{"id":5774,"date":"2025-08-20T07:52:02","date_gmt":"2025-08-20T07:52:02","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/cryptolinks.com\/news\/?p=5774"},"modified":"2025-08-20T08:59:56","modified_gmt":"2025-08-20T08:59:56","slug":"the-environmental-impact-of-cryptocurrency-mining","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/cryptolinks.com\/news\/the-environmental-impact-of-cryptocurrency-mining","title":{"rendered":"\u200bThe Environmental Impact of Cryptocurrency Mining"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><strong>Is <a href=\"https:\/\/cryptolinks.com\/cryptocurrency-mining\">crypto mining<\/a> wrecking the planet\u2014or are the headlines missing key context?<\/strong> If you\u2019ve tried to make sense of the energy debate, you\u2019ve probably run into clashing stats, dueling think pieces, and a lot of heat with not much light. Let\u2019s fix that.<\/p>\n<p>I write about crypto every day and keep a close eye on how it affects the real world. This is the kind of straight talk I publish on my news section at <a href=\"https:\/\/cryptolinks.com\/news\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">CryptoLinks News<\/a>: clear answers, plain language, and a focus on what actually helps.<\/p>\n<h2>Why the conversation feels so confusing<\/h2>\n<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"aligncenter size-full wp-image-5776\" src=\"https:\/\/cryptolinks.com\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/shutterstock_2429711509.jpg\" alt=\"Bewildered confused or surprised Indian man sit at desk looking at laptop screen read news\" width=\"1000\" height=\"667\" srcset=\"https:\/\/cryptolinks.com\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/shutterstock_2429711509.jpg 1000w, https:\/\/cryptolinks.com\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/shutterstock_2429711509-300x200.jpg 300w, https:\/\/cryptolinks.com\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/shutterstock_2429711509-768x512.jpg 768w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 1000px) 100vw, 1000px\" \/><\/p>\n<p>People care about the planet\u2014and they also care about open, censorship\u2011resistant money. That\u2019s why the environmental debate around crypto gets so heated. Here\u2019s why it\u2019s hard to parse:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Scary numbers without context:<\/strong> You\u2019ll see claims that \u201cBitcoin uses as much electricity as a country,\u201d but not whether that power is clean or dirty\u2014or how it compares to other industries.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Different models, different answers:<\/strong> Estimates depend on assumptions about hardware efficiency, miner revenue, and location. Change the inputs, get a new headline.<\/li>\n<li><strong>\u201cRenewable\u201d can be slippery:<\/strong> Some operators buy offsets; others plug into wind, hydro, or nuclear directly. Not all \u201cgreen\u201d claims are equal.<\/li>\n<li><strong>New tech moves fast:<\/strong> Ethereum\u2019s switch to Proof\u2011of\u2011Stake cut its energy use dramatically, but many still think it runs like it did years ago.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Local impacts vary:<\/strong> The grid mix, cooling, and noise control can make the difference between a good neighbor and a community headache.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<blockquote><p><em>Context matters.<\/em> For example, the Cambridge Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index shows Bitcoin\u2019s electricity use ranges widely by method and year\u2014often quoted in the tens to low hundreds of TWh annually\u2014while the carbon footprint depends heavily on where miners plug in and when they run.<br \/>\nSource: Cambridge CBECI<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>And here\u2019s a concrete shift worth knowing about: after \u201cthe Merge,\u201d <a href=\"https:\/\/ethereum.org\/en\/energy-consumption\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener nofollow\">Ethereum\u2019s estimated energy use fell by ~99.95%<\/a>, showing a large network can run with a tiny energy footprint when it changes its security model.<\/p>\n<h3>What I\u2019ll do for you in this guide<\/h3>\n<p>I\u2019m going to cut through the noise and make this simple without dumbing it down. I\u2019ll:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Explain how mining works<\/strong> and where the electricity actually goes.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Show how emissions are calculated<\/strong> (energy \u2260 carbon) and why location and timing matter.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Compare networks<\/strong> so you see why Bitcoin dominates Proof\u2011of\u2011Work energy use and how Proof\u2011of\u2011Stake flips the script.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Highlight what\u2019s getting greener<\/strong>\u2014from siting on clean grids to heat reuse and smarter hardware.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Give you practical steps<\/strong> to support cleaner crypto, whether you mine, invest, or just care about the impact.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h3>Who this is for<\/h3>\n<ul>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/cryptolinks.com\/mining-pools\"><strong>Miners<\/strong><\/a> who want a clear checklist to cut footprint and costs.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Investors and users<\/strong> who want to choose networks and projects that match their values.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Builders and policymakers<\/strong> looking for balanced, data\u2011backed context.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Curious readers<\/strong> who are tired of hot takes and want straight answers.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h3>What you\u2019ll learn<\/h3>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Energy use vs. emissions:<\/strong> The difference between kilowatt\u2011hours and carbon\u2014and why grid mix is the real story.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Network comparisons:<\/strong> How Bitcoin stacks up against smaller Proof\u2011of\u2011Work chains and low\u2011energy Proof\u2011of\u2011Stake systems.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Why location changes everything:<\/strong> A kilowatt on a hydro\u2011heavy grid isn\u2019t the same as a kilowatt on a coal\u2011heavy one.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Tools and policies that work:<\/strong> From power purchase agreements to demand response, heat reuse, and third\u2011party verification.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Ready to get specific? The next step is simple: what exactly is crypto mining, and <em>why<\/em> does it use so much energy in the first place? That\u2019s where we\u2019re heading next\u2014stick with me.<\/p>\n<h2>What exactly is crypto mining and why does it use so much energy?<br \/>\n<img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"aligncenter size-full wp-image-5779\" src=\"https:\/\/cryptolinks.com\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/shutterstock_2271050451-scaled.jpg\" alt=\"GPU Crypto mining.\" width=\"2560\" height=\"1369\" srcset=\"https:\/\/cryptolinks.com\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/shutterstock_2271050451-scaled.jpg 2560w, https:\/\/cryptolinks.com\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/shutterstock_2271050451-300x160.jpg 300w, https:\/\/cryptolinks.com\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/shutterstock_2271050451-1024x548.jpg 1024w, https:\/\/cryptolinks.com\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/shutterstock_2271050451-768x411.jpg 768w, https:\/\/cryptolinks.com\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/shutterstock_2271050451-1536x821.jpg 1536w, https:\/\/cryptolinks.com\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/shutterstock_2271050451-2048x1095.jpg 2048w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2560px) 100vw, 2560px\" \/><\/h2>\n<p>If you\u2019ve ever wondered why \u201ccryptocurrency mining\u201d and \u201cenergy use\u201d show up in the same sentence, here\u2019s the simple truth: on Proof\u2011of\u2011Work networks like Bitcoin, miners spend electricity to make cheating painfully expensive. That cost is the shield.<\/p>\n<blockquote><p><em>\u201cThe proof-of-work is essentially one-CPU-one-vote.\u201d<\/em> \u2014 <a href=\"https:\/\/bitcoin.org\/bitcoin.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"nofollow noopener\">Satoshi Nakamoto, Bitcoin whitepaper<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>That line sounds technical, but the idea is human: we pay a visible price (electricity) to earn something we value (trust in a shared ledger no one can quietly rewrite). It\u2019s not energy for energy\u2019s sake\u2014it\u2019s energy as honesty.<\/p>\n<h3>Proof\u2011of\u2011Work in plain English<\/h3>\n<p>Think of miners as billions of digital scratch-off tickets being revealed every second. The winning \u201cticket\u201d is a hash that meets a target set by the network. Finding it is pure guesswork, so the only way to increase your odds is to try more guesses\u2014hashes\u2014which takes electricity.<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Miners bundle transactions into a candidate block.<\/li>\n<li>They race to find a valid hash by tweaking a number (the nonce) and hashing again\u2014trillions of times per second.<\/li>\n<li>The first valid block wins newly minted coins plus transaction fees.<\/li>\n<li>Everyone else\u2019s guesses become \u201cwasted\u201d heat\u2014by design\u2014because that unforgeable waste is what makes an attack wildly expensive.