The level of Bitcoin mining energy consumption is on par with that of some countries. This statement is often mentioned as one of Bitcoin’s main drawbacks, as consumption takes its toll on the environment. However, Bitcoin advocates argue that things are not that simple, and in some ways, Bitcoin is an eco-friendly technology. How come, and who’s right?
Proof-of-work
The Bitcoin network is protected from spam attacks with a mechanism known as “proof-of-work.” The earliest installment of this algorithm was created by Cynthia Dwork and Moni Naor in 1993, long before Bitcoin’s emergence. The essence of this mechanism is the requirement to make calculations (do the “work”) in order to get permission to cast a transaction (originally, to send an email).
Transaction validation requires performing calculations to filter out bad actors. The network rewards them with bitcoins that haven’t been in circulation to incentivize validators. That’s how bitcoins are “mined;” that’s why the validation process is called “mining.”
In the early days of Bitcoin, mining wasn’t demanding. Anyone could mine it using a regular PC. However, as the demand for Bitcoin grew, the mining difficulty increased, requiring more and more energy to complete the math tasks.
These days, mining operations have an industrial scale. Mining farms occupy extensive facilities of devices created for the only purpose–to crack Bitcoin puzzles at the highest speed possible (to solve the puzzle before the rest of the miners and get the reward). By 2018, the Bitcoin network’s energy consumption reached a level comparable to Nigeria and Denmark.
Bitcoin’s environmental impact
Bitcoin mining operations impact the environment in four main directions:
- Mining has a carbon print
- Mining consumes much water
- Mining consumes much electricity
- Mining creates electronic waste
Based on all of these metrics, Bitcoin has a serious impact on the environment. These metrics indicate that Bitcoin consumes as much electricity and water and leaves as much harmful waste as in some countries.
While it may be hard to comprehend what it means when you read that Bitcoin consumes as much power as Poland, you may zoom in and see the equivalents of each Bitcoin transaction’s impact. It pictures a much more vivid picture. According to Digiconomist, one Bitcoin transaction consumes over 1,100 kW/h (as much as an average U.S. household in 38 days), consumes 17,500 liters of fresh water (as much as a backyard swimming pool), creates over 280 grams of electronic waste (more than 1.5 iPhones 12), while the carbon emissions amount to 620kgCO2 (as much as 1.3 million transactions of VISA or watching 11.7 years of videos on YouTube).
Statista provides similar estimations. More than that, gold mining is less harmful to the environment than BTC mining if we compare the amount of BTC and the amount of gold with the same value expressed in USD. Although no precise date is associated with these estimations, the articles seem to rely on data revealed in 2023 or earlier.
Tesla cited environmental impact as the reason for stopping support for Bitcoin payments in 2021, shortly after the launch of this option. Ethereum transitioned from proof-of-work to a greener proof-of-stake algorithm in 2022.
Fossil fuels power most mining facilities. Various sources evaluate the use of fossil fuels to power Bitcoin mining at a range from 50 to 90 percent.
What Bitcoin advocates say…
First, the Digital Assets Research Institute denies that the data and articles about Bitcoin’s environmental harm are correct. According to this study, flawed 2018 research suggesting the high environmental harm of Bitcoin was quoted thousands of times until 2024. Accurate articles amounted to only 2% of all pieces on the topic. DARI’s paper claims that 2022 was marked by a shift toward more rigorous coverage of Bitcoin’s environmental impact theme.
As the environmental impact of mining is a serious problem, various mining operations began to look for ways to greener Bitcoin mining, and the search was successful. The 2020s initiatives saw companies using the excess power for Bitcoin mining instead of wasting this power and the resources spent on its production.
Another way to make Bitcoin mining greener is to rely on renewable resources. For instance, Ethiopia is using its Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam for clean Bitcoin mining.
The 2024 studies show that, lately, Bitcoin mining has played a positive role in reducing CO2 emissions, becoming the straight opposite in terms of environmental impact.
Although some companies already boast they are carbon-neutral Bitcoin mining operations, most enterprises only admit to reducing energy consumption. As no institution that studies Bitcoin’s environmental impact has all the info about mining operations, we don’t have all the data regarding CO2 emissions associated with mining. We can’t say how much the pollution level dropped in the last couple of years.
Pierre Rochard of Riot Platforms appeared in a video in which he meters the CO2 level in the mining facility using a special device. It drew some criticism as some users pointed out that the emissions are not coming from the mining devices but are associated with excessive electricity production.
Another line of defense used by some Bitcoin advocates is comparing Bitcoin’s environmental impact to that of the banking system, indicating that bank transactions are not more eco-friendly than Bitcoin. This argument may have made sense if Bitcoin were to replace the banking system, but this is not happening.
Who’s right?
Although the Bitcoin mining industry is far from eco-friendly, various participants seek ways to make it greener or even reduce CO2 emissions through Bitcoin mining so that mining would have a negative carbon footprint. According to a recent report by MiCA Crypto Alliance, 70% of the Bitcoin network will be powered by sustainable energy by 2030. To conclude this, we may state that certain mining operations are green while others are not. However, an eco-friendly trend is on the rise.
