The New York Times (NYT) recently published an article exploring the energy usage and carbon emissions due to Bitcoin mining. The story caused controversy as supporters of the crypto industry argued that it contained falsehoods and that the methodology used was inadequate. Pierre Rochard, VP of Riot Platforms, a crypto mining company, noted that the piece utilized "fictitious fractional-reserve carbon accounting" and accused the NYT of fabricating data.

The NYT determined the story's information by performing a "market-based simulation" which analyzed 34 large-scale mining operations and their power use. It also commissioned studies to better estimate the impact of the increasing demand for Bitcoin mining. Although the NYT acknowledged concerns of the methodology from crypto companies, they used WattTime- a non-profit tech company- as a source to estimate emissions. Riot Platforms was mentioned in the piece, citing their mining operation in Rockdale, Texas is using substantial amounts of power.

The reaction to the article has been largely negative in the crypto space with those in the industry questioning the accuracy of the reporting. Critiques include Brian Armstrong, Jesse Powell, Zooko Wilcox and Edward Snowden who all slammed an earlier NYT puff piece on Sam Bankman-Fried.

It's not just the NYT drawing the ire of the crypto community as rumors of Interpol issuing a red notice for Binance CEO Changpeng Zhao led to a drop in Bitcoin. Zhao responded to quash the FUD (fear, uncertainty, doubt) and urged people to be careful of their sources.

As the US becomes a prominent player in the crypto mining industry, implications from such articles are of importance to those invested in the space. The call for accuracy and transparency in the reporting of Bitcoin mining is rising. A clear understanding of the context of the entire industry is necessary to properly illuminate news stories. The crypto space is welcome to evidence-based journalism, as long as it is accurate.



Other News from Today