Original report: https://earthjustice.org/experts/mandy-deroche/how-much-do-we-subsidize-cryptocurrency-minings-electricity-use-no-one-knows
This post argues that Earthjustice’s latest report on Bitcoin mining is significantly disconnected from both the scientific consensus and real-world evidence. By failing to engage with the latest research and developments, Earthjustice risks undermining efforts to leverage Bitcoin mining as a tool that benefits the environmental across a range of metrics. This rebuttal examines the inaccuracies in their report and highlights the growing body of evidence supporting Bitcoin mining’s environmental benefits.
For context: in recent times, Bitcoin has emerged as arguably the most important form of climatetech in enabling not one but four critical areas of climate justice. A large volume of peer reviewed research now confirms what Bitcoin mining companies, grid operators, energy experts, and the Bitcoin mining industry have been saying for some time: Bitcoin mining is essential to progress on these four critical areas
1. Remove bottlenecks to getting more renewable energy onto the grid
2. Replace Fossil fuel based heat with electrically based heat
3. Increase the speed and profitability of R&D into new renewable energy projects
4. Urgently end three carbon-intensive practices (gas peaker plant proliferation, natural gas flaring, venting of landfill gas)
These are no longer theoretical benefits, as they were when Earthjustice first started reporting on Bitcoin mining:
Finland is now supplying 2% of all district heat through recycled Bitcoin mining heat, replacing fossil fuel-dependent sources such as the burning of coal and peat. 29 Bitcoin mining operations use carbon negative sources such as flared gas or landfill gas for power. OTEC, a forgotten form of renewable energy has had a new lease of life. Finally, since Bitcoin mining moved onto the Texas grid, blackouts have been prevented, $18Billion of new gas peaker plant costs were averted, inflation adjusted electricity prices were kept stable (a rare phenomenon for jurisdictions with rapidly increasing renewable penetration), while solar/wind rose from 80 GW to 130 GW of generation capacity.
Heat recycled from Bitcoin mining rigs running on Finland’s 92% fossil-free grid is increasingly
replacing 54.6% fossil-fuel dependent existing district heating sources in Finland
The world has changed, leaving Earthjustice behind
Earthjustice published their first anti-Bitcoin report in 2022. Since then, the world of Bitcoin mining has fundamentally changed in five major ways:
1. Scientific community puts its weight behind Bitcoin mining’s environmental benefits
Bitcoin mining has been shown to
- accelerate the renewable energy transition (Lal et al, 2023)
- obviate the need for gas peaker plants (Bruno et al, 2023)
- stabilize the grid (Rudd et al, 2023)
- halve the payback time for solar farms (Hakimi et al, 2024)
- accelerate renewable microgrid development (Moghimi et al 2024)
- reduce methane emissions from landfills (Sechrest et al, 2024)
- avert the need for expensive grid upgrades (Norris et al, 2025)
with 14 out of the last 16 peer reviewed papers on Bitcoin and energy (87.5%) showing clear positive environmental externalities.
2. Sustainability media gets behind Bitcoin mining’s environmental benefits
Of the ten climate-focused media that are commenting on Bitcoin mining and energy, nine of them found strong environmental benefits (90%).
3. 180° turnaround in mainstream media reporting on Bitcoin mining
Of the 14 media outlets still covering Bitcoin and energy, 12 are covering Bitcoin’s environmental benefits (85.7%)
4. Bitcoin’s sustainable energy proportion has increased from 49.1% to 56.7%
source: Digital Assets Research Institute
5. Source findings of Earthjustice’s 2022 report debunked
The work of Alex de Vries and authors who relied on his findings, which formed the basis of Earthjustice’s 2022 findings, has been discredited due to fundamental flaws in both data-gathering techniques and methodology.
source: Sai & Vranken, 2023
Earthjustice has responded by spreading even more misinformation
Earthjuistice has not revisited their 2022 position on Bitcoin mining. Rather, their approach mirrors tactics that disregard scientific consensus, which is concerning given the volume of peer-reviewed research supporting Bitcoin mining’s environmental benefits. They have either ignored the scientific consensus, or dismissed the entire body of research as being the work of “vest interest groups”
But not only has Earthjustice ignored the undisputed evidence of Bitcoin mining’s environmental benefits, they have put out more misinformation.
