Proof of work (PoW) crypto-currencies like Bitcoin are physically non sustainable.

The Bitcoin network currently consumes more electricity than Argentina (130 tWh / year), for 400 000 transactions per day. This is ridiculous : it represents only 0.02% of the global daily digital payment transactions (about 2 billions / day).


Bitcoin is the worst waste of resources and energy in human history. It is solely used for financial speculation, with no genuine utility. This is a call to ethical hackers: through targeted and repeated computer attacks, we could undermine the confidence of speculators and burst this irrational and destructive financial bubble.

The price of Bitcoin recently reached new highs: more than $ 30,000 for 1 bitcoin. The electricity consumption of this cryptocurrency follows the same trend [1] The blockchain constantly consumes as much electricity as Chile (77.78 terawatt-hours per year) and has the same carbon footprint as New Zealand (36…


I see you refer to CBECI, and then continue with general talking and twisted logic to conclude that on average, Bitcoin mining might use more renewables than US.

Data proves you wrong : by crossing the shares of mining per region provided CBECI with the Ecoinvent database (DB of lifecycle footprint) we find that the Bitcoin mix is 830g CO2 / kWh on average : way worse than the average USA mix (530g per ecoinvent).

Bitcoin is mostly powered by fossils.

See :

@Nic Carter : Why did you delete this comment ?


Developing renewable energies to replace fossil fuels is a good thing. Developing them to increase the global consumption, especially for frivolous and inefficient usages, is not.

Bitcoin’s energy usage skyrockets along with its price, burning currently around 130 TWh / year (as much as Argentina) and is expected to double again in the coming months, reaching the power of whole Australia … for processing only 0.02% of all digital transactions.

We recently demonstrated, by crunching the data from recent studies, that contrary to what the bitcoin industry says, bitcoin runs mostly on fossil fuels, with an average carbon footprint of…


By crunching the data, we find that the average carbon footprint of electricity used for bitcoin mining is 830g CO2 / kWh : Worse than the average US mix (530g CO2 / kWh). We should rise up against this madness.

As Bitcoin’s energy usage skyrockets along with its price, the Bitcoin industry (miners, traders, …) use a proportional energy to build legends for green washing. They invent a parallel world where burning phenomenal amounts of energy becomes good for the planet, in violation of the most elementary laws of physics.

You may already know that bitcoin currently consumes more electricity…


Australian coal power plan, reopened for mining Bitcoins

The bitcoin network currently consumes as much power as Argentina. This could be twice as much in a few months.

As the price of Bitcoin is skyrocketing on the market, its tremendous energy consumption is following the same path. According to estimates by the university of Cambridge, the Bitcoin network currently consumes about 130 TWh per year, around the consumption of Argentina :


Gold mining is an absolute disaster for environment, but nothing can compete with the footprint of bitcoin.

Fewer and fewer Bitcoin proponents still claim that this crypto can be used as a daily currency. Bitcoin is now considered a purely speculative asset, like gold.

So how does bitcoin mining compares to gold mining from an environmental perspective?

Bitcoin mining consumes 2 to 7more energy than gold mining

For energy usage, nothing can beat Bitcoin. Mining 1$ of bitcoin consumes 2 to 7 times more energy than mining gold :

Bitcoin mining is basically metal extraction

“Ok, but it’s not just about energy is it ? The mining industry is also known for being extremely polluting for…


"5. Finally, as is well known, much of the power used to mine Bitcoin is drawn from renewable resources, with "mining towns" often popping up in areas like China and Washington state that use hydroelectric power."

No it's not. The most recent and complete study on the miners and their energy usage is 3rd Global Cryptoasset Benchmarking Study https://www.jbs.cam.ac.uk/faculty-research/centres/alternative-finance/publications/3rd-global-cryptoasset-benchmarking-study/

It concludes to less that 40% of renewables usage overall.

Bitcoin mining also enables ancient coal units to stay profitable and last longer :

https://www.datacenterdynamics.com/en/news/bitcoin-miner-marathon-signs-coal-fired-electricity-montana/

Also, renewables are not "green". There is NO green energy. Even if they show less (but…


Footprint of one bitcoin = 80 tons of CO2

This is how insanely bad Bitcoin is for the environment : If you buy a Tesla car (around 40 000 $) in Bitcoins, the impact of the mining of those bitcoins is around 80 tons of CO2. This is 4 times more than the saving of CO2 you can expect from this car (compared to a gasoline one) on its entire lifetime (around -20 tons).

Of course, the Bitcoins you use here will eventually be used for other transactions. But still, it gives a good point of comparison : Suppose you want to buy this car with gold. …


It's irrelevant. Bitcoin is barely usable (and used) as a practical currency : all transactions are public, it is super slow (up to 1 hour to valiate a tx), it does not scale (400.000 tx max per day), it's very expensive (30$ of fees per transaction !!), the value is too volatile, etc.

When was the last time you purchased something (service / good) with bitcoin ?

This thing is now more than 1 decade old and is only used as a speculation value.

Hence, it should be compared to Gold for instance (although Gold still has some actual usage…

Franck Leroy

Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store