Bitcoin’s environmental influence stays contested as critics query its power use, whereas ESG researcher Daniel Batten disputes a number of of these claims.
In a Saturday X thread, ESG researcher Daniel Batten mentioned 9 frequent criticisms of Bitcoin mining’s power use are contradicted by peer-reviewed research and grid-level information.
“Each nascent disruptive know-how is accompanied by claims which might be primarily based on lack of knowledge, lack of knowledge, and a worry of one thing unknown,” mentioned Batten.
In November, the Dow Jones lambasted Harvard College for investing a few of its endowment in BTC, labelling it as a “faux foreign money and money-laundering device that can be an environmental disaster.“
In July, Bloomberg claimed that Bitcoin “devours the electrical energy meant for the world’s poor.”
Some environmental researchers dispute these conclusions, arguing that oblique emissions and alternative prices linked to mining stay tough to quantify.
Fable: Bitcoin is resource-intensive, destabilizes energy grids
The premise that Bitcoin consumes a whole lot of power, water, and e-waste per transaction is just “not true,” he mentioned.
Batten argues this has already been debunked by 4 peer-reviewed research concluding that useful resource use is unbiased of transaction quantity.
Batten cited peer-reviewed analysis summarized within the College of Cambridge’s 2025 Digital Mining Trade Report, which discovered Bitcoin’s power use is basically unbiased 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 be a delusion, because it truly does the alternative — 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 mentioned.
“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 strain and a struggle to outlive
Fourth, evaluating Bitcoin’s power utilization to complete nations is deceptive as a result of the main target needs to be on power supply transformation, not the discount of utilization, in accordance with the Intergovernmental Panel on Local weather Change (IPCC).
“The worldwide computing community used to help Bitcoin already makes use of extra power than Thailand or Poland —sure, actually,” reported Morningstar in November.
Batten additionally challenged claims that Bitcoin has a “excessive carbon footprint,” arguing that mining produces no direct emissions and outcomes solely in scope-2 emissions from electrical energy utilization.
“Bitcoin mining is, the truth is, the one international trade for which there’s strong, third-party information exhibiting it has crossed the 50% sustainable power threshold.”
Proof-of-stake shouldn’t be essentially higher
Batten additionally disputed the notion that proof-of-stake Ethereum (ETH) is healthier for the atmosphere than proof-of-work Bitcoin (BTC). Claiming this makes PoS extra environmentally pleasant “errs by conflating power use with hurt,” he mentioned.
In 2022, an article from the Australian Monetary Assessment about Ethereum’s transition to proof-of-stake described the blockchain as beforehand utilizing as a lot electrical energy as Chile.
Nevertheless, Batten argues PoW affords many advantages, reminiscent of the flexibility to mitigate methane, present stability to the power grid, enhance renewable power capability, and monetize wasted renewable power.
Batten argued that whereas landfill and flare fuel may technically be used for different functions, such options have up to now confirmed economically infeasible at scale.
Bitcoin mining promotes renewable power utilization
The declare that Bitcoin mining takes away renewable power from different customers can be false, as proof exhibits the alternative, he mentioned.
“Many individuals now have entry to renewable power 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 power to an estimated 28,000 individuals.
Lastly, the argument that “Bitcoin mining wastes power” is a delusion as a result of it prevents renewable power waste, attaining over 90% of photo voltaic and wind utilization in research, in accordance with the ESG professional. Batten cited peer-reviewed analysis by Moghimi et al. and Lai and You, which discovered Bitcoin mining considerably decreased renewable power curtailment and improved microgrid economics.
“Additional, ‘losing power’ shouldn’t be an goal evaluation, however a price judgment. One can solely declare that power 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