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>On Bitcoin, the protocol targets roughly one block every 10 minutes. If the global mining fleet gets faster, the software raises the difficulty so blocks don\u2019t arrive sooner. That automatic difficulty adjustment is the metronome of Proof\u2011of\u2011Work\u2014and the core reason energy use tracks competition, not transaction count.<\/p>\n<h3>Proof\u2011of\u2011Work vs Proof\u2011of\u2011Stake at a glance<\/h3>\n<p>There\u2019s another way to secure a blockchain: Proof\u2011of\u2011Stake. Instead of spending electricity to prove honesty, validators lock up coins. If they cheat, their stake can be slashed. The work shifts from power-hungry hashing to cryptographic voting and networking, which uses a tiny fraction of the energy.<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Proof\u2011of\u2011Work (PoW):<\/strong> Security budget = electricity + specialized hardware. Attacks require enormous power and machines in the real world.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Proof\u2011of\u2011Stake (PoS):<\/strong> Security budget = capital at risk (stake). Attacks require buying and risking a large portion of the asset itself.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>If you want a real-world example of the energy gap, look at Ethereum\u2019s move from PoW to PoS. After the Merge, Ethereum\u2019s electricity use dropped by about 99.95%, according to the project\u2019s own analysis (<a href=\"https:\/\/ethereum.org\/en\/energy-consumption\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"nofollow noopener\">source<\/a>). Same network purpose, drastically different energy profile.<\/p>\n<h3>Hardware, difficulty, and the race for hashpower<\/h3>\n<p>Because PoW is a race, miners obsess over efficiency\u2014more hashes per watt. That\u2019s why the hardware arms race never really stops:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>GPUs \u2192 FPGAs \u2192 ASICs:<\/strong> Early miners used consumer graphics cards. Today, purpose\u2011built ASICs dominate because they\u2019re orders of magnitude faster and more efficient.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Real examples:<\/strong> An older Antminer S9 sat around ~90 J\/TH (joules per terahash). A newer Antminer S19 Pro is roughly ~29.5 J\/TH, and the S21 class pushes down near ~17\u201320 J\/TH. MicroBT\u2019s latest WhatsMiner M60 series also lands around the ~20 J\/TH mark, depending on the model. In plain terms: more hashes, less power per hash.<\/li>\n<li><strong>But total energy can still rise:<\/strong> When price or fees go up, mining revenue per terahash rises. That pulls in more machines until difficulty ratchets higher and profit margins compress again. It\u2019s the classic rebound effect: efficiency gains lower cost per hash, which invites more hashing until the economics re\u2011balance.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Why difficulty is the governor:<\/strong> Bitcoin recalibrates difficulty every 2016 blocks (~two weeks) to keep block times stable. More hashpower \u2192 higher difficulty \u2192 similar block interval, but with a larger global energy \u201cwall\u201d that protects the chain.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Why location and electricity price matter:<\/strong> Because miners operate on thin margins, they cluster where power is cheapest or most flexible. That\u2019s also why you see miners experiment with firmware tuning, underclocking, or different cooling setups\u2014every watt saved helps.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>If you\u2019ve ever felt whiplash from headlines\u2014\u201cBitcoin uses too much\u201d vs. \u201cIt\u2019s less than X industry\u201d\u2014this is the root cause: supply, demand, hardware efficiency, and difficulty are constantly tugging at each other. The network sets the rules; economics sets the energy.<\/p>\n<p>Curious how big the electricity bill actually gets, how Bitcoin compares to other networks, and why different studies disagree? I\u2019m about to break that down with real numbers and the methods behind them\u2014so you can spot good data from shaky claims in seconds.<\/p>\n<h2>How much electricity are we talking about?<\/h2>\n<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"aligncenter size-full wp-image-5781\" src=\"https:\/\/cryptolinks.com\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/2-scaled.jpg\" alt=\"energy for mining cryptocurrency. \" width=\"2560\" height=\"1707\" srcset=\"https:\/\/cryptolinks.com\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/2-scaled.jpg 2560w, https:\/\/cryptolinks.com\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/2-300x200.jpg 300w, https:\/\/cryptolinks.com\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/2-1024x683.jpg 1024w, https:\/\/cryptolinks.com\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/2-768x512.jpg 768w, https:\/\/cryptolinks.com\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/2-1536x1024.jpg 1536w, https:\/\/cryptolinks.com\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/2-2048x1365.jpg 2048w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2560px) 100vw, 2560px\" \/><\/p>\n<p>When people say \u201ccrypto uses as much power as a country,\u201d they\u2019re usually talking about one network: Bitcoin. That\u2019s the honest picture. Most other chains are either tiny compared to it or have switched to Proof\u2011of\u2011Stake and use a rounding\u2011error of energy.<\/p>\n<p><em>Here\u2019s the snapshot I trust right now:<\/em> credible trackers like the Cambridge Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index place Bitcoin\u2019s annual electricity use somewhere in the tens to low hundreds of terawatt\u2011hours per year, with a wide uncertainty range because real\u2011world mining is messy and global. You can watch their live estimate here: <a href=\"https:\/\/ccaf.io\/cbeci\/index\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"nofollow noopener\">CCAF\u2019s CBECI<\/a>.<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>\u201cEnergy isn\u2019t the villain; waste is. The real questions are what kind of energy, when, and where it\u2019s used.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<h3>Bitcoin vs other networks<\/h3>\n<p>Bitcoin is the heavyweight of Proof\u2011of\u2011Work energy use. Nothing else in PoW land is close right now. A few quick markers:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Bitcoin:<\/strong> Tens to low hundreds of TWh per year, depending on market conditions, hardware mix, and uptime (<a href=\"https:\/\/ccaf.io\/cbeci\/index\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"nofollow noopener\">Cambridge CBECI<\/a>).<\/li>\n<li><strong>Ethereum after the Merge:<\/strong> Energy use fell by ~99.95%. That\u2019s not marketing\u2014multiple sources back it up, including <a href=\"https:\/\/ethereum.org\/en\/energy-consumption\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"nofollow noopener\">ethereum.org<\/a>. In practical terms, it went from \u201cindustrial\u201d to \u201cnearly nothing.\u201d<\/li>\n<li><strong>Other PoW chains (Litecoin\/Dogecoin, Monero, Kaspa, etc.):<\/strong> Smaller hashrates and less revenue keep their electricity needs far below Bitcoin\u2019s. Think <em>orders of magnitude<\/em> lower, not peers.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>One thing I see misunderstood all the time: \u201cenergy per transaction.\u201d On PoW networks like Bitcoin, security drives energy use, not how many payments you stuff into blocks. So kWh\/tx is a misleading metric; it can go down simply by batching or using Layer 2, even if total power stays the same.<\/p>\n<h3>How estimates are made and why they vary<\/h3>\n<p>There isn\u2019t a single meter on \u201cglobal Bitcoin.\u201d Researchers triangulate from several angles, which is why headlines don\u2019t agree. The main methods:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Bottom\u2011up (hardware\u2011based):<\/strong> Take the network hashrate, estimate the mix of machines (J\/TH efficiency), add facility overhead (cooling, networking), and multiply by runtime.<br \/>\n<em>Why it varies:<\/em> Nobody knows the exact fleet mix, how widely miners undervolt\/underclock, or how many run immersion cooling. Even a small change in assumed efficiency shifts the total a lot.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Top\u2011down (revenue\u2011based):<\/strong> Start with miner revenue (block rewards + fees), assume electricity is a certain share of costs, and back into power use.<br \/>\n<em>Why it varies:<\/em> Electricity prices range from stranded energy at a few cents to premium grid power, and profits rise\/fall with Bitcoin\u2019s price. In bull markets, revenue surges and the model can overstate power.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Hybrid models:<\/strong> Blend both approaches and layer in known device releases, public filings from listed miners, and regional electricity data to tighten the range.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>For a feel of the math, here\u2019s a simplified example I often run when testing assumptions:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Network hashrate: 600 EH\/s<\/li>\n<li>Fleet efficiency (assumed average): 25 J\/TH<\/li>\n<li>Power draw = 600,000,000 TH\/s \u00d7 25 J\/TH = 15,000,000,000 J\/s \u2248 15 GW<\/li>\n<li>Add facility overhead (say +10%): ~16.5 GW<\/li>\n<li>Annualized: ~16.5 GW \u00d7 8,760 h \u2248 144 TWh\/year<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Change the fleet efficiency to 20 J\/TH or 30 J\/TH and that number swings massively. That\u2019s why serious studies publish ranges, not single-point certainties.