Can somebody please do the world a favor and update this (very) out-of-date wikipedia entry
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_effects_of_bitcoin
to reflect, with citations
- KPMG report on Bitcoin
https://kpmg.com/us/en/articles/2023/bitcoin-role-esg-imperative.html
- New Bloomberg Intelligence data on Bitcoin
https://x.com/Jamie1Coutts/status/1702232759866163351?s=20
- Cambridge revising down energy consumption estimates
https://www.jbs.cam.ac.uk/2023/bitcoin-electricity-consumption/
- MIT study https://bitcoinist.com/bitcoin-mining-mit-research-acknowledges-benefits/
- The "Bitcoin's Carbon Footprint revisited" study
It’s been a thought year for the opponents of Bitcoin
“bitcoin is not only simpatico with an ESG framework; it is superior to existing ESG technologies”
Earthjustice just write a report on Bitcoin mining in Texas full of factual errors and already debunked claims.
So I debunked it.
https://batcoinz.com/rebuttal-of-earthjustice-report-of-bitcoin-mining-in-texas/
Looking forward to the day this is no longer necessary.
Here’s how I found out bitcoin mining was the greenest investment I could be making
Just put out a video about why Bitcoin is the greatest ESG asset of our time
Why Bitcoin mining is the best climatetech I’ve seen (my latest article)
https://bitcoinmagazine.com/culture/bitcoin-is-the-best-way-to-mitigate-runaway-methane-emissions
Just in: The moral basis for the NY Bitcoin Mining ban was a fraud
tl;dr: No Bitcoin mining operation has ever revived a fossil fuel plant.
Here's the context, the story and the evidence below
Rule #1 psy-ops: "Find a scapegoat and create moral outrage around it"
Rule #2 "If you cannot find a scapegoat, invent one"
Rule#2 is what the advocates of the NY Bitcoin mining ban used
The scapegoat was of course Greenidge Energy. You know, that Bitcoin mining company that was responsible for bringing a disused fossil fuel plant back online to mine Bitcoin?
Except that the story was sexed up. There were no WMDs. Greenidge did not bring back a gasplant for the purpose of mining Bitcoin. They brought it back for the purpose of selling that power to the grid.
Recently I did a bit of investigation into Greenidge, since (no one in NY Times seemed to be), and here's what I found, with the evidence in the filings below.
1. Greenidge bought the then inactive power facility and spent tens of millions of dollars to permanently end the ability to use the plant for coal fired operations before converting the facility to natural gas operations.
2. Greenidge brought the now natural gas facility to the wholesale energy market in 2017 as a merchant power provider, under newly issued air and water permits. There was no Bitcoin just a natural gas power plant when Greenidge restarted operations.
3. Two years later, in 2019, Greenidge began a small Bitcoin mining pilot of approximately 1 megawatt (“MW”) while continuing to send power to the local energy grid as well.
4. The Bitcoin operation began to expand in 2021, eventually reaching the level it is at now, but throughout the entire time and to this day, the Greenidge power plant provides power to the local electrical grid every minute it operates, which is mandated by its agreement with the local grid operator. In fact, in 2022 Greendige sent more energy to the local grid than it did when it was just a power plant only, without Bitcoin mining operations.
Conclusion: Greenidge came online to supply additional power to the grid, not to mine Bitcoin. 2 years, later it opened a small Bitcoin mining operation that grew in size over the next 2 years.
What this means is that the claim of critics "Bitcoin mining revives old fossil fuel plants" is false. There have been no fossil fuel plant brought back online for the purpose of mining Bitcoin. This is yet another piece of misinformation used by Bitcoin critics, which is unsupported by data.
You can see this evolution in the S-1 form with the SEC, below, which provides a detailed look on when and how the operation grew.
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1844971/000119312521332868/d253482ds1.htm
Additionally, you can see Greenidge's initial press release announcing its exploration into bitcoin mining dated March 5, 2020 here
I would say this, and the MIT academic working paper are unlinked to the ETF because the research on both happened many months earlier. MSM was already reporting a lot more positive press in the first half of this year. Many plebes working behind the scenes like Troy Cross and Dennis Porter have had an impact here.
