- Stronghold Digital Mining’s “environmentally beneficial” claims are undermined by increased air pollution, heavy metal emissions, and contamination of groundwater in the process of burning waste coal for Bitcoin mining.
- Proof of work (PoW) mining methods, like those used by Bitcoin, consume massive amounts of electricity and contribute to climate change.
- Alternative consensus mechanisms, such as Ethereum’s proof of stake (PoS), use 99% less electricity and avoid reliance on dirty fossil fuel power sources.
As the world embraces digital currencies like Bitcoin, an often overlooked aspect has significant consequences: the environmental and health impact of its mining process. Using a method called “proof of work” (PoW), Bitcoin mining operations are causing pollution, consuming massive amounts of electricity, and negatively affecting local communities. Recent reports by the Environmental Working Group aim to bring these issues to light through a case study of Stronghold Digital Mining.
Stronghold Digital Mining: A Double-Edged Sword
Stronghold Digital Mining has set up two Bitcoin mining operations in Pennsylvania, claiming that their energy-intensive process is an “environmentally beneficial” way to remediate the impacts of 19th and 20th-century coal mining in environmentally neglected regions of the United States. The company claims to be more of a coal refuse reclamation company than a Bitcoin miner, asserting that its operations save communities living near coal prohibit from further environmental harm and clean up dangerous coal refuse piles.
While their intentions may seem noble, the reality is far from it. Stronghold burns waste coal, which is more inefficient and more pollution-intensive than burning commercially marketed coal. In 2022, the company combusted about 1 million tons of waste coal and returned nearly 700,000 tons of coal ash to waste coal sites.
Turning Ground Pollution into Air Pollution
Stronghold’s process involves burning waste coal and producing coal ash, which contains heavy metals and toxic substances. When coal ash is spread over the ground for “beneficial use,” these pollutants are washed into nearby streams and rivers, contaminating groundwater throughout the watershed.
Moreover, burning waste coal contributes to climate change by increasing carbon emissions and heavy metals, acid gases, and toxic air emissions. In 2022, Environmental Protection Agency monitoring data revealed that Stronghold’s Bitcoin mining activity increased sulfur dioxide emissions by 351 percent, nitrogen oxides by 1,224 percent, and released over 1.4 million tons of carbon dioxide compared to 2020 levels.
The Alternatives: Moving Away from Proof of Work
The negative environmental impacts of Bitcoin mining are not inevitable. Alternative consensus mechanisms, like Ethereum’s “proof of stake” (PoS), use 99 percent less electricity than PoW and avoid the need for dirty fossil fuel power. As Rob Altenburg, Director of PennFuture Energy Center, suggests, there is no unique feature that Bitcoin offers, aside from name recognition and a highly inflated market cap, that other coins don’t do and probably do better.
Unfortunately, communities have few options to force Bitcoin miners to change their ways. But environmental advocates like PennFuture and others are leading the charge against Bitcoin operations due to their reliance on dirty fossil fuel power sources.
Federal agencies and legislators are considering initiatives to identify less harmful approaches that retain the potential benefits of blockchain technology. Alternative consensus mechanisms like PoS, or other innovative solutions, can help make digital currencies more efficient and environmentally friendly. Consumers and investors must also demand transparency and responsibility from cryptocurrency mining companies, prioritizing those genuinely committed to reducing their environmental footprint.