<\/p>\n<h3>Where miners are and why it matters<\/h3>\n<p>Electricity is not created equal. The same kilowatt\u2011hour can be almost carbon\u2011free in one place and very dirty in another. Location is everything.<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>United States (notably Texas):<\/strong> The U.S. has held the largest share of Bitcoin hashrate in recent years per the <a href=\"https:\/\/ccaf.io\/cbeci\/mining_map\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"nofollow noopener\">CCAF mining map<\/a>. In Texas (ERCOT), miners sit near booming wind and solar and often <em>curtail<\/em> during grid stress, earning credits for powering down. A well\u2011known case: Riot reported tens of millions in power credits during summer peak events in 2023, showing how flexible loads can operate on a modern grid.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Hydro and geothermal hubs:<\/strong> Quebec and British Columbia (Canada), Norway, Iceland, and Paraguay (Itaip\u00fa hydro) have attracted miners with abundant low\u2011carbon power. These locations dramatically cut the emissions attached to the same unit of electricity.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Coal\u2011heavy grids:<\/strong> Kazakhstan became a mining hotspot after China\u2019s 2021 crackdown but later introduced taxes and enforcement as the grid strained. Where coal dominates, each kWh carries high emissions, and the footprint looks much worse.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>If you want a rough idea of how much the location matters, look at grid carbon intensity. Hydropower\u2011 and nuclear\u2011heavy regions can be under 100 gCO\u2082\/kWh, while coal\u2011heavy grids can exceed 800 gCO\u2082\/kWh. Public sources like the IEA and Ember track these differences globally (<a href=\"https:\/\/ember-climate.org\/insights\/research\/global-electricity-review-2024\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"nofollow noopener\">Ember\u2019s Global Electricity Review<\/a> is a good starting point).<\/p>\n<p>This is why you\u2019ll see smart operators chase sites with stranded or seasonally cheap clean energy\u2014think hydro in rainy seasons or wind corridors with frequent curtailment. Same terawatt\u2011hour, drastically different climate story.<\/p>\n<p>But electricity is only the first half of the story. What matters to the planet isn\u2019t just how many kilowatts flow\u2014it\u2019s the emissions behind them, the hardware turnover, and even the water and heat at the site. Want the straight numbers on carbon, e\u2011waste, water, and what good design can fix? Let\u2019s answer that next.<\/p>\n<h2>From kilowatts to carbon: emissions, e\u2011waste, water, and heat<br \/>\n<img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"aligncenter size-full wp-image-5782\" src=\"https:\/\/cryptolinks.com\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/3-scaled.jpg\" alt=\"Bitcoin pollution - Illustration about the debate of energy usage in crypto currency and environmental impact. \" width=\"2560\" height=\"1418\" srcset=\"https:\/\/cryptolinks.com\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/3-scaled.jpg 2560w, https:\/\/cryptolinks.com\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/3-300x166.jpg 300w, https:\/\/cryptolinks.com\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/3-1024x567.jpg 1024w, https:\/\/cryptolinks.com\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/3-768x425.jpg 768w, https:\/\/cryptolinks.com\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/3-1536x851.jpg 1536w, https:\/\/cryptolinks.com\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/3-2048x1134.jpg 2048w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2560px) 100vw, 2560px\" \/><\/h2>\n<p>Energy use gets all the headlines, but the real story is what that energy turns into\u2014carbon, scrap hardware, water stress, and local heat\/noise. Those impacts change dramatically based on where and how a site runs.<\/p>\n<blockquote><p><em>\u201cYou can\u2019t manage what you don\u2019t measure.\u201d<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>So let\u2019s measure the right things.<\/p>\n<h3>Carbon footprint depends on grid mix<\/h3>\n<p>Two mining sites can pull the same number of kilowatt-hours and leave wildly different footprints. The difference is the grid\u2019s <strong>carbon intensity<\/strong> (grams of CO\u2082 per kWh) and the <strong>timing<\/strong> of when the power is used.<\/p>\n<p>What I look for:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Grid mix by location:<\/strong> A hydro\u2011heavy region like Qu\u00e9bec or Norway typically sits under ~100 gCO\u2082\/kWh, while coal\u2011heavy regions can exceed 700 gCO\u2082\/kWh. Public datasets like <a href=\"https:\/\/ourworldindata.org\/grapher\/co2-intensity-electricity?tab=chart\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener nofollow\">Our World in Data<\/a> and live tools like <a href=\"https:\/\/app.electricitymap.org\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener nofollow\">ElectricityMap<\/a> make this visible.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Time\u2011of\u2011use (marginal emissions):<\/strong> The \u201ccleanliness\u201d of a kWh changes hour by hour. Running during windy Texas nights or solar\u2011heavy middays can cut emissions dramatically. Providers like <a href=\"https:\/\/www.watttime.org\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener nofollow\">WattTime<\/a> track marginal emissions so operators can automate when to throttle.<\/li>\n<li><strong>How claims are reported:<\/strong> Location\u2011based vs market\u2011based accounting (GHG Protocol Scope 2) matters. Hourly\u2011matched PPAs and granular certificates (see <a href=\"https:\/\/energytag.org\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener nofollow\">EnergyTag<\/a>) beat generic annual RECs when you want real\u2011world impact, not paper green.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Bottom line: <strong>the same kWh can be low\u2011carbon or high\u2011carbon<\/strong> depending on where and when it\u2019s consumed. If a site won\u2019t share its hourly mix or metered data, I assume the average grid intensity\u2014or worse, the marginal peak number.<\/p>\n<h3>E\u2011waste and hardware churn<\/h3>\n<p>Proof\u2011of\u2011Work rewards efficiency, but that incentive cuts both ways. New ASICs outcompete old ones, and if older models can\u2019t find cheap power or a second life, they turn into scrap.<\/p>\n<p>What the research says:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>A peer\u2011reviewed study by Alex de Vries and Christian Stoll estimated Bitcoin\u2019s e\u2011waste in the tens of thousands of tonnes annually (2021), driven by short device lifespans and rapid upgrades.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>What actually reduces the pile (and I\u2019ve seen this work in the field):<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Refurbish and cascade:<\/strong> Move older rigs to cleaner, cheaper power and underclock. Tools like <a href=\"https:\/\/braiins.com\/os\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener nofollow\">Braiins OS+<\/a> or other tuning firmware stretch efficiency and lifespan.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Immersion cooling:<\/strong> Eliminates fan failures, lowers dust corrosion, and can extend hardware life by years while improving performance per watt.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Right\u2011to\u2011repair parts:<\/strong> Modular PSUs, replaceable hashboards, and open diagnostics keep gear out of landfills.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Responsible recycling:<\/strong> When a rig truly is done, send it to certified recyclers (R2v3 or e\u2011Stewards) that recover copper, aluminum, and precious metals without polluting another community.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Buy smarter:<\/strong> Favor vendors that disclose repairability, spare\u2011parts availability, and take\u2011back programs in writing.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Fast upgrades don\u2019t have to mean fast trash. If a farm has no resale\/refurb pipeline and no recycler on contract, that\u2019s a red flag.<\/p>\n<h3>Water use, heat, and noise<\/h3>\n<p>Cooling is another piece people miss. Some sites are air\u2011cooled and barely touch water; others use evaporative cooling and consume a lot. And that\u2019s just on\u2011site. There\u2019s an upstream water story too\u2014the power plants behind the grid.<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>On\u2011site water:<\/strong> Air cooling uses fans and filters; evaporative systems trade water for cooler inlet temps; immersion uses closed loops that can be designed to consume little to no water.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Upstream water (the grid):<\/strong> Thermoelectric plants (coal, gas, nuclear) withdraw and often consume water for cooling; hydropower has variable evaporation losses. Meta\u2011analyses from NREL highlight how water intensity differs by technology and region (<a href=\"https:\/\/www.nrel.gov\/docs\/fy11osti\/50900.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener nofollow\">NREL review<\/a>).<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Heat isn\u2019t just waste\u2014it\u2019s a product if you set things up right. Real examples worth knowing:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>District heating in Canada:<\/strong> North Vancouver\u2019s utility partnered with <a href=\"https:\/\/www.cbc.ca\/news\/canada\/british-columbia\/north-vancouver-crypto-mining-heat-1.6207165\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener nofollow\">MintGreen<\/a> to capture heat from bitcoin miners for its district energy network\u2014turning a local complaint into a community benefit.