The misinformation in Earthjustice’s 2025 report falls into three categories
- The very widely debunked claim that Bitcoin mining destabilizes grids
- The more recently debunked claim that Bitcoin mining increases power prices
- The more recently debunked claim that Bitcoin mining does not offer community benefits
Let’s address each in turn.
1. Bitcoin and grid stability
This claim demonstrates considerable ignorance about the large body of evidence showing that Bitcoin mining stabilizes grids. The claim also reveals a severe lack of awareness about what Earthjustice’s peers in the environmental movement have been writing in climate media for some time.
The key point is: Bitcoin does not destabilize grids. In fact, a mountain of peer-reviewed and real-world evidence shows that Bitcoin mining stabilizes grids, enabling grid operators to integrate higher concentrations of variable renewable energy.
For example:
- Lai et al states that Bitcoin mining can “balance the electrical grid”. source
- Ibañez et al concludes “PoW mining emerges as an alternative that can provide additional income and ancillary services (auxiliary services designed to provide stability to the energy grid)”. source
- Menati et al found that “the flexibility of cryptocurrency mining loads plays a pivotal role in the reliability of electricity systems and the stability of electricity markets” and “cryptocurrency mining …is shown not to be detrimental to power grid reliability even with significant amounts at certain locations.” source
- A whitepaper from Energy Experts at Duke University concluded that Controllable Load Resources (aka: Bitcoin mining) help to stabilize grids, and decarbonize grids. source
- These findings correspond precisely to Texas’ grid operators own direct observations.
“[Bitcoin mining operations] have found a way to come into the market and take some of that excess wind in offpeak periods. Then it can turn down whenever we need the power for other customers… And if a generator trips off line can very quickly respond to that frequency disruption and allow us to balance our grid more efficiently.”
source: Brad Jones, Former Interim CEO, ERCOT.
The early misinformation that bitcoin destabilizes grids is rarely recycled any more, with both mainstream and sustainability-focsed journalists increasingly reporting on how Bitcoin mining in fact has a stabilizing impact on Grids.
2. Bitcoin and electricity prices
The Earthjustice report shows an eye-opening level of naivety about the relationship between Bitcoin mining electricity prices and the cost that other users pay for electricity, the argument basically runs like this “We found out that Bitcoin miners pay a low cost for electricity, so we postulate that this means other users are subsidizing them.” To anyone with a basic understanding of wholesale electricity markets, this demonstrates the risks of non-domain experts commenting outside their area of expertise.
Not only is there no evidence, either real-world or in the academic literature for this claim, but there is a significant body of evidence to the contrary. For example, Brad Jones, Former CEO of Texas’ grid ERCOT observed that by creating a more competitive market for ancillary services and by finding a home for otherwise wasted wind energy, Bitcoin was “helping keep the cost of electricity low for all Texans”
In September 2024, Norwegian residents realized that Bitcoin mining had for years been keeping their power prices 20% lower. After the Bitcoin mining operation left the grid, their prices instantly increased to meet the revenue shortfall.
As for the claim “There are other types of Demand Response. We don’t need Bitcoin”
As energy expert Tom Algie puts it
“Turning off and providing demand response isn’t straightforward. Compensation for traditional DR assets; steel works, aluminium smelters etc, is astronomical. Bitcoin mining revenue is on par with electricity prices, so we don’t need much additional incentive to turn off. This coupled with the ability to be located anywhere, the Bitcoin mining load is one of the most cost effective ways to provide DR, FCAS and System Strength services. It also incentivises overbuild of renewables. Bitcoin miners are also building plenty of energy assets globally.”
Further, Inflation-adjusted figures show no statistically significant rise or fall in either electricity or gas prices since Bitcoin mining came onto the ERCOT grid in Texas, giving support for ERCOT CEO Brad Jones’ observation that Bitcoin mining in fact “Helped keep the price of power low for all Texans.”
The claim therefore seems to be a false attribution of the impact of high inflation from 2021-2023, to Bitcoin mining.
