The New York Times has published yet another inflammatory article about bitcoin mining full of misinformation. Although leading Bitcoin researchers were quick to refute the information and data as biased and false, the article remains online to corner BTC as a climate sinner.
One of the leading Bitcoin environmentalists and researchers, Daniel Batten, has dissected the New York Times article and data to the core, revealing that the article lacks any journalistic integrity. As Batten discussed at length on Twitter, the mainstream publication only selected the data that fit with its “bitcoin is bad” theme.
Remarkably, this isn’t the first time the Bitcoin and crypto community has been infuriated by the New York Times. The publication was heavily criticized late last year for publishing a “breathless love letter” to Sam Bankman-Fried, even though his billion-dollar fraud had long since been exposed.
Bitcoin activist sets record straight
For Bitcoin mining industry insiders, it is already clear at first glance that the NY Times article cannot be trusted. The NY Times table of top BTC miners is grossly inaccurate, as reported by Batten, who collected actual data over an 8-month period.
According to Batten, the NY Times article overestimates emissions figures from mining companies Riot, Atlas, Cipher Mining, US Bitcoin Corp, Rhodium, and Bitdeer by an average of 81.7%. In addition, there is ample evidence that the NY Times massively selected data to support its thesis.
For example, there are currently 26 mining companies in the US and Canada that use more than 90% sustainable energy. Of these, the NY Times included only two in its data (Cleanspark and Terawulf). Within these two, journalists focused on the least renewable energy-based locations and neglected those that used predominantly renewable energy.
“This is cherry-picking as in the beginning: cherry-picking within the cherry-picking,” said Batten, who goes on to say that the “article is full of such violations of genuinely objective reporting.”
Batten also accuses the publication of not saying anything positive about the “Demand Response Program”, in which Bitcoin miners play a key role for network operators by being able to temporarily throttle their power consumption in the event of network instabilities. Latte says:
The NY Times article attempts to give the impression that Bitcoin miners are costing citizens money by taking a cut from “demand-response” revenue. By withholding context, their point of view aims to create moral outrage for something that is necessary for the stability of the web.
But that’s not all. According to Batten, there are a total of nine signs that reveal the bias of the alleged investigation. This includes the fact that those responsible from the energy industry do not have a chance to speak. You have repeatedly acknowledged in the past that BTC Mining is driving the expansion of renewable energies and stabilizing the grid.
See more
TEXAS GOVERNOR: “#Bitcoin mining is good for the grid.” pic.twitter.com/WgFQPg6Xtj
— Dennis Porter (@Dennis_Porter_) November 27, 2022
“No objective assessment of the benefit to the consumer and the renewable energy operator of setting a minimum price for all variable renewable energy to allow renewable energy operations to be scaled faster (as has been the case with ERCOT at >4% per year since 2021 )” added Batten.
Additionally, there is also no objective evidence of previous reports (including CNBC) on how BTC mining has stabilized networks during winter storms. Data from Lancium and ERCOT network operators confirming this is nowhere to be found.
Likewise, no objective evidence can be found that BTC mining has a built-in economic incentive to be a non-competing electricity consumer.
An executive at mining company Riot Platforms echoed Batten’s criticism. Vice President Pierre Rochard responded to The New York Times to clarify the misinformation about his company in the article.
According to the NY Times, Riot’s Rockdale, Texas mining operation uses about the same amount of electricity as the next 300,000 homes, “making it the most power-intensive bitcoin mining operation in America.”
Rochard asked the NY Times to disclose the methodology and simulation to reveal how the data was calculated.
See more
NYTimes couldn’t be bothered to fact check the first sentence of their #bitcoin mining article.
They don’t care about their credibility, they just want to trick their readers into believing falsehoods. https://t.co/06lpNjRiGg
— Pierre Rochard (@BitcoinPierre) April 10, 2023
As Bitcoinist reported, Daniel Batten recently published a new study showing that the main energy source of BTC mining is hydropower, which accounts for 23% of the total energy. Fossil fuels have declined by a total of 6.2% per year since January 2020. Overall, Bitcoin is the most sustainable industry in the world.
At press time, bitcoin price stood at $28,282, still consolidating below the key resistance area at $28,600.
BTC price 4 hour chart | Source: BTCUSD on TradingView.com
Featured image from iStock, chart from TradingView.com
Learn Crypto Trading, Yield Farms, Income strategies and more at CrytoAnswers
https://nov.link/cryptoanswers
Comments are closed.