Spoke to Decrypt recently about what surprised me about the KPMG report on Bitcoin
https://decrypt.co/151443/bitcoin-esg-environment-social-corporate-governance-kpmg
You are a true Bitcoiner if this title makes you feel uncomfortable. Free sats wasted into the air. nostr:npub13lkyycj8s3da6fhndtj0wd6s3s2ahmq86s7wrruvzd4tnc66cgfqn4lpsy 
Perfect opportunity for bitcoin mining
Correct. Bitcoin is it turns out the only global industry not powered mostly by coal
This is the biggest and fastest position-reversal from a journalist on Bitcoin I’ve ever seen
One week after writing this flawed piece in bitcoin
https://www.makeuseof.com/sustainable-cryptocurrencies-greener-bitcoin/
He wrote this informed and knowledgeable piece
https://www.makeuseof.com/surprising-ways-bitcoin-mining-benefits-environment/
What happened in between?
I critiqued his article; he was open to learning and reversed his position in the light of new information.
Yes. WBD. recording in sept.
Forbes continue to lead the pack by some distance when it comes to digging beneath the surface on Bitcoin.
Good write up on Coin Republic on what Cambridge left out and how Bitcoin become the #1 industry sector for use of sustainable energy.
Bitcoin miners accelerator for methane capture from landfills: Open now
#bitcoin creates the economic rationale for climate positive outcomes
Who wants to learn how to reduce 1Mt CO2e/yr by mining #BTC
with stranded electricity from landfill gas ?
We'll be deep diving on:
- Which landfills are suitable sites?
- What do I say to the owners?
- Best way to negotiate PPAs?
- How do carbon credits work? Am I eligible for them?
- What should I know about landfill gas powergen?
- How do I get financing?
- And most importantly - how do I make sure I’m profitable?
1 Aug launch (12 week virtual program)
You: love infrastructure and engineering challenges, have solid operational skills, doing commercial negotiation one minute, optimizing gas flow the next. All while working next to the visible decay of the consumption-fuelled fiat economy, and helping mitigate the environmental impact of that legacy.
If you’re up for the challenge, you’ll literally be turning garbage into digital gold. Every mid-sized (8MW) venting landfill you mine bitcoin on removes a million tonnes of CO2e emissions. You'll also be part of history: measurably steering Bitcoin carbon-negative. All it takes is 35 venting landfills
8 highly contested spaces in the accelerator so put in your best application. Both experienced commercial miners and those new to Bitcoin mining with solid operational acumen and energy/infrastructure experience considered
LFG = Landfill Gas!
Apply now in the link below
They used to have the best model and it was highly accurate. I think they’ve just run low on resources and had some key people leave, and that’s resulted in it now being really out of date and (because the mining industry has evolved so fast) quite inaccurate.
I thing also, part of the issue is that it is academia, and as a result they are one step removed from the way the industry has evolved, and up-to-the-minute data.
I've been waiting 3 months to make this post
The Cambridge (CCAF) data on Bitcoin has these issues
1. energy consumption (20.6% overstated)
2. emission intensity (69.4% overstated)
3. sustainable energy mix (39.9% understated)
4. emissions (106% overstated)
Key reasons:
* miner-map 17 months out of date (puts Kazakhstan at 13% of hashrate, whereas its currently <1%. Other issues)
* mining dataset is non-representative and non-extensive (excludes the 52% of the network, who use 64.7% sustainable energy sources)
* offgrid mining not measured (28% of network, who our analysis shows use 78% sustainable-energy sources)
Conclusion:
We shouldn't be using the CCAF models of the Bitcoin Network until their model limitations are fixed. To their credit, they are aware of the limitations, and have always been transparent about them on their website.
I've been working with Luxor, Blockware and over 30 miners over the last few months to build an up-to-date model based on the Network's current miner-mix, mining map and energy sources
That work is now done.
If you want to dive into the weeds, you can find all the data, calcs, methodologies and analysis here
1. Emissions and emissions intensity
https://batcoinz.com/accurately-dynamically-calculating-bitcoin-network-emissions/
here
2. Energy Consumption
https://batcoinz.com/improving-our-estimate-of-bitcoin-energy-consumption/
and here
3. Sustainable energy mix
These 3 articles together contains the source data for the pretty charts that #[0] and I got together to put together recently when he was over in NZ.
Follow @woonomic on Nostr if you’re not already
Invaluable Bitcoin alpha and he releases intel here you won’t see on Twitter
#[0]