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Greenhouses and buildings:<\/strong> Several European pilots pipe mining heat to greenhouses and commercial buildings, offsetting gas boilers and stabilizing site economics during price swings.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>And yes, <strong>noise<\/strong> is real. High\u2011speed fans can read like a lawnmower chorus. Communities in places like Plattsburgh, NY, pushed back years ago, forcing new rules on siting and sound. Practical fixes I look for:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Acoustic barriers, larger low\u2011RPM fans, and lined enclosures<\/li>\n<li>Setbacks and proper zoning to keep noise away from neighbors<\/li>\n<li>Transparent sound monitoring with published dB limits and complaint hotlines<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>If a facility won\u2019t share its water plan or its decibel map, it\u2019s not ready to be a neighbor.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Here\u2019s the emotional core for me:<\/strong> emissions, e\u2011waste, water, and noise aren\u2019t abstract. They land in real towns, on real bills, and in real rivers. The tech can be part of the solution\u2014but only if the operators choose to be measured, verified, and held to a higher bar.<\/p>\n<p>So what\u2019s actually changing on the ground\u2014are miners switching to cleaner power, capturing heat, and squeezing more work from each watt? I\u2019ve been tracking the best examples and the greenwashing. Ready to see which ones actually hold up?<\/p>\n<h2>Is crypto mining getting greener?<br \/>\n<img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"aligncenter size-full wp-image-2699\" src=\"https:\/\/cryptolinks.com\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/12\/environmental-concerns-crypto.jpg\" alt=\"Renewable Cryptocurrency Mining.\" width=\"1000\" height=\"667\" srcset=\"https:\/\/cryptolinks.com\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/12\/environmental-concerns-crypto.jpg 1000w, https:\/\/cryptolinks.com\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/12\/environmental-concerns-crypto-300x200.jpg 300w, https:\/\/cryptolinks.com\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/12\/environmental-concerns-crypto-768x512.jpg 768w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 1000px) 100vw, 1000px\" \/><\/h2>\n<p>Short answer: <strong>in many pockets, yes<\/strong>\u2014and fast\u2014but it\u2019s uneven. I\u2019m seeing three big shifts that actually show up on a meter: siting on cleaner or wasted power, turning waste heat into a product, and squeezing more hashes out of every watt. Where these stack together, the footprint drops hard. Where they don\u2019t, it\u2019s noisy gear on fossil-heavy grids and nobody\u2019s happy.<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>\u201cYou can\u2019t manage what you don\u2019t measure.\u201d \u2014 Peter Drucker<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>That line is taped above my desk. It\u2019s how I judge every \u201cgreen\u201d claim miners make: if they can\u2019t show energy sources, timing, and a plan to cut emissions, it\u2019s just marketing perfume.<\/p>\n<h3>Renewables and stranded energy<\/h3>\n<p>Two things have moved the needle: plugging into <strong>renewable-rich grids<\/strong> and capturing <strong>stranded energy<\/strong> that would otherwise be wasted.<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Absorbing curtailment<\/strong> on windy and sunny grids: In places like Texas, wind and solar sometimes produce more than the grid can take. Miners soak up this \u201cspill,\u201d then power down when households need it. Texas\u2019s market monitor documents ongoing wind\/solar curtailment and large flexible loads helping stabilize the system. See the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.potomaceconomics.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/2023-State-of-the-Market-Report.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener nofollow\">ERCOT State of the Market report (2023)<\/a>.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Demand response in the real world<\/strong>: During 2023 heat waves, a major Texas operator reported earning <a href=\"https:\/\/www.riotplatforms.com\/news-media\/press-releases\/detail\/190\/riot-platforms-august-2023-production-and-operations-updates\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener nofollow\">$31.7M in power credits in one month<\/a> by curtailing for the grid. That\u2019s what adjustable load looks like when it meets a stressed system: miners step back, homes stay on.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Hydro-heavy regions<\/strong>: Iceland and Norway are almost entirely powered by hydro and geothermal; miners there lean into that advantage. Norway\u2019s electricity is overwhelmingly renewable\u2014see the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.iea.org\/countries\/norway\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener nofollow\">IEA country profile<\/a> for the mix.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Flared and stranded gas<\/strong>: Instead of burning natural gas at the well (or worse, venting methane), some teams run generators on-site to power miners. It\u2019s not \u201cgreen,\u201d but it can be <em>cleaner<\/em> than flaring because enclosed combustion is more complete and reduces methane slip. Crusoe calls this \u201cdigital flare mitigation\u201d (<a href=\"https:\/\/www.crusoeenergy.com\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener nofollow\">overview<\/a>), and big energy firms have tested selling otherwise-wasted gas to miners, as covered by <a href=\"https:\/\/www.cnbc.com\/2022\/02\/10\/conocophillips-is-selling-gas-to-bitcoin-miners.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener nofollow\">CNBC<\/a>. Methane is a powerful greenhouse gas, so turning it into electricity and CO\u2082 (with far lower warming potential) can be a net win when done to spec.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Key takeaway: <strong>location and timing matter<\/strong>. A kilowatt at 2 a.m. in a wind corridor is not the same as a kilowatt at 6 p.m. on a coal-heavy grid. Good miners know this and plan around it.<\/p>\n<h3>Heat reuse and smart siting<\/h3>\n<p>Here\u2019s the part that makes me smile: using the \u201cwaste\u201d heat. When your computers are heaters that happen to make hashes, you can warm real buildings and knock fossil fuels out of local heating.<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>District heating<\/strong>: In British Columbia, a project is routing mining heat to the local district energy system so buildings stay warm without burning gas. It\u2019s been covered by mainstream outlets like the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.bbc.com\/news\/technology-59071379\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener nofollow\">BBC<\/a>. That\u2019s heat someone would\u2019ve paid for anyway\u2014now it\u2019s a byproduct.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Industrial uses<\/strong>: In Norway, miners have been <a href=\"https:\/\/www.theguardian.com\/technology\/2018\/sep\/27\/norway-bitcoin-mining-drying-wood\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener nofollow\">drying wood and seaweed<\/a> with waste heat for years. It\u2019s not glamorous, but it replaces boilers and cuts local emissions.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Colocating smart<\/strong>: Greenhouses, swimming pools, warehouses in cold regions\u2014if you can pipe or duct the heat (or run immersion loops), you can sell it. The business model works best where heating demand is steady, outside air is cool, and thermal loads are near the rigs.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Is heat reuse a silver bullet? No. But it turns a cost into revenue and slashes net emissions where heating is fossil-fueled. Think of it as turning a headache into a second product line.<\/p>\n<h3>Efficiency gains: ASICs, immersion, and firmware<\/h3>\n<p>Three letters that changed the game: <strong>J\/TH<\/strong> (joules per terahash). That\u2019s the efficiency number to watch. Lower is better.<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>New-gen ASICs<\/strong>: The jump from an old Antminer S9 (~90\u2013100 J\/TH) to today\u2019s top rigs is massive. Recent flagships are around the high teens in J\/TH\u2014see the Antminer S21 coverage (~17.5 J\/TH) and WhatsMiner M60 series (~18\u201320 J\/TH). That\u2019s a multi-fold drop in energy per unit of security.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Immersion cooling<\/strong>: Submerging miners in special dielectric fluid cuts fan power, stabilizes temps, and allows tighter tuning. Case studies from vendors like <a href=\"https:\/\/submer.com\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener nofollow\">Submer<\/a> show double-digit reductions in total facility energy overhead and better uptime. The extra control lets operators underclock for peak pricing or overclock when power is cheap.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Optimization firmware<\/strong>: Tools like <a href=\"https:\/\/braiins.com\/os\/plus\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener nofollow\">Braiins OS+<\/a> and other tuning stacks help miners hit the sweet spot for each machine and each hour of the day. Gains of 5\u201320% in efficiency aren\u2019t unusual when you pair the right profile with the right cooling.