Bitcoin’s network drew approximately 138 TWh of electricity, with 52.4% of that load powered by sustainable sources, according to Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance researchers in the April 2025 industry report. The cryptocurrency mining sector sits at the center of an energy debate centered on how much of the load now comes from low-carbon generation and how fast that ratio is climbing, given that Bitcoin’s annual consumption is about 0.5% of global electricity.
The headline numbers diverge by methodology. Digiconomist’s Bitcoin Energy Consumption Index puts the live network at 204.44 TWh, with annual emissions equivalent to the carbon footprint of the Czech Republic. International Energy Agency analysts expect cryptocurrency electricity consumption to reach around 160 TWh by 2026, more than 40% above 2022 levels. The three indices apply different assumptions to the same hashrate; readers searching for a single Bitcoin energy figure usually see one of them without understanding the divergence.
Key Takeaways
- Bitcoin mining drew approximately 138 TWh of electricity, representing approximately 0.54% of global electricity consumption.
- Sustainable energy sources powered 52.4% of Bitcoin mining, up from a 2022 estimate of 37.6%.
- Natural gas accounted for 38.2% of the mining energy mix, replacing coal (now 8.9%, down from 36.6% in 2022) as the single largest source.
- The U.S. operated 75.4% of reported Bitcoin mining activity by hashrate, cementing its position as the largest mining hub since China’s 2021 ban.
- Mining firms reported electricity expenses accounting for more than 80% of their cash operational costs, with the median electricity rate sitting at $45/MWh.
- Bitcoin’s global network hashrate reached 894.5 EH/s in February 2026, with a fleet-weighted efficiency of 28 J/TH.
- Bitcoin mining produced approximately 39.8 MtCO2e in attributable greenhouse-gas emissions, or about 0.08% of global annual emissions.
Editor’s Choice
- 138 TWh: Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance estimate of annual Bitcoin electricity consumption, based on a survey representing 48% of the network.
- 204.44 TWh: Digiconomist live snapshot of Bitcoin network electricity use, higher than CCAF because of methodology differences.
- 160 TWh by 2026: IEA base-case forecast for total cryptocurrency electricity consumption.
- 10,275 MW: Maximum identified U.S. cryptocurrency mining capacity across 101 measured facilities, per the EIA.
- 245,199: Bitcoin mining rigs deployed by CleanSpark as of December 31, 2025, with a peak fleet efficiency of 16.07 J/TH.
- 2,910 MW: Grid-connected power secured by IREN across U.S. and Canadian sites, all powered by 100% renewable energy through RECs.
Recent Developments
- April 2025: CCAF researchers published the Cambridge Digital Mining Industry Report, surveying 49 mining firms across 23 countries and nearly 48% of the global Bitcoin network.
- March 2026: MARA Holdings filed its FY2025 Form 10-K, reporting 490,000 mining rigs and an energized hashrate of approximately 66.4 EH/s as of December 31, 2025.
- February 2026: Hashrate Index recorded the Bitcoin network’s average hashrate at 894.5 EH/s (or 894,500,000 TH/s) with a global weighted-average efficiency of 28 J/TH.
- January 2026: CleanSpark reported producing 7,746 BTC in calendar year 2025 and operating a deployed fleet of 245,199 miners at year-end.
- August 2025: IREN reported full-year FY25 revenue of $501.0 million (a 168% year-over-year increase) and Bitcoin mining capacity of 50 EH/s (up 400%).
Global Cryptocurrency Mining Electricity Consumption
Three primary indices report Bitcoin’s electricity consumption, and they do not agree. Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance researchers estimate Bitcoin mining at approximately 138 TWh annually, a year-over-year increase of 17% and about 0.54% of global electricity consumption. Digiconomist’s Bitcoin Energy Consumption Index reports the live network at 204.44 TWh, comparable to the power consumption of Thailand. The IEA set 2022 crypto electricity use at about 110 TWh, projecting an increase to around 160 TWh by 2026.
| Source | Estimate | Year | Methodology |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance | 138 TWh | 2024 | Bottom-up survey, 49 firms, 48% of hashrate |
| Digiconomist BECI | 204.44 TWh | Live (May 2026) | Profitability-based modeling |
| IEA Electricity 2024 | 160 TWh (2026 forecast) | Forecast | Base-case modeling for total crypto |
| EIA (US-only Bitcoin) | 25 to 91 TWh | 2023 | EIA estimate range |
Source: CCAF, Digiconomist, IEA, EIA.
