According to a new preprint by researchers at the Open Universiteit, University of California Berkley, and Radboud University, the vast majority of the literature on the energy use of blockchain networks, both from academic and everyday sources, “lacks the scientific rigor expected from a mature scientific field.” The report analyzed 128 scientific and open source studies related to carbon emissions from blockchain networks like Bitcoin.
The researchers then discovered that a staggering 34% of studies did not even have an explicit research design. In the meantime, 43% of studies did not share data, while 67% did not share source code. Lastly, in 79% of the studies did not discuss the reliability of external data.
The researchers discovered in their analysis several notable fallacies in the studies. First of all, studies on the power consumption of blockchain networks often cite data and derive their conclusions from the Cambridge Bitcoin Power Consumption Index. However, the source explicitly states that it only captures between 32% and 37% of all the computing power of the network.
Second, the validity of the electricity costs used in these studies is questioned. The researchers found that a significant portion of the studies did not make “clear” assumptions about the cost of electricity usage in cryptocurrency mining. In addition, there is considerable opacity within the studies as to their choice of the efficiency of electricity use.
Lastly, the researchers noted the validity of claims about the carbon emissions of blockchain networks. In several studies, they found that early researchers simply extrapolated carbon emissions data, without empirical evidence, from 2014 and applied to 2014, 2019 to 2021, 2015 to 2020, and so on.
The report called for a debate on the reliability of models that assess the environmental impact of blockchain networks. The cryptocurrency community remains highly divided when it comes to assessing the carbon footprint of networks. Some, like the mayor of Miami, Francis Suárez, affirm that 90% of Bitcoin mining energy comes from dirty energy. Others claim that the network represents less than 0.08% of global carbon dioxide production.
Clarification: The information and/or opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily represent the views or editorial line of Cointelegraph. The information set forth herein should not be taken as financial advice or investment recommendation. All investment and commercial movement involve risks and it is the responsibility of each person to do their due research before making an investment decision.
Keep reading:
Investments in crypto assets are not regulated. They may not be suitable for retail investors and the full amount invested may be lost. The services or products offered are not aimed at or accessible to investors in Spain.