ESG researcher Daniel Batten has published a comprehensive rebuttal challenging long-standing criticisms of Bitcoin's environmental impact. In a Saturday X article, Batten identified and disputed nine common theories about cryptocurrency, focusing particularly on energy consumption, electronic waste, and grid stability claims.
Batten vehemently disagreed with recent criticism from Dow Jones that blasted Harvard University for allocating endowment funds to what was described as a "fake currency and money-laundering tool that is also an environmental catastrophe." He argued that "every nascent disruptive technology is accompanied by claims that are based on lack of understanding, lack of data, and a fear of something unknown. This happened to the bicycle, the radio, and the Internet. It has also happened with Bitcoin mining."
Regarding energy consumption metrics, Batten pointed to fundamental flaws in the per-transaction analysis methodology. He noted that four peer-reviewed papers alongside Cambridge University assessments have concluded that Bitcoin's resource use is not driven by transaction volume, meaning transaction throughput can increase without proportionally increasing energy, water, or hardware consumption. The controversial per-transaction metric originated from Alex de Vries' 2018 commentary "Bitcoin's Growing Energy Problem," which Batten described as non-empirical and later discredited.
Cambridge University research revealed significant overestimations in electronic waste calculations. The institution found that Digiconomist founder Alex de Vries had overestimated Bitcoin mining's electronic waste by 1,204%, placing actual annual eWaste at 2.3 kilotonnes compared to de Vries' estimate of 30 kilotonnes.
On grid stability concerns, Batten cited research from Duke University concluding that controllable load resources like Bitcoin mining can actually stabilize power grids rather than destabilize them. These findings are supported by data from ERCOT, the Texas grid operator overseeing the world's largest concentration of Bitcoin mining. According to ERCOT records, Bitcoin miners provide frequency regulation and demand response services, with documented instances during Texas's July 2022 heatwave where mining operations cut back energy demand during grid stress to help prevent outages.
Former ERCOT interim CEO Brad Jones explained: "Bitcoin mining operations have found a way to come into the market and take some of that excess wind in off-peak periods. Then it can turn down whenever we need the power for other customers... And if a generator trips offline, it can very quickly respond to that frequency disruption and allow us to balance our grid more efficiently." ERCOT documented only one mild grid-destabilizing incident in April 2024.
Analyzing electricity cost data from 2021 to 2024, Batten showed inflation-adjusted increases of 7.7% nationally and 7.0% in Texas, with no peer-reviewed study supporting claims that Bitcoin mining raises consumer power prices. He presented cases where mining actually lowers costs, including reducing curtailment fees and investments in gas peaker plants. Examples include Norwegian residents reportedly benefiting from 20% lower power prices for years before miners exited the grid, and CNBC reporting that adding Bitcoin mines to rural microgrids in Kenya reduced electricity costs from 35 cents to 25 cents per kilowatt hour.
Regarding carbon emissions and renewable energy, Cambridge University stated that comparing industries to nations involves "presenter bias," emphasizing that environmental policy should focus on transforming energy systems rather than reducing absolute consumption. Batten's assessment shows Bitcoin mining as the only global industry with third-party data demonstrating more than 50% sustainable energy usage, with emissions at 39.8 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent. He noted that Bitcoin mining produces only indirect emissions from electricity use, similar to electric vehicles, which produced 80 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent emissions in China and the United States alone.
Batten also rejected assertions that mining diverts renewable energy from other users, citing ERCOT data and Brad Jones' characterization of mining as a "non-rival energy user" that powers down when prices rise. He concluded by sharing peer-reviewed studies showing mining integration can almost fully eliminate wasted energy on microgrids while cutting operating costs by 46.5%.
