A group of Bitcoin miners rejected – once again – the accusations of the environmental association Greenpeace about the impact of the activity on the environment. In addition to refuting claims in a recent report from the entity, miners accuse the nonprofit of spreading misinformation about Bitcoin's energy use.

Mining advocates say the industry's benefits are well documented by timely and legitimate studies. Greenpeace USA's most pessimistic statements are based on discredited and outdated sources, say experts such as Pierre Rochard, vice president of the Bitcoin mining company Riot Platforms.

According to Bitcoin miners, those who do not use renewable energy as their main energy resource simply go out of business. In parallel, they argue that polluting emissions resulting from energy generation are already regulated in many places around the world, that renewable energy is growing in the United States and that Bitcoin mining itself is zero emissions.

Some Bitcoin mining companies backed up these claims. CleanSpark, for example, claimed that 81% of the energy used at its mining sites is carbon-free. Additionally, they claimed to have invested millions of dollars in Georgia's energy infrastructure, including upgrades to substations, transformers and power lines.

Proponents argue that Bitcoin miners help stabilize power grids, rather than destabilize them, by flexibly scaling their operations based on the grid's needs. Additionally, they point out that Bitcoin data centers can be turned off during peak hours or in circumstances of high demand and turned back on when demand drops, contributing to overall energy efficiency.

What does the Greenpeace report say?

Greenpeace's report titled "Mining for Power: Connecting Bitcoin Miners, Corporate Interest Groups, and Climate Change Deniers," dated March 19, 2024, highlights several key points about the environmental impacts of Bitcoin mining .

The report notes that Bitcoin emits as much carbon dioxide (CO2) as some industrialized countries, suggesting a significant impact on climate change. Furthermore, it is expressed that the majority of the electricity used in Bitcoin mining comes from non-renewable sources such as oil, coal, and gas, further contributing to greenhouse gas emissions.

In turn, says Greenpeace, Bitcoin mining requires large amounts of water to cool equipment and generate electricity. In the United States, Bitcoin mining operations use as much water as 300,000 homes, raising concerns about the availability of this vital resource.

Furthermore, the report highlights the connection between the Bitcoin mining industry and corporate interest groups and climate change deniers, who "work against the actions necessary to address the climate crisis." This calls into question Bitcoin miners' claims to promote renewable energy and the stability of power grids. Instead, the report suggests that the industry contributes to the problem by providing financial support to fossil fuel industries and encouraging continued reliance on non-renewable energy sources.