Is Bitcoin mining really wasting energy? ESG experts debunk 9 misconceptions with data

The controversy over Bitcoin’s energy consumption has a long history, but with institutional adoption accelerating toward 2025, this topic has once again become a focal point. ESG and sustainability researcher Daniel Batton recently systematically outlined nine common misconceptions, refuting each with real-world data. The key finding is that many criticisms surrounding Bitcoin mining are not based on data but stem from misunderstandings of the technological mechanisms. In the current environment where institutions continue to increase their holdings and long-term holders are accumulating, it is especially important to revisit these misconceptions.

Core Content of the 9 Misconceptions

Misconception 1: Transactions consume大量 energy, water resources, and electronic waste

Fact: Multiple peer-reviewed studies show that Bitcoin’s energy consumption is unrelated to the number of transactions. This means the network’s transaction volume can expand without a corresponding increase in energy input, which is fundamentally different from the linear scaling model of traditional payment systems.

Misconception 2: Mining disrupts grid stability

Fact: The reality is quite the opposite. Mining, as an interruptible load, can absorb excess electricity during periods of surplus and quickly withdraw during peak demand. For grids primarily powered by renewable energy (such as Texas, USA), mining can actually help stabilize the grid.

Misconception 3: Miners drive up electricity costs for ordinary users

Fact: According to Batton’s research, there is currently no reliable data or studies supporting this conclusion. On the contrary, there are cases where mining demand provides a stable “last buyer” for energy projects, helping to spread out overall electricity costs.

Other key misconceptions

• Comparing energy consumption directly across countries can be misleading; the focus should be on the direction of energy structure transformation
• Proof of Stake (PoS) is necessarily more environmentally friendly than Proof of Work (PoW); this confuses “energy consumption” with “environmental harm”
• Mining wastes renewable energy; in fact, it converts wind and solar energy that would otherwise be abandoned into economic value

Data Support: Renewable Energy Share and Transparency

Batton emphasizes the unique advantages of the Bitcoin industry:

• Renewable energy usage exceeds 50%
• Has third-party data verification mechanisms
• Mining can provide stable power supply to remote areas (e.g., projects in Africa have provided renewable energy access to tens of thousands of people)

In contrast, simply assuming PoW is not environmentally friendly overlooks its unique advantages in reducing methane emissions, utilizing flare gas, and enhancing the economics of renewable energy.

The Context of Clarification Work

This clarification is not accidental. According to the latest data, Bitcoin’s current market cap is $1.84 trillion, accounting for 58.67% of the market. More importantly, institutional adoption is accelerating:

• Bitdeer mined 147.4 BTC this week, with a total Bitcoin holding reaching 2,000 BTC
• Galaxy Digital received 2,000 BTC (worth about $180 million)
• 754 BTC transferred into Coinbase institutional wallets
• Long-term holders are reducing selling pressure; the LTH distribution pressure index is -1.628, indicating accumulation

These data suggest that as institutions enter, understanding Bitcoin’s fundamentals becomes even more critical. Clarifying the energy controversy with data supports is precisely aimed at underpinning this wave of institutional adoption.

Possibility of a Cognitive Shift

Summary

The essence of the Bitcoin energy consumption controversy lies in a mismatch between outdated cognitive frameworks and the realities of new technology. The significance of clarifying these nine misconceptions is not only to “defend” Bitcoin but also to promote a scientific understanding of mining mechanisms, grid stability, and renewable energy development. As more data disclosures and application cases emerge, the actual role of Bitcoin mining in energy transition and sustainable development is being reevaluated. For institutions continuing to increase their holdings, this data-supported clarification work is becoming an important reference for investment decisions.