Regardless of Bitcoin’s rising institutional adoption in 2025, its environmental affect continues to be being misunderstood and misinterpreted by many, in keeping with ESG professional Daniel Batten.
In an X thread on Saturday, Batten stated there are 9 frequent criticisms of Bitcoin mining’s vitality use that may be debunked by real-world information.
“Each nascent disruptive expertise is accompanied by claims which might be primarily based on lack of know-how, lack of knowledge, and a concern of one thing unknown,” stated Batten.
In November, the Dow Jones lambasted Harvard College for investing a few of its endowment in BTC, labelling it as a “faux forex and money-laundering software that can also be an environmental disaster.“
In July, Bloomberg claimed that Bitcoin “devours the electrical energy meant for the world’s poor.”
Fantasy: Bitcoin is resource-intensive, destabilizes energy grids
The premise that Bitcoin consumes plenty of vitality, water, and e-waste per transaction is solely “not true,” he stated.
Batten argues this has already been debunked by 4 peer-reviewed research concluding that useful resource use is impartial of transaction quantity. “Which means that Bitcoin transaction quantity can scale with out rising useful resource use.”
Second, the declare that Bitcoin mining destabilizes energy grids can also be a fable, because it truly does the other — stabilizing grids via versatile load administration, particularly on renewable-heavy grids like these in Texas.
Bitcoin mining doesn’t enhance energy prices
There may be additionally no information to help the declare that on a regular basis shoppers pay extra for electrical energy due to Bitcoin miners, he stated.
“Neither within the information, nor in a peer-reviewed examine is there proof to help the declare,” he added, highlighting a number of cases when Bitcoin mining has been discovered to assist decrease costs.
Associated: Bitcoin mining’s 2026 reckoning: AI pivots, margin stress and a battle to outlive
Fourth, evaluating Bitcoin’s vitality utilization to entire international locations is deceptive as a result of the main focus needs to be on vitality supply transformation, not the discount of utilization, in keeping with the Intergovernmental Panel on Local weather Change (IPCC).
“The worldwide computing community used to help Bitcoin already makes use of extra vitality than Thailand or Poland —sure, actually,” reported Morningstar in November.
“Bitcoin’s carbon footprint may be very excessive,” can also be a flawed assertion as a result of mining has no direct emissions, solely scope-2 emissions from electrical energy utilization,” stated Batten.
“Bitcoin mining is, in actual fact, the one world trade for which there’s sturdy, third-party information displaying it has crossed the 50% sustainable vitality threshold.”
Bitcoin mining emissions depth is falling. Supply: Daniel Batten
Proof-of-stake will not be essentially higher
Batten additionally argued with the notion that proof-of-stake Ethereum (ETH) is best for the setting than proof-of-work Bitcoin (BTC). Claiming this makes PoS extra environmentally pleasant “errs by conflating vitality use with hurt,” he stated.
In 2022, an article from the Australian Monetary Evaluation about Ethereum’s transition to proof-of-stake described the blockchain as beforehand utilizing as a lot electrical energy as Chile.
Screenshot of a 2022 article about Ethereum’s Merge. Supply: AFR
Nevertheless, Batten argues PoW gives many advantages, corresponding to the flexibility to mitigate methane, present stability to the vitality grid, enhance renewable vitality capability, and monetize wasted renewable vitality.
The argument that landfill and flare fuel may very well be used for issues aside from Bitcoin mining is “technically true,” however economically infeasible since solely Bitcoin’s economics make stranded methane viable, Batten argued.
Bitcoin mining promotes renewable vitality utilization
The declare that Bitcoin mining takes away renewable vitality from different customers can also be false, as proof reveals the other, he stated.
“Many individuals now have entry to renewable vitality who in any other case wouldn’t have, as a direct results of Bitcoin mining,” reported Batten, citing a venture known as Gridless in Africa, which has delivered renewable vitality to an estimated 28,000 folks.
Lastly, the argument that “Bitcoin mining wastes vitality” is a fable as a result of it prevents renewable vitality waste, attaining over 90% of photo voltaic and wind utilization in research, in keeping with the ESG professional.
“Additional, ‘losing vitality’ will not be an goal evaluation, however a worth judgment. One can solely declare that vitality is wasted if no good to humanity is produced within the course of.”
Journal: Kain Warwick loses $50K ETH guess, Bitmine’s ‘1000x’ share plan: Hodler’s Digest