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Does better efficiency mean lower total consumption? Not necessarily\u2014economic incentives can push total hashrate higher. But it <strong>does<\/strong> lower the energy and emissions required for a given level of network security, which is the metric we actually want trending down.<\/p>\n<h3>What \u201ccarbon neutral\u201d claims really mean<\/h3>\n<p>If a mining company waves a \u201ccarbon neutral\u201d banner, I ask three questions before I give them any credit.<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Is it real clean power or just offsets?<\/strong> Buying cheap offsets while pulling power from a fossil grid doesn\u2019t change physics. The Oxford Offsetting Principles are clear: reduce emissions first, offset last\u2014and only with high-quality, additional projects.<\/li>\n<li><strong>How is renewable use verified?<\/strong> Hourly-matched certificates beat annual averages. Look for 24\/7 energy tracking frameworks (e.g., <a href=\"https:\/\/energytag.org\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener nofollow\">EnergyTag<\/a>) and registries like <a href=\"https:\/\/www.mrets.org\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener nofollow\">M-RETS<\/a> or <a href=\"https:\/\/www.green-e.org\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener nofollow\">Green\u2011e<\/a>. Metered data + serials, or it didn\u2019t happen.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Is there additionality?<\/strong> Long-term power purchase agreements (PPAs) or VPPAs that finance new wind\/solar\/geothermal are far better than scooping up existing green credits. New steel in the ground is what changes the mix.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Strong claims come with specifics: plant names, ERCOT node or ISO zone, contract terms, hourly usage profiles, and third\u2011party audits. Weak claims rely on vague \u201c100% renewable\u201d PR lines while sitting on a coal-heavy interconnect. <em>Clean energy isn\u2019t a press release; it\u2019s a meter reading.<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The trend is encouraging\u2014more miners are chasing cleaner electrons, reusing heat, and doing more with less wattage\u2014but there\u2019s still a gap between the best operators and the average site. And there\u2019s a big question hanging over all of this: what if you could get crypto\u2019s security and utility with a tiny slice of the energy?<\/p>\n<p><strong>Next up:<\/strong> can staking-based systems actually keep the network safe while shrinking energy to a rounding error? I\u2019ll show you what changed after one of the biggest shifts in crypto history\u2014and what trade\u2011offs to watch.<\/p>\n<h2>Low\u2011energy crypto: Proof\u2011of\u2011Stake and other alternatives<\/h2>\n<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"aligncenter size-full wp-image-2236\" src=\"https:\/\/cryptolinks.com\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/Why-Proof-of-Stake-PoS-Is-the-Go-To-Option-for-a-Lot-of-Projects.jpg\" alt=\"Why Proof-of-Stake (PoS) Is the Go-To Option for a Lot of Projects\" width=\"1000\" height=\"667\" srcset=\"https:\/\/cryptolinks.com\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/Why-Proof-of-Stake-PoS-Is-the-Go-To-Option-for-a-Lot-of-Projects.jpg 1000w, https:\/\/cryptolinks.com\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/Why-Proof-of-Stake-PoS-Is-the-Go-To-Option-for-a-Lot-of-Projects-300x200.jpg 300w, https:\/\/cryptolinks.com\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/Why-Proof-of-Stake-PoS-Is-the-Go-To-Option-for-a-Lot-of-Projects-768x512.jpg 768w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 1000px) 100vw, 1000px\" \/><\/p>\n<p>Here\u2019s the simple truth: <strong>you don\u2019t need a warehouse of roaring machines to secure a public blockchain<\/strong>. With Proof\u2011of\u2011Stake (PoS), validators put capital at risk instead of burning electricity. If they behave, they earn. If they cheat, they get slashed. The result is the same open network effect people love\u2014without the power draw that made headlines.<\/p>\n<blockquote><p><em>\u201cSecurity from skin in the game, not smoke from the stack.\u201d<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>In PoS, energy use mainly comes from running validator nodes\u2014basically standard servers and networking gear. That\u2019s <strong>megawatts at the network level, not gigawatts<\/strong>. Decentralization comes from smart protocol design, thousands of independent validators, diverse software clients, and incentives that make attacks painfully expensive in money, not megawatt\u2011hours.<\/p>\n<h3>Ethereum after the Merge<\/h3>\n<p>The Merge flipped Ethereum from Proof\u2011of\u2011Work to Proof\u2011of\u2011Stake on September 15, 2022. The before\/after is not subtle. The Ethereum website pegs the reduction in electricity at about <strong>99.95%<\/strong> compared to its PoW days, shifting consumption from industrial mining to modest validator operations (<a href=\"https:\/\/ethereum.org\/en\/energy-consumption\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener nofollow\">source<\/a>). Independent analysis from the Crypto Carbon Ratings Institute also found the network now draws just a few megawatts\u2014orders of magnitude lower than PoW (<a href=\"https:\/\/ccri.org\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener nofollow\">CCRI<\/a>).<\/p>\n<p>Real\u2011world signals I watch:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Validator scale:<\/strong> Ethereum now has well over a million active validators (you can check live counts on <a href=\"https:\/\/beaconcha.in\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener nofollow\">beaconcha.in<\/a>). You can run one on a mini\u2011PC at home. That\u2019s a cultural shift\u2014security anchored by many small, online\u2011all\u2011the\u2011time nodes.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Client diversity:<\/strong> Multiple production clients (Prysm, Lighthouse, Teku, Nimbus, Lodestar) mean fewer single\u2011point failures. The 2023 finality hiccups were a reminder that <strong>software diversity is as important as energy savings<\/strong>; the fix was to spread stake across clients (<a href=\"https:\/\/clientdiversity.org\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener nofollow\">see live stats<\/a>).<\/li>\n<li><strong>Censorship resistance:<\/strong> After the Merge, some MEV relays filtered OFAC\u2011sanctioned transactions. The share of blocks from censoring relays spiked in late 2022, then trended down as the community pushed relay diversity and new strategies (<a href=\"https:\/\/www.mevwatch.info\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener nofollow\">track it here<\/a>).<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>PoS didn\u2019t just cut energy; it moved the conversation to <strong>who controls stake, which software wins, and how censorship is resisted<\/strong>. Energy became a background cost; governance came to the front row.<\/p>\n<h3>Other low\u2011energy chains<\/h3>\n<p>Plenty of networks started with PoS or other low\u2011energy designs from day one. A few I keep tabs on:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Solana<\/strong> (PoH + PoS): High throughput with hardware\u2011optimized validators. The foundation publishes ongoing energy reports and tooling to track footprint (<a href=\"https:\/\/solana.com\/environment\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener nofollow\">source<\/a>). Despite the heavy performance profile, total electricity stays tiny relative to PoW.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Cardano<\/strong> (Ouroboros PoS): Thousands of stake pools and academic\u2011grade protocol papers. PoS efficiency is consistently highlighted in independent assessments like CCRI\u2019s analyses of PoS networks (<a href=\"https:\/\/ccri.org\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener nofollow\">CCRI<\/a>).<\/li>\n<li><strong>Polkadot<\/strong> (Nominated PoS): Known for low resource usage per validator; a CCRI\u2011referenced study has ranked it among the most energy\u2011efficient large chains.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Tezos<\/strong> (Liquid PoS): Early PoS adopter with regular sustainability reviews; independent audits have documented low electricity per operation (<a href=\"https:\/\/tezos.com\/sustainability\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener nofollow\">source<\/a>).<\/li>\n<li><strong>Algorand<\/strong> (PPoS): Lightweight consensus with an explicit sustainability program; they also use offsets (worth scrutinizing) to claim \u201ccarbon negative\u201d status (<a href=\"https:\/\/www.algorand.foundation\/sustainability\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener nofollow\">source<\/a>).<\/li>\n<li><strong>Chia<\/strong> (Proof\u2011of\u2011Space and Time): Farms with disk capacity instead of hashing power. Electricity is low, but there were early concerns about SSD wear; best practice is plotting on durable hardware and farming on HDDs (<a href=\"https:\/\/www.chia.net\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener nofollow\">overview<\/a>).<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>A note on \u201cenergy per transaction\u201d charts: they\u2019re catchy, but often misleading. Throughput can change without much change in total power draw, so I compare <strong>network\u2011level consumption<\/strong> across designs, not per\u2011TX numbers.