Data centres consumed an estimated 460 TWh in 2022 and could reach more than 1,000 TWh by 2026, roughly equivalent to the electricity consumption of Japan. Cryptocurrency mining sits alongside AI workloads as a separate energy-intensive computing category in the IEA’s framing; Bitcoin’s share of total electricity growth is large in absolute terms but small relative to the broader data-centre and AI load that is expanding even faster.
How much energy does Bitcoin mining use?
Estimates range from 138 TWh (Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance survey) to 204.44 TWh (Digiconomist live snapshot), with the IEA forecasting global cryptocurrency demand at 160 TWh by 2026. The spread reflects three different methodologies, bottom-up firm surveys, live profitability modeling, and base-case forecasting, applied to the same underlying network hash rate, so any single figure depends on which method matches the reader’s question.
Bitcoin Mining Renewable Energy Share
Sustainable energy sources accounted for 52.4% of Bitcoin mining’s electricity mix, comprising 9.8% nuclear and 42.6% renewables such as hydropower and wind, compared to a 2022 estimate of 37.6% overall sustainable energy use. Bitcoin mining statistics show miners shifting toward gas, hydro, and nuclear.
| Source category | 2024 share | 2022 share | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sustainable (total) | 52.4% | 37.6% | +14.8 pp |
| Renewables (hydropower and wind) | 42.6% | n/d | N/A |
| Nuclear | 9.8% | n/d | N/A |
| Natural gas | 38.2% | 25.0% | +13.2 pp |
| Coal | 8.9% | 36.6% | −27.7 pp |
| Oil | 0.5% | n/d | N/A |
Source: Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance, Cambridge Digital Mining Industry Report, April 2025.
By the numbers: Per the Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance, Bitcoin mining’s sustainable energy share climbed from 37.6% in 2022 to 52.4% in the latest survey, driven by nuclear at 9.8% and a coal-to-gas transition that saw coal fall from 36.6% to 8.9% in the same window across 23 surveyed countries.
What percentage of Bitcoin mining uses renewable energy?
Sustainable energy sources powered 52.4% of Bitcoin mining, with renewables such as hydropower and wind at 42.6% and nuclear at 9.8%, compared to a 2022 estimate of 37.6% overall, per the CCAF report. Nuclear contributed the smaller share of the sustainable mix, while hydropower-heavy renewables made up the remainder across the surveyed fleet.
Bitcoin Mining Energy Mix by Source
Natural gas at 38.2% (up from 25.0% in 2022) has replaced coal (now 8.9%, down from 36.6% in 2022) as the single largest energy source used in Bitcoin mining. The coal-to-gas swap is the dominant policy story buried inside the sustainable-mix headline; miners did not switch to wind and solar in two years; they switched to gas, with renewables and nuclear absorbing the remainder. Oil contributes 0.5% of the mix, a negligible share that primarily reflects flare-gas operations at remote sites.
- Natural gas: 38.2%, the single largest source
- Renewables (hydropower and wind): 42.6%
- Nuclear: 9.8%
- Coal: 8.9%
- Oil: 0.5%
The implications for blockchain energy trading markets are significant: a gas-heavy mining fleet runs on a fuel whose carbon intensity is roughly half that of coal, but it remains exposed to fossil-fuel price volatility and to upstream methane-emission scrutiny that nuclear and renewables do not face.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Cryptocurrency Mining
Bitcoin mining produced approximately 39.8 MtCO2e in attributable greenhouse-gas emissions, representing about 0.08% of global annual GHG emissions. That figure comes from the CCAF survey’s energy mix applied to the 138 TWh consumption estimate. Digiconomist reports a single Bitcoin transaction’s footprint at 483.50 kgCO2, equivalent to 1,071,605 VISA transactions or 80,583 hours of YouTube viewing.
| Metric | Value | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Total annual GHG emissions | 39.8 MtCO2e | CCAF 2024 survey |
| Share of global annual GHG | 0.08% | CCAF 2024 survey |
| Per-transaction CO2 | 483.50 kgCO2 | Digiconomist (live) |
| Per-transaction VISA equivalent | 1,071,605 transactions | Digiconomist (live) |
| Per-transaction water | 13,662 liters | Digiconomist (live) |
Source: Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance, Digiconomist.
How much CO2 does cryptocurrency mining emit?
