ESG researcher Daniel Batten said nine common criticisms of Bitcoin mining energy use are contradicted by peer-reviewed studies and grid-level data.
Batten argued that claims around energy waste, grid instability and rising electricity prices stem from misunderstanding and lack of evidence.
Every nascent disruptive technology is accompanied by claims that are based on lack of understanding, lack of data, and a fear of something unknown.
Daniel Batten said.
He said multiple studies show Bitcoin’s energy, water and e-waste usage are not linked to transaction volume.
Research cited from the University of Cambridge found Bitcoin transactions can scale without increasing total energy consumption.
Batten rejected claims that Bitcoin mining destabilises power grids, arguing flexible load management can instead stabilise renewable-heavy systems.
He said there is no peer-reviewed evidence showing Bitcoin mining raises electricity costs for everyday consumers.
Comparisons between Bitcoin’s energy use and that of entire countries were described as misleading and inconsistent with climate policy frameworks.
Batten also disputed claims that Bitcoin has a high carbon footprint, noting mining produces no direct emissions.