Bitcoin’s environmental impression stays contested as critics query its vitality use, whereas ESG researcher Daniel Batten disputes a number of of these claims.
In a Saturday X thread, ESG researcher Daniel Batten stated 9 widespread criticisms of Bitcoin mining’s vitality use are contradicted by peer-reviewed research and grid-level knowledge.
“Each nascent disruptive know-how is accompanied by claims which can be based mostly on lack of expertise, lack of knowledge, and a worry of one thing unknown,” said Batten.
In November, the Dow Jones lambasted Harvard College for investing a few of its endowment in BTC, labeling it as a “faux forex and money-laundering instrument that can also 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 troublesome to quantify.
Delusion: Bitcoin is resource-intensive, destabilizes energy grids
The premise that Bitcoin consumes a whole lot of vitality, water, and e-waste per transaction is just “not true,” he stated.
Batten argues that this has already been debunked by 4 peer-reviewed research concluding that useful resource use is impartial of transaction quantity.
Batten cited peer-reviewed analysis summarized within the College of Cambridge’s 2025 Digital Mining Business Report, which discovered Bitcoin’s vitality use is basically impartial of transaction quantity. “Because of this Bitcoin transaction quantity can scale with out growing useful resource use.”
Second, the declare that Bitcoin mining destabilizes energy grids can also be a fantasy, because it truly does the alternative — stabilizing grids by way of versatile load administration, particularly on renewable-heavy grids like these in Texas.
Bitcoin mining doesn’t enhance energy prices
There’s additionally no knowledge to assist the declare that on a regular basis shoppers pay extra for electrical energy due to Bitcoin miners, he stated.
“Neither within the knowledge, nor in a peer-reviewed examine is there proof to assist the declare,” he added, highlighting a number of situations when Bitcoin mining has been discovered to assist decrease costs.
Associated: Bitcoin mining’s 2026 reckoning: AI pivots, margin stress and a combat to outlive
Fourth, evaluating Bitcoin’s vitality utilization to complete international locations is deceptive as a result of the main focus ought to be on vitality supply transformation, not the discount of utilization, based on the Intergovernmental Panel on Local weather Change (IPCC).
“The worldwide computing community used to assist Bitcoin already makes use of extra vitality 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, in actual fact, the one world business for which there’s strong, third-party knowledge exhibiting it has crossed the 50% sustainable vitality threshold.”
Proof-of-stake is just not essentially higher
Batten additionally disputed the notion that proof-of-stake Ethereum (ETH) is healthier for the surroundings 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 Assessment about Ethereum’s transition to proof-of-stake described the blockchain as beforehand utilizing as a lot electrical energy as Chile.
Nonetheless, Batten argues that PoW affords many advantages, corresponding to the power to mitigate methane, present stability to the vitality grid, enhance renewable vitality capability, and monetize wasted renewable vitality.
Batten argued that whereas landfill and flare gasoline might technically be used for different functions, such options have to this point confirmed economically infeasible at scale.
Bitcoin mining promotes renewable vitality utilization
The declare that Bitcoin mining takes away renewable vitality from different customers can also be false, as proof exhibits the alternative, 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 challenge referred to 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 fantasy as a result of it prevents renewable vitality waste, reaching over 90% of photo voltaic and wind utilization in research, based on the ESG knowledgeable. Batten cited peer-reviewed analysis by Moghimi et al. and Lai and You, which discovered Bitcoin mining considerably lowered renewable vitality curtailment and improved microgrid economics.
“Additional, ‘losing vitality’ is just not an goal evaluation, however a price 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
