Regardless of Bitcoin’s rising institutional adoption in 2025, its environmental influence remains to be being misunderstood and misinterpreted by many, in response to ESG professional Daniel Batten.
In an X thread on Saturday, Batten mentioned there are 9 frequent criticisms of Bitcoin mining’s vitality use that may be debunked by real-world information.
“Each nascent disruptive know-how is accompanied by claims which might be based mostly on lack of awareness, lack of information, and a concern 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 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.”
Fantasy: Bitcoin is resource-intensive, destabilizes energy grids
The premise that Bitcoin consumes quite a lot of vitality, 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 impartial of transaction quantity. “Because of this Bitcoin transaction quantity can scale with out rising useful resource use.”
Second, the declare that Bitcoin mining destabilizes energy grids can also be a fantasy, because it really does the other — stabilizing grids by means of versatile load administration, particularly on renewable-heavy grids like these in Texas.
Bitcoin mining doesn’t enhance energy prices
There’s additionally no information to assist the declare that on a regular basis customers 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 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 struggle to outlive
Fourth, evaluating Bitcoin’s vitality utilization to entire nations is deceptive as a result of the main target must be on vitality supply transformation, not the discount of utilization, in response to 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.
“Bitcoin’s carbon footprint could 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,” mentioned Batten.
“Bitcoin mining is, in truth, the one world trade for which there’s strong, third-party information exhibiting it has crossed the 50% sustainable vitality threshold.”
Proof-of-stake shouldn’t be essentially higher
Batten additionally argued with the notion that proof-of-stake Ethereum (ETH) is best for the surroundings than proof-of-work Bitcoin (BTC). Claiming this makes PoS extra environmentally pleasant “errs by conflating vitality use with hurt,” he mentioned.
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.
Nonetheless, Batten argues PoW gives many advantages, similar to the power 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 might be used for issues apart 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 exhibits the other, he mentioned.
“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 mission known as Gridless in Africa, which has delivered renewable vitality to an estimated 28,000 individuals.
Lastly, the argument that “Bitcoin mining wastes vitality” is a fantasy as a result of it prevents renewable vitality waste, attaining over 90% of photo voltaic and wind utilization in research, in response to the ESG professional.
“Additional, ‘losing vitality’ shouldn’t 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