NEW YORK CITY, NY – The New York Times has raised the ire of bitcoiners who accuse the paper of “cherry-picking” data to condemn Bitcoin mining. Proponents of the world’s largest digital currency say the article “The Real-World Costs of the Digital Race for Bitcoin” is a mining hit piece, decrying the Old Gray Lady for obfuscating and misconstruing facts. 

The New York Times report

In broad strokes, the article suggests that Bitcoin mining has a “voracious” appetite for electricity, consuming as much energy as all New York City residences. The environmental impact argument against Bitcoin is nothing new. Many critics, including Chris Larsen, CEO of Ripple, and New York State legislators, have made the same allegation. 

The writer, Gabriel J.X. Dance, begins by making a macabre corollary: Bitcoin mining is partly to blame for the electricity crisis in Texas during Winter Storm Uri in 2021 because it took enough electricity to “power about 6,500 homes as they raced to earn Bitcoin.” Since “nearly 40 people had died, some from the freezing cold,”  In other words, Bitcoin mining contributed to the deaths of dozens of people.

The Bitcoin mining operation, Bitdeer is in Rockdale, Texas, about 1 hour outside Austin. According to the article, “row upon row of computers were using enough electricity to power about 6,500 homes as they raced to earn Bitcoin,” earning the Rockdale operation “about $170,000 in recent weeks.”

BTC mining hit piece response

In response to the article, Bitcoin ESG analyst Daniel Bratton said the New York Times exaggerates the amount of fossil fuel miners use and neglects to mention the increased amount of renewable energy in the mining sector. 

Batten highlights that 90% of miners in the U.S. and Canada are using sustainable energy to fuel their operations. Yet the New York Times chose to focus only on mining farms that use the least sustainable energy.

Another popular Bitcoiner, Troy Cross, took to Twitter to rebuttal. 

The CEO and Co-Founder of the Satoshi Act Fund, Dennis Porter, also pointed out on Twitter that the New York Times mistakenly said the Bitdeer mine is located in “Rockland, Texas”  when it is in Rockdale, Texas. Referencing the mistake by the New York Times and the article’s author, Porter said, “These are not serious people.”

According to the Bitcoin Mining Council’s Q4 2022 report, the Bitcoin network is a leader in sustainable energy use, with 58.9% coming from renewable sources. Nonetheless, Bitcoin critics are actively campaigning to change Bitcoin’s consensus algorithm from proof-of-work to proof-of-stake [1][2][3].

The future of bitcoin mining

Despite the environmental claims about high energy consumption, mining is essential to Bitcoin. Not only does it verify transactions, but it also keeps the network decentralized and adds a layer of security. Unlike many long-established companies that use fossil fuels and are now trying to switch to renewable energies, Bitcoin has used renewable energy almost since its inception. 

If there is going to be an honest debate over Bitcoin mining, facts must be laid out in the open and emotional appeal jettisoned. An educated, intelligent conversation about how energy consumption is measured and sourced has to be clearly understood and communicated. Until then, the debate over Bitcoin mining will continue to inflame the ire of both sides of the argument unnecessarily.