<\/p>\n<h3>Trade\u2011offs and security questions<\/h3>\n<p>PoS cuts the kilowatts, but it raises different questions. Here\u2019s how I evaluate the trade\u2011offs when I review networks and staking providers:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Stake concentration:<\/strong> If a few entities or liquid\u2011staking providers control a big chunk of stake, governance pressure and censorship risk rise. For Ethereum, operator share data is transparent\u2014check <a href=\"https:\/\/www.rated.network\/ethereum\/validators\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener nofollow\">Rated Network<\/a> and staking dashboards before you delegate.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Permissionless entry:<\/strong> Can anyone become a validator with commodity hardware and open\u2011source software? Or are there soft barriers (minimums, whitelists, data\u2011center constraints)? Accessibility keeps power diffused.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Client and implementation diversity:<\/strong> Multiple mature clients reduce correlated bugs. I want to see a real split across client families and teams, not 90% on one stack.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Censorship resistance in practice:<\/strong> Metrics like the share of OFAC\u2011compliant blocks and relay diversity matter. Watch how a chain handles controversial transactions over time (again, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.mevwatch.info\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener nofollow\">MEV Watch<\/a> is useful).<\/li>\n<li><strong>Nakamoto coefficient \/ \u201csuperminority\u201d size:<\/strong> How many independent validators (or stake pools) are required to reach a blocking threshold? On fast chains like Solana, community dashboards often show it\u2019s on the order of a few dozen\u2014improving over time but crucial to monitor (<a href=\"https:\/\/solanabeach.io\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener nofollow\">live stats<\/a>).<\/li>\n<li><strong>Economic security and slashing:<\/strong> Are penalties meaningful? Is recovery from key compromise thought through (MPC, DVT, insurance)? I look for transparent slashing records and policies.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Governance rules:<\/strong> Who can change parameters? How fast? On\u2011chain governance can be healthy\u2014or a rubber stamp if stake is concentrated.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>In short: <strong>PoS makes energy a solved problem<\/strong>, then shifts the hard work to decentralization, incentives, and credible neutrality. That\u2019s a trade I like\u2014if the chain shows it in the data, not just in a deck.<\/p>\n<p>One last thing I get asked a lot: if PoS is so light on the grid, does policy even matter anymore? Or do siting, incentives, and demand\u2011response still shape costs and carbon in a big way? Keep reading\u2014I\u2019m about to unpack how rules, grids, and communities quietly decide who wins, who pays, and which projects earn real trust.<\/p>\n<h2>Policy, grids, and community impact<br \/>\n<img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"aligncenter size-full wp-image-5783\" src=\"https:\/\/cryptolinks.com\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/shutterstock_2062772528-scaled.jpg\" alt=\"Bitcoin crypto currency banned, government monetary policy\" width=\"2560\" height=\"1707\" srcset=\"https:\/\/cryptolinks.com\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/shutterstock_2062772528-scaled.jpg 2560w, https:\/\/cryptolinks.com\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/shutterstock_2062772528-300x200.jpg 300w, https:\/\/cryptolinks.com\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/shutterstock_2062772528-1024x683.jpg 1024w, https:\/\/cryptolinks.com\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/shutterstock_2062772528-768x512.jpg 768w, https:\/\/cryptolinks.com\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/shutterstock_2062772528-1536x1024.jpg 1536w, https:\/\/cryptolinks.com\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/shutterstock_2062772528-2048x1365.jpg 2048w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 2560px) 100vw, 2560px\" \/><\/h2>\n<p>Energy headlines don\u2019t tell you what your neighbor hears at 2 a.m., what your grid operator needs at 6 p.m., or why one state says \u201cwelcome\u201d while another slams the door. That\u2019s the real story: rules and grid design shape both the carbon footprint and how a mining facility shows up in daily life.<\/p>\n<blockquote><p><strong>\u201cEnergy without context is just a number. Policy and place decide whether that number helps or hurts.\u201d<\/strong><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<h3>Bans, moratoriums, and incentives<\/h3>\n<p>Policy is a patchwork, and miners follow it\u2014along with cheap, reliable power. A few examples that actually moved machines and emissions:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Targeted pauses on fossil-fueled PoW:<\/strong> New York signed a two\u2011year moratorium in 2022 on certain new Proof\u2011of\u2011Work facilities using fossil plant \u201crestarts,\u201d aimed at preventing higher local emissions while the state studies impacts. See the state announcement: NY PoW moratorium.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Hydro-rich provinces hitting pause:<\/strong> British Columbia announced an 18\u2011month suspension on new crypto connections while reviewing grid priorities (BC announcement). Hydro\u2011Qu\u00e9bec asked regulators to temporarily suspend capacity allocation to crypto in 2022 to protect winter reliability (Hydro\u2011Qu\u00e9bec request).<\/li>\n<li><strong>Crackdowns after grid stress:<\/strong> Kazakhstan welcomed miners post\u2011China ban, then faced power shortages and rolled out inspections and higher tariffs in 2022\u20132023, prompting an exodus.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Incentives for flexible, clean load:<\/strong> Texas\u2019s market rewards \u201ccontrollable load resources\u201d that can curtail quickly during peaks. That carrot\u2014and abundant wind\/solar\u2014pulled major miners into ERCOT. Program overview: ERCOT load programs.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Methane mitigation routes:<\/strong> States like North Dakota encouraged load next to oilfields, where miners run on otherwise flared gas. Combusting methane instead of venting cuts warming impact dramatically because methane\u2019s 20\u2011year warming potential is ~80x CO\u2082 (IPCC). Example provider: Crusoe Energy.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>The net effect? Policy nudges decide <em>where<\/em> mining lands and <em>what<\/em> power it uses. Hydro\/nuclear regions often push for reliability first; fossil\u2011heavy grids add taxes or conditions; competitive markets pay for flexibility.<\/p>\n<h3>Grid stability and demand response<\/h3>\n<p>Mining can be a blunt instrument\u2014or a shock absorber. The difference is whether a site is wired into demand\u2011response programs with real telemetry and penalties.<\/p>\n<p>Texas is the live case study. When the grid screams for help, miners that signed up as \u201ccontrollable load resources\u201d can shut off in minutes and get paid to stay out of the way. In August 2023\u2019s heat wave, one large operator reported curtailing most of its load and earning power credits for doing so, effectively returning power to homes and businesses. Operators did similar curtailments during Winter Storm Elliott in late 2022.<\/p>\n<p>What \u201cgood\u201d looks like on the grid side:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Fast, verifiable curtailment:<\/strong> Site can drop megawatts within minutes via automated controls, not manual guesswork.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Pay\u2011for\u2011performance:<\/strong> Compensation tied to actual load shed with penalties for under\u2011delivery.<\/li>\n<li><strong>No diesel backsliding:<\/strong> Curtailment shouldn\u2019t be replaced by on\u2011site diesel generators that spike local pollution.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Locational awareness:<\/strong> Curtail where constraints are tightest, not just system\u2011wide averages.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Time\u2011of\u2011use alignment:<\/strong> Run hardest when wind\/solar are strong; stand down during evening peaks.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>There\u2019s a real upside if miners act like adjustable sponges for variable renewables. There\u2019s also a real downside if they\u2019re just another inflexible industrial load. The market design and rules decide which story wins.<\/p>\n<h3>Local jobs, noise, and taxes<\/h3>\n<p>This is where crypto meets community. A 100 MW facility won\u2019t employ thousands; think dozens to low hundreds for ops, plus periodic construction bursts. The upside often comes from property taxes, substation upgrades, and breathing new life into old industrial sites. The friction comes from sound, traffic, and opaque energy deals.<\/p>\n<p>Two grounded examples worth learning from:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Plattsburgh, New York:<\/strong> In 2018, residents saw electricity bills jump because cheap municipal power was maxed out. The city paused new mining and created a special tariff for high\u2011density load. Lesson: protect local ratepayers with the right pricing from day one.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Niagara Falls, New York:<\/strong> Noise complaints turned into lawsuits and new local ordinances capping decibels and requiring sound mitigation. Lesson: ambient noise matters; cooling strategy is not just an engineering choice\u2014it\u2019s a neighborhood issue.