There are now not one but five ways that Bitcoin mining has been shown to keep residential power prices low
- Creating a more competitive market for Demand Response services (Mitch Klee)
- Providing more revenue to the grid operators, thereby decreasing the cost burden to other users (Dan Roberts)
- Reducing costly curtailment payouts to VRE generators (MARA)
- Helping grid operators to delay the need for cost-prohibitive grid upgrades (Norris et al)
- Obviating the need for multi-billion dollar Gas peaker plant investment (Rian Dewhurst)
Earthjustice’s habit of indulging in domain-naive speculative inference over consulting the existing large body of literature on Bitcoin mining should be viewed as a red flag to environmentalists, policymakers, regulators and others in the climate industry. All should give Earthjustice’s articles on Bitcoin mining a wide berth until there is a substantial improvement in their awareness of both the domain, and the prior body of literature germane to the subject they are addressing.
3. Bitcoin and community benefits
While Earthjustice claims that Bitcoin mining fails to deliver significant community benefits, evidence from the Perryman Group and testimonials from local officials like Mayor Ward Roddam of Rockdale, Texas, demonstrate the opposite.
Perryman’s report found that in the US alone, Bitcoin mining has
- created 31,000 jobs
- brought $4.1 billion in annual U.S. gross product
- helped stabilize the grid while offering a range of other direct community benefits
Community benefits were found to be significant, and included
- strengthening local public services
- boosting school funding
- improving community well-being
- expanding career opportunities in high-tech fields
- Improving community infrastructure
In Rockdale, one of the major Bitcoin mining hubs in Texas, the mayor confirmed these benefits were being observed:
“Bitcoin miners are deeply invested in the communities where they work. [They] are among the largest taxpayers in … our local school district. These companies donate to local causes, including scholarships, police and fire departments, youth sports and … community events.”
~ Ward Roddam. Mayor, Rockdale
Conclusion
In this paper, two lawyers from Earthjustice have advanced the implausible theory that they know more about community impacts of Bitcoin mining than the residents and mayor of the town of Rockdale benefitted, more about the grid stabilization impacts of Bitcoin than five separate teams of energy experts who published peer reviewed research on this subject, and more about the impact of Bitcoin on cost to other grid users than the Grid operator himself. They have ignored the scientific consensus, the environmental consensus and even the media reporting in the liberal media on Bitcoin mining.
While the Earthjustice report of 2022 was arguably forgivable, as none of these five shifts had occurred in our understanding of Bitcoin mining, to write such a report in 2025 reflects a lack of engagement with recent research and real-world evidence, which calls into question its credibility on this issue.
But Earthjustice’s report is not just misguided, its irresponsible.
As a climatetech investor, I am continually looking for landfill operators where bitcoin mining operations can be set up, because bitcoin mining is usually the only way to profitably mitigate landfill gas methane (a horrendous greenhouse gas). We face considerable pushback on an almost daily basis because landfill owners have read factually incorrect accounts of bitcoin mining’s environmental impact.
Such uncritical appraisals slow down our efforts to mitigate methane.
I also travel around the world encouraging renewable operators to use bitcoin mining for their otherwise wasted renewable energy, so that they can become more profitable, and pour that profit back into expanding their renewable operation faster.
Unfortunately, my efforts to do this are severely compromised by the misinformation they have heard about Bitcoin mining that was circulated widely by Alex de Vries from 2018-2022, and which unfortunately you are still recirculating, and which despite your good intentions actually slow down the efforts of those seeking pragmatic solutions to advancing the green energy transition.
By promoting misinformation, Earthjustice risks delaying the adoption of innovative solutions like Bitcoin mining, which have been shown to accelerate the transition to renewable energy and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Specifically, they risk delaying the point at which we will be able to phase out gas peaker plants, while increasing the chances that retail users of electricity will have to pay a premium for their power.
It is important that anyone who chances upon Earthjustice’s report should know that they are an outlier in the environmental movement in that they are still publishing misinformation on Bitcoin mining in 2025.
We urge Earthjustice to revisit its stance on Bitcoin mining in light of the latest scientific research and real-world evidence. By doing so, they can align their advocacy with the most effective strategies for achieving climate justice.