The New York Times has once again published an inflammatory article on Bitcoin mining filled with misinformation. Although top Bitcoin researchers were quick to refute the information and data as biased and false, the article remains online in an effort to push BTC into a climate sinner’s corner.
One of Bitcoin’s leading environmentalists and researchers, Daniel Batten, has torn apart the New York Times article and data to the core, revealing that the article lacks journalistic integrity. As Batten discussed at length on Twitter, the main post only selected data that fit his “Bitcoin is bad” motto.
Surprisingly, this is not the first time The New York Times has angered the Bitcoin and cryptocurrency community. The publication came under fire late last year for publishing a “breathless love letter” to Sam Bankman-Fried, despite the fact that his billion-dollar fraud had long since been exposed.
Bitcoin Activist Sets the Record Straight
For those insiders of the Bitcoin mining industry, it is already obvious at first glance that the NY Times article cannot be trusted. The NY Times table of top BTC miners is grossly inaccurate, as reported by Batten, who collected real data over an 8-month period.
According to Batten, the NY Times article overstates the emission levels of mining companies Riot, Atlas, Cipher Mining, US Bitcoin Corp, Rhodium and Bitdeer by an average of 81.7%. In addition, there is ample evidence that the NY Times has massively selected data to support her thesis.
For example, there are currently 26 mining companies in the US and Canada that use more than 90% sustainable energy. Of these, the NY Times included only two in its data (Cleanspark and Terawulf). Within those two, journalists focused on the less renewable energy-based sites and neglected those that are predominantly renewable.
“This is a similar cherry pick at the start: a cherry pick within a cherry pick,” said Batten, who further says that “the article is full of such transgressions of genuine objective reporting.”
Furthermore, Batten accuses the publication of saying nothing positive about the “demand response program,” in which Bitcoin miners play an essential role for network operators by being able to reduce their power consumption at short notice. during network instabilities. ribbon says:
The NY Times article attempts to create the impression that Bitcoin miners are costing citizens money by taking a piece of “demand response” revenue. By hiding the context, his angle is designed to create moral outrage over something that is necessary for the stability of the network.
But that is not all. According to Batten, there are a total of nine indications that reveal the bias of the alleged investigation. Among them is the fact that the people responsible for the energy industry have no voice. In the past, they have repeatedly acknowledged that BTC Mining promotes the expansion of renewable energy and stabilizes the grid.
GOVERNOR OF TEXAS: “#Bitcoin mining is good for the network.” pic.twitter.com/WgFQPg6Xtj
—Dennis Porter (@Dennis_Porter_) November 27, 2022
“There is no objective assessment of the benefit to the consumer and the benefit to the renewable operator of setting a floor price for all variable renewables so that renewable operation can scale faster (as it has done at >4% per year in ERCOT from 2021)”, Batten aggregate.
Furthermore, there is also no factual reference to previous reports (including CNBC) on how BTC mining stabilized networks during winter storms. There is no data from the Lancium and ERCOT network operators to confirm this.
Similarly, no objective evidence can be found that BTC mining has a built-in economic incentive to be a non-competing consumer of electricity.
An executive from mining company Riot Platforms echoed Batten’s criticisms. Vice President Pierre Rochard responded to the New York Times to set the record straight about the misinformation about his company in the article.
According to the NY Times, Riot’s mining operation in Rockdale, Texas uses roughly the same amount of electricity as the next 300,000 homes, “making it the most electricity-using Bitcoin mining operation in the United States.”
Rochard asked the NY Times to reveal the methodology and simulation to reveal how the data was calculated.
The NYTimes did not bother to verify the first sentence of his #Bitcoin mining item.
They don’t care about their credibility, they just want to defraud their readers into believing falsehoods. https://t.co/06lpNjRiGg
—Pierre Rochard (@BitcoinPierre) April 10, 2023
As reported by Bitcoinist, Daniel Batten recently published new research claiming that the main source of power for BTC mining is hydropower, which accounts for 23% of total power. Fossil fuels have decreased by a total of 6.2% per year since January 2020. Overall, Bitcoin is the most sustainable industry in the world.
At press time, Bitcoin price stood at $28,282, still consolidating below the key resistance area at $28,600.
Featured Image from iStock, Chart from TradingView.com