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>What responsible operators do to keep trust:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Design for quiet:<\/strong> Use immersion cooling or proper acoustic walls; commit to enforceable decibel limits at the property line.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Be transparent on energy:<\/strong> Share monthly uptime, curtailment hours, and power sources; third\u2011party verification beats adjectives.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Plan the logistics:<\/strong> Schedule truck traffic in daylight hours; keep roads clean; coordinate with local EMS and fire departments.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Offer community benefits:<\/strong> Local hiring for trades, scholarships, or a community energy fund tied to curtailment revenue.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Pay fairly for power:<\/strong> Special rate classes or riders so neighbors don\u2019t subsidize industrial load, especially in winter peaks.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Here\u2019s the emotional truth: people don\u2019t remember your whitepaper; they remember the hum they heard at night and whether the lights stayed on. Or as one city planner told me, <em>\u201cClean watts are cheaper than PR.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Curious how you\u2014whether you mine, invest, or just use crypto\u2014can tilt this story toward cleaner power and better community outcomes? I\u2019ve got a practical checklist next. Want the version you can screenshot and act on today?<\/p>\n<h2>What you can do: miners, investors, and everyday readers<br \/>\n<img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"aligncenter size-full wp-image-5784\" src=\"https:\/\/cryptolinks.com\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/shutterstock_1009585465.jpg\" alt=\"Macro view of miner working for bitcoins mine pool. \" width=\"1000\" height=\"663\" srcset=\"https:\/\/cryptolinks.com\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/shutterstock_1009585465.jpg 1000w, https:\/\/cryptolinks.com\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/shutterstock_1009585465-300x199.jpg 300w, https:\/\/cryptolinks.com\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/shutterstock_1009585465-768x509.jpg 768w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 1000px) 100vw, 1000px\" \/><\/h2>\n<p>I read the headlines, review crypto sites daily, and talk to both miners and skeptics. Here\u2019s exactly how you can shrink the footprint, avoid greenwash, and back projects that are actually moving the needle.<\/p>\n<h3>For miners: quick checklist to cut footprint<\/h3>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Choose cleaner grids, intentionally.<\/strong> If you can pick location, pick the power mix. Check real-time carbon intensity before you plug in. Tools like <a href=\"https:\/\/www.electricitymap.org\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener nofollow\">ElectricityMap<\/a> make it easy, and the Cambridge mining map shows regional trends: <a href=\"https:\/\/ccaf.io\/cbeci\/mining_map\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener nofollow\">CBECI Mining Map<\/a>.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Use real renewables, not just annual paper RECs.<\/strong> Aim for metered PPAs or hourly matched clean energy. Annual offsets can say \u201c100% renewable\u201d while you\u2019re still running at coal-heavy hours. If you want a north star, look at 24\/7 matching frameworks popularized by hyperscalers: <a href=\"https:\/\/www.google.com\/about\/datacenters\/cleanenergy\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener nofollow\">Google\u2019s 24\/7 carbon-free energy approach<\/a>.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Become a demand-response asset.<\/strong> Make curtailment part of the business model, not an afterthought. In Texas, miners register as <em>Controllable Load Resources<\/em> and get paid to power down at grid stress: ERCOT CLRs. It\u2019s good for the grid and your bottom line.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Reuse heat where people actually need heat.<\/strong> If you\u2019re in a cool climate, sell your \u201cwaste\u201d heat. One strong example: MintGreen\u2019s partnership to supply heat to homes in North Vancouver instead of venting it: City of North Vancouver + MintGreen.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Track emissions the right way.<\/strong> Don\u2019t stop at kWh. Track <em>hourly<\/em> marginal emissions so you know the real impact of when you mine. Tools like WattTime help. Use recognized accounting frameworks: <a href=\"https:\/\/ghgprotocol.org\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener nofollow\">GHG Protocol<\/a> or <a href=\"https:\/\/www.iso.org\/standard\/66453.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener nofollow\">ISO 14064<\/a>.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Upgrade smart, extend life, and handle e-waste right.<\/strong> Run efficiency-forward gear, but get the most life you can from each unit: repair, resell, repurpose for heat projects. When you retire gear, use certified recyclers; in the U.S., check your vendor\u2019s track record and certifications.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Cool efficiently and mind water.<\/strong> Immersion cooling can boost hashrate per watt and reduce noise; design it to minimize water use and leaks. Monitor <em>PUE<\/em> (Power Usage Effectiveness) and publish it.<\/li>\n<li><strong>If you\u2019re using stranded gas, prove the methane abatement.<\/strong> Flaring or venting methane is a big climate problem; on-site generation can cut emissions if it truly reduces methane release. Share your metering and uptime data, not just marketing. Background on the opportunity is well summarized in the U.S. OSTP brief: OSTP: Crypto-Assets and Climate.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<blockquote><p><em>Pro tip:<\/em> Publish a short, verifiable sustainability page: grid locations (by region), energy mix, PUE, hourly curtailment history, and third\u2011party verification. Credibility attracts capital and keeps the community on your side.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<h3>For investors and users: greener choices<\/h3>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Prefer low\u2011energy networks by default.<\/strong> If you\u2019re staking or using DeFi, Proof\u2011of\u2011Stake chains use a tiny fraction of the power. That\u2019s the simplest way to lower your footprint today.<\/li>\n<li><strong>For PoW exposure, reward transparency.<\/strong> Back miners or pools that publish location-aware energy data, demand-response records, and audits. Ask for PPAs or time\u2011matched clean power, not just \u201c100% renewable\u201d slogans.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Read the right metrics.<\/strong> Look for kWh per PH\/s, facility PUE, curtailment hours, and emissions intensity (gCO\u2082e\/kWh) with a named methodology (GHG Protocol, ISO 14064). Annual RECs without hourly data = a red flag.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Check independent sources.<\/strong> Use public datasets to sanity-check claims: Cambridge CBECI for context, ElectricityMap for grid carbon, and the EPA eGRID (U.S.) for regional generation mixes.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Signal your preferences.<\/strong> Many exchanges, wallets, and pools respond to customer demand. Tell them you want transparent energy reporting and time\u2011matched clean power. Money talks\u2014and so do emails.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h3>Read energy claims the smart way<\/h3>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>\u201c100% renewable\u201d<\/strong> \u2014 Is it on\u2011site or via PPAs? Hourly matched or annual RECs? If it\u2019s annual only, the claim can mask fossil-heavy hours.<\/li>\n<li><strong>\u201cCarbon neutral\u201d<\/strong> \u2014 Is it offsets or actual clean power and curtailment? Ask for project types, vintage, and verification.<\/li>\n<li><strong>\u201cGrid friendly\u201d<\/strong> \u2014 Show me the curtailment logs. Participation in programs like ERCOT CLRs is a positive signal, but the proof is in the uptime profile during peak events.<\/li>\n<li><strong>\u201cLow emissions\u201d<\/strong> \u2014 Average grid factors can understate impact. Ask for <em>marginal<\/em> emissions and time-of-use. If the miner can\u2019t explain the difference, be cautious.<\/li>\n<li><strong>\u201cEfficient hardware\u201d<\/strong> \u2014 Great, but what\u2019s the fleet\u2011wide efficiency and PUE? Also, what\u2019s the plan for e\u2011waste at end of life?<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>If a project won\u2019t share location ranges, procurement method, and a third\u2011party methodology, I file it under \u201cneeds proof.\u201d The OSTP has called for exactly this kind of standardized reporting\u2014ask for it.<\/p>\n<h3>Simple ways to support cleaner crypto<\/h3>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Stake and transact on energy\u2011light networks<\/strong> when it fits your use case.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Favor miners and pools that publish energy dashboards<\/strong> with third\u2011party verification, and share those links when you talk about your portfolio.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Push your favorite wallet\/exchange<\/strong> to release an annual sustainability note: energy mix for their validators, custody, and on\u2011chain operations.