According to a recent report published by the Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance (CCAF), bitcoin mining worldwide accounts for around 0. 10% of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions or 48. 35 million tons of carbon dioxide per annum. Moreover, CCAF’s report details that “Bitcoin’s environmental footprint is more nuanced and complex” and because of complexity issues it “underscores the need for independent data.”

Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance Study: ‘Bitcoin Network Produces 48. 35 Million Tons of CO2 per Annum’

On Tuesday, the Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance (CCAF) published a new report called “A deep dive into Bitcoin’s environmental impact,” which was written by the CCAF project lead Alexander Neumueller. This report highlights the environmental issues that are associated with Bitcoin’s production .”

CCAF’s study claims that the Bitcoin network produces 48. 35 million tons of carbon dioxide per annum. This equates roughly to 0. 10% of global greenhouse gas emissions and Neumueller says it’s about “14.1% lower than the estimated GHG emissions in 2021.”

Neumueller’s research further details that 37.6% of the energy leveraged by bitcoin (BTC) miners derives from sustainable types of energy. CCAF’s best guess estimate of 0. 10% of global greenhouse gas emissions equates to the same amount of energy used by Nepal or the Central African Republic.

Bitcoin mining energy represents a touch less than half of the 100.4 million tons of carbon dioxide gold mining uses per year. Neumueller believes that the GHG emissions in 2022 were lower than in 2021 because of a “substantial decrease in mining profitability.”

CCAF suggests that the decline could have occurred during a shift in efficiency from mining rigs with lower performance to newer machines. Neumueller says that CCAF’s assumption has been “confirmed by anecdotal evidence of Bitcoin miners.”

Miners face pressure from three angles: Falling BTC price, increasing hashrate & operating costs. Rev per hash is close to the ’20 lows, and energy costs are rising, ASICs more efficient though. Consolidation is possible this year, but it’s possible to separate the wheat from its chaff. pic.twitter.com/WRqbTD8raG

— Alexander Neumuller (@alexneumueller) June 16, 2022

CCAF explains that the use of renewable energy has been declining in recent years.

Starting in 2021, data shows electricity mix fluctuations are now “visibly less” volatile. “Since it is not yet possible to comment on how the emission intensity changed from 2021 to 2022, as only January data is currently available, Bitcoin’s average emission intensity in 2020 (491. 24 gCO2e/kWh) was compared to that of 2021 (531. 81 gCO2e/kWh), suggesting that the sustainability of the electricity mix has deteriorated,” Neumueller notes.

The CCAF report concludes that the Bitcoin mining industry is constantly changing and that the CCAF tools and research continue to be improved. With real-world data available researchers are able to look at the situation with “greater granularity.”

The CCAF project lead ends the study by mentioning that “interesting concepts and developments are already emerging around bitcoin mining.” These include concepts like mitigating flare gas, waste heat recovery, and applied demand response applications.

“Time will show if these are just novel ideas that fail on their promise or if they will be a more integral part the Bitcoin mining industry’s future,” Neumueller concludes in his report.

What do you think about the latest bitcoin mining report published by the Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance? Please comment below to let us know your thoughts on this topic.

Image Credits: Shutterstock, Pixabay, Wiki Commons, Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance, Twitter,

Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only. This article is not intended to be a solicitation or offer to buy or sell any products or services. Bitcoin.com does not provide investment, tax, legal, or accounting advice. The author and the company are not responsible for any loss or damage resulting from or in connection to the content, goods, or services discussed in this article.

Read More