Daniel Batten

The difference between Cambridge (CCAF) and Bitcoin Mining Council (BMC) data on sustainable energy use of the Bitcoin Network is primarily due to CCAF underreporting, not BMC over-reporting of sustainable energy use, as many in the media have assumed. Evidence: Cambridge (CCAF) to their credit acknowledge openly that their sample represents less than half the total data-set and does not include flare-gas and off-grid mining that could “reasonably be expected to reduce emissions”. “Sample may not be sufficiently representative: The Bitcoin mining map is based on an extrapolation of a sample of mining pool data. This sample may not be fully representative as it (i) represents less than half of Bitcoin’s total hashrate” https://ccaf.io/cbeci/mining_map/methodology Also “Our estimates do not account for any activities that could reasonably be expected to reduce emissions, such as using flare-gas, off-grid (behind the meter) Bitcoin mining, waste heat recovery or carbon offsetting.” https://ccaf.io/cbeci/ghg/methodology

The conclusion when we factor in the missing data:

Bitcoin runs on at least 52.6% sustainable energy. source: http://batcoinz.com/BEEST

Daniel Batten