The latest New York Times report on Bitcoin (BTC) mining, titled “The Real Costs of the Digital Rush for Bitcoin,” has riled many BTC advocates, some of whom took to Twitter to point out certain aspects of the report. . including saying it was “cherry pick” data.
The NYT article says that Bitcoin mining has a “ravenous” appetite and claims that it uses as much energy as all the residences in New York City.
In response, Daniel Batten, a Bitcoin environmental, social and governance (ESG) analyst, pointed to what he said were two important instances of data selection in addition to neglecting the increased use of renewable energy in the mining sector.
Ribbon saying the NYT article drastically exaggerates the actual fossil fuel use of BTC miners, with emission levels exaggerated by an average of 81.7%. He added that the report was “using overwhelmingly incomplete data sets to support a thesis.”
Batten also mentioned that there are 26 Bitcoin miners in the United States and Canada who use 90% sustainable energy to power their mining activities, but the NYT article chose only two and focused on the sites least supported by renewable energy.
Troy Cross, another Bitcoin advocate, saying the NYT article used “marginal emissions accounting” to test its narrative, selectively applying it only to carbon emissions, not generation.
It’s a shame, because I know it took months of work and the photography, design and graphics are excellent as always.
— Trojan Cross (@thetrocro) April 10, 2023
Dennis Porter, executive director of the Satoshi Act Fund, noted that the NYT article erred in its initial reporting, naming the wrong city in which a BTC mining facility is located in Texas. The post later corrected the bug.
Wow. The NYT could not even take the time to verify the city that #Bitcoin mining takes place in
It’s to Rockdale, Texas. Not Rockland.
These are not serious people. pic.twitter.com/72ed3uIiga
—Dennis Porter (@Dennis_Porter_) April 10, 2023
Pierre Rochard, vice president of research at BTC mining company Riot, accused the NYT of using “fictitious fractional reserve carbon accounting” and “cooking the books to manufacture emissions.” Another Twitter user, Hakan, pointed toward passages they believed fostered fear.
While the high power consumption required for Bitcoin mining is definitely up for debate, mining is significantly important to the blockchain. It is not only used to verify transactions but also makes it decentralized and adds a layer of security.
Related: Bill Protecting Bitcoin Mining Rights Passes Arkansas Senate and House
According to the Bitcoin Mining Council Q4 2022 report, the Bitcoin network is already a leader in sustainable energy use, with 58.9% of its energy from renewable resources.
Bitcoin mining has always been a controversial topic, often fueled by critical articles published by mainstream media claiming that it has a net negative impact on the environment. However, many Bitcoin advocates view these types of reports as key pieces and are quick to offer an opposing perspective. Meanwhile, some are actively campaigning to switch Bitcoin mining consensus to the more environmentally friendly proof of stake.
Cointelegraph Magazine: Bitcoin in Senegal: Why is this African country using BTC?
