Daniel Batten Slams The New York Times Over “Flawed” Bitcoin Mining Report

Bitcoin advocate Daniel Batten has once again called out The New York Times (NYT), accusing the publication of promoting “junk science” to fuel its anti-Bitcoin agenda. In a recent social media post, Batten remarked, “Well, the Bitcoin maxis were right (again),” in response to what he described as the newspaper’s flawed portrayal of Bitcoin mining and its environmental impact.

The NYT article in question criticized Bitcoin mining for its high energy consumption. However, Batten argues that the analysis relied on a deeply flawed methodology—specifically, the use of marginal emission calculations. This approach estimates the additional emissions generated from consuming one extra unit of electricity. While it might seem accurate on the surface, a recent peer-reviewed study published in Nature Climate Change revealed that such a method can overstate actual emissions since energy systems constantly adjust based on supply and demand.

The study used rooftop solar energy as an example, showing that emission savings can appear smaller than expected because solar energy often displaces other renewable sources before replacing fossil fuels. In the context of Bitcoin mining, this means that applying marginal emissions can create a misleading picture—overemphasizing carbon impact while ignoring the sector’s growing integration with clean and renewable energy sources.

Batten’s critique highlights the ongoing debate surrounding Bitcoin’s environmental footprint. He and other advocates continue to push back against media narratives that paint the cryptocurrency industry as environmentally destructive. With growing investments in sustainable mining solutions and renewable energy adoption, the Bitcoin ecosystem aims to demonstrate that innovation and sustainability can coexist.