumption of energy in regards of climate change. Would I be wrong to answer them that Bitcoin's non-inflationary policy will probably help save the world? Yeah, I mean, that argument won't get you very far, Guillaume, because here's the thing. People who make this argument have usually a very specific bias or that is very difficult to shift. First of all, they confuse energy production with energy consumption and see the two as equivalent. This would be the same as saying that electric cars harm the environment because they use more energy in total than gasoline cars, but that's ignoring the side effects of concentrating production of energy and regulating it as well as distributing the consumption in that way. Obviously, the distribution of gas and oil is much more harmful to the environment. And theoretically, at least, if you're producing the electricity for your Teslas with coal-fired power plants, they're more damaging to the environment. You don't hear them saying this argument, however, because it is much easier to regulate the production of energy in one place at the electricity plant than regulate the emissions of a billion vehicles that are distributed all around the place. So if you shift the emissions from the endpoint to the source, you've achieved a great deal of environmental impact. These are fundamental concepts in understanding that energy consumption is not the same as pollution. Also, energy consumption in Bitcoin is not related to the number of transactions. Energy consumption in Bitcoin does not grow linearly with the amount of people using it, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. All of these things are incorrect. But if you want to bash Bitcoin because you don't see it as useful or you disagree with its political message, then no amount of argumentation is going to shift that perspective. Keep doing what you're doing. Keep focusing on what matters. The truth of the matter is that because Bitcoin mining can happen anywhere and does not require a specific location, Bitcoin mining is attracted to renewable energy and waste energy, energy that either cannot be distributed or cannot be used in a cost-effective manner because it is remote. Things like off-flaring of gas, hydro that exceeds local demand or other renewable forms of energy that exceed local demand and do not have distribution mechanisms. In the end, Bitcoin subsidizes renewable energy. But that argument won't get you very far if the people are not interested in good faith arguments but are interested simply in finding, gets another way to bash Bitcoin. Just ignore it. Just ignore it. You don't want pollution and carbon dioxide. Great. Regulate energy production. If you're worried about pollution, regulate energy production. One of the best ways to do that is, in my opinion, with carbon credit markets. But those are not very popular.