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Home or small\u2011scale miners:<\/strong> time your rigs to off\u2011peak hours, hook into local demand response where available, and if you\u2019ve got excess solar, set rules to mine only when you\u2019re exporting to the grid.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Builders and devs:<\/strong> add an \u201cenergy transparency\u201d section to your docs. A simple JSON with region, kWh, and emissions factor per validator or facility goes a long way.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Community leaders:<\/strong> compile best practices and templates for PPAs, curtailment reporting, and heat\u2011reuse partnerships. Make it easy for the next operator to copy success.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>One more thing\u2014people keep asking me the big question: is crypto mining \u201cbad,\u201d or just misunderstood? I\u2019ve got a straight answer and a few surprises. Ready for the rapid\u2011fire FAQs next?<\/p>\n<h2>FAQs and final takeaways<br \/>\n<img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"aligncenter size-full wp-image-5339\" src=\"https:\/\/cryptolinks.com\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/Cryptocurrency-Mining-How-Proof-Of-Work-POW-Defined-How-We-Utilize-Cryptocurrencies-and-Blockchain-Based-Payments-1.jpg\" alt=\"Cryptocurrency Mining How Proof-Of-Work (POW) Defined How We Utilize Cryptocurrencies and Blockchain-Based Payments\" width=\"1000\" height=\"674\" srcset=\"https:\/\/cryptolinks.com\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/Cryptocurrency-Mining-How-Proof-Of-Work-POW-Defined-How-We-Utilize-Cryptocurrencies-and-Blockchain-Based-Payments-1.jpg 1000w, https:\/\/cryptolinks.com\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/Cryptocurrency-Mining-How-Proof-Of-Work-POW-Defined-How-We-Utilize-Cryptocurrencies-and-Blockchain-Based-Payments-1-300x202.jpg 300w, https:\/\/cryptolinks.com\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/Cryptocurrency-Mining-How-Proof-Of-Work-POW-Defined-How-We-Utilize-Cryptocurrencies-and-Blockchain-Based-Payments-1-768x518.jpg 768w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 1000px) 100vw, 1000px\" \/><\/h2>\n<p>I get these questions a lot. Here are straight answers, with real examples and sources you can check yourself.<\/p>\n<h3>Is crypto mining bad for the environment?<\/h3>\n<p>It can be\u2014especially on fossil\u2011heavy grids or in regions where mining crowds out cleaner uses of power. But it\u2019s not one story. The actual impact depends on how miners source electricity and how they operate.<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Bad case:<\/strong> Mining on coal\u2011heavy grids raises emissions fast. Same hardware, worse carbon per kWh.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Better case:<\/strong> Miners that plug into hydro, wind, solar, or curtailed power cut emissions a lot. Example: In Texas, large miners participate in ERCOT\u2019s <a href=\"https:\/\/www.ercot.com\/programs\/load\/controllable_load_resources\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener nofollow\">Controllable Load Resources<\/a> program\u2014powering down during peak demand to stabilize the grid. In August 2023, Riot reported significant curtailment and power credits during a brutal heat wave, easing stress on the system and avoiding dirtier peaker plants .<\/li>\n<li><strong>Smart reuse:<\/strong> Waste heat can replace boiler fuel. A well\u2011known example is North Vancouver\u2019s plan to use heat from Bitcoin mining for district heating. That turns a \u201cwaste\u201d into a product.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Stranded energy:<\/strong> Some miners turn otherwise flared gas into electricity on\u2011site. Preventing methane venting matters because methane is a potent greenhouse gas. Companies like <a href=\"https:\/\/www.crusoeenergy.com\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener nofollow\">Crusoe<\/a> build data centers on oilfields to do this.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<blockquote><p><strong>Bottom line:<\/strong> Mining can hurt or help depending on siting and operations. If it runs on dirty, inflexible power, the footprint is worse. If it soaks up clean or wasted energy and supports the grid, it can reduce emissions at the margin.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<h3>Does crypto use renewable energy?<\/h3>\n<p>Yes\u2014some of it. The share varies a lot by region and season, and claims often outpace verification.<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>What we know:<\/strong> Independent trackers like Cambridge\u2019s Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index show location matters and that estimates vary because miners move and power contracts differ (<a href=\"https:\/\/ccaf.io\/cbeci\/index\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener nofollow\">CBECI<\/a>).<\/li>\n<li><strong>How to trust a claim:<\/strong> Look for contracts you can verify (PPAs), on\u2011site meters, and third\u2011party audits. Bonus points for hourly\/real\u2011time matching via granular certificates (see <a href=\"https:\/\/energytag.org\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener nofollow\">EnergyTag<\/a>) instead of annual averages.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Timing matters:<\/strong> Running mainly when wind\/solar are strong and curtailment is high is cleaner than 24\/7 baseload on a mixed grid. Flexible miners that ramp down during peaks help avoid fossil peakers.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>When you see a \u201cwe\u2019re 100% green\u201d headline, ask: <em>Where? When? Who verified it?<\/em><\/p>\n<h3>Can PoS really solve the energy problem?<\/h3>\n<p>For energy use, yes\u2014by orders of magnitude. Proof\u2011of\u2011Stake cuts electricity to a rounding error compared to Proof\u2011of\u2011Work.<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Case in point:<\/strong> After the Merge, Ethereum\u2019s electricity use fell by roughly 99.95% according to the project\u2019s own analysis (<a href=\"https:\/\/ethereum.org\/en\/energy-consumption\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener nofollow\">Ethereum.org<\/a>) and third\u2011party assessments such as CCRI\u2019s report (<a href=\"https:\/\/ccri.io\/reports\/Ethereum-The-Merge.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener nofollow\">CCRI<\/a>).<\/li>\n<li><strong>New focus:<\/strong> The main questions shift from energy to decentralization, validator concentration, and governance. Those are real debates, but they\u2019re not about megawatts.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<blockquote><p><strong>Short answer:<\/strong> If your priority is slashing electricity, PoS does the job. Then you evaluate the network on security and openness.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<h3>The short version I tell friends<\/h3>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Energy isn\u2019t the same as emissions.<\/strong> What matters is <em>when<\/em> and <em>where<\/em> miners pull power.<\/li>\n<li><strong>PoW can be cleaner<\/strong> when it\u2019s flexible, uses verified low\u2011carbon power, and reuses heat or tackles methane that would have been vented or poorly flared.<\/li>\n<li><strong>PoS slashes energy use<\/strong> and shifts the conversation to decentralization and credible neutrality.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Trust data, not slogans.<\/strong> Ask for location, grid mix, curtailment behavior, and third\u2011party verification. Cambridge\u2019s tracker is a good reality check: <a href=\"https:\/\/ccaf.io\/cbeci\/index\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener nofollow\">ccaf.io\/cbeci<\/a>.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>If you care about open networks <em>and<\/em> the planet, the path is clear: back projects with verified clean power, reward transparency, and choose tech that respects both security and the air we breathe. I\u2019ll keep pointing you to the builders who do this right\u2014and calling out the ones who don\u2019t.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Confused about cryptocurrency mining\u2019s environmental impact? I cut the noise with facts on Bitcoin energy, carbon, grid mix, and steps to cut emissions.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":5775,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-5774","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/cryptolinks.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5774","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/cryptolinks.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/cryptolinks.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cryptolinks.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cryptolinks.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=5774"}],"version-history":[{"count":6,"href":"https:\/\/cryptolinks.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5774\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":5787,"href":"https:\/\/cryptolinks.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5774\/revisions\/5787"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cryptolinks.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/5775"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/cryptolinks.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5774"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cryptolinks.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5774"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cryptolinks.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5774"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}