Bitcoin mining emitted approximately 39.8 MtCO2e according to the Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance, equal to about 0.08% of global annual greenhouse-gas emissions. Digiconomist estimates 483.50 kgCO2 per Bitcoin transaction, with annual electrical-energy consumption of 204.44 TWh producing emissions comparable to the carbon footprint of the Czech Republic.
U.S. Cryptocurrency Mining Electricity Footprint
The U.S. Energy Information Administration estimated annual electricity use from cryptocurrency mining at 0.6% to 2.3% of U.S. electricity consumption, or 25 TWh to 91 TWh in 2023. The EIA identified 137 mining facilities to date, with maximum electricity use at 101 of those facilities estimated at 10,275 MW, representing a share of 2.3% of the average annual U.S. power demand of about 450,000 MW.
- Estimated U.S. crypto mining share: 0.6% to 2.3% of national electricity consumption
- Identified U.S. mining facilities: 137, located across 21 states
- Maximum capacity at 101 measured sites: 10,275 MW
- Comparison to total U.S. electricity demand 2023: 3,900 TWh
- Equivalent household demand: more than three million to more than six million homes
| Metric | Value |
|---|---|
| US mining facilities identified | 137 |
| Facilities with capacity data | 52 |
| Facilities with electricity-use data | 101 |
| Maximum measured capacity | 10,275 MW |
| Estimated US crypto share of national power | 0.6% to 2.3% |
| Estimated annual US crypto mining electricity | 25 to 91 TWh |
Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, “Tracking electricity consumption from U.S. cryptocurrency mining operations,” February 2024.
Geographic Distribution of Bitcoin Mining
The U.S. operated approximately 75.4% of reported Bitcoin mining activity, by hashrate, per the Cambridge survey. Within the U.S., the EIA found most mining facilities clustered in Texas, Georgia, and New York, with Texas leading because of the state’s ERCOT-managed grid, abundant flare-gas, and ability to absorb interruptible loads. The post-China-ban concentration in North American jurisdictions has now persisted for four years, and recent Cambridge survey data points to it deepening rather than diffusing.
- U.S. share of reported Bitcoin mining: 75.4%
- Survey jurisdictions: 23 countries, with mining firms headquartered in 16 jurisdictions
- U.S. state concentration: Texas, Georgia, and New York lead with the most identified facilities
- EIA-identified U.S. facilities are spread across 21 states
Key finding: Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance: With 75.4% of reported Bitcoin mining concentrated in the United States and the EIA tallying up to 2.3% of national power demand consumed by 137 crypto facilities, U.S. policy on miner load-management, not global average energy mix, will determine where Bitcoin’s footprint sits over the next regulatory cycle.
ASIC Efficiency and Hardware Improvements
As of February 2026, the Bitcoin network’s average hashrate was 894.5 EH/s, or 894,500,000 terahashes per second, with a global weighted-average efficiency of 28 joules per terahash (J/TH). Hardware efficiency has improved by roughly an order of magnitude over the past two ASIC generations. The top Bitcoin miners in 2026 target ratings under 15 J/TH, whereas the S19 series ran at 21 to 30 J/TH. The U3S23H posts a hashrate of 1,160 TH/s with an efficiency of 9.5 J/TH, consuming around 11,020 watts, while the S21 XP Hydro hits 473 TH/s at 12 J/TH and 5,676 watts.
| Rig model | Hashrate | Efficiency | Power |
|---|---|---|---|
| Antminer U3S23H | 1,160 TH/s | 9.5 J/TH | 11,020 W |
| Antminer S21 XP Hydro | 473 TH/s | 12 J/TH | 5,676 W |
| Network fleet weighted average (Feb 2026) | N/A | 28 J/TH | N/A |
| Antminer S19 series | 96-100 TH/s | 21, 30 J/TH | 2,200-3,250 W |
Source: Hashrate Index, February 2026 ASIC efficiency report.
How efficient are modern Bitcoin miners?
Bitcoin’s network fleet-weighted average efficiency is 28 J/TH as of February 2026, but the 2026 frontier rigs operate below 15 J/TH. CleanSpark reported a peak deployed-fleet efficiency of 16.07 J/TH at year-end 2025, deployed across 245,199 miners.
Bitcoin Mining Economics and Electricity Cost
Mining firms reported a median electricity cost of $45/MWh and an all-in cost of $55.5/MWh, with electricity constituting more than 80% of their cash-based operational costs. Electricity is the dominant economic input; every cent per kilowatt-hour translates into millions of dollars per year for utility-scale operations. Operating costs, especially for electricity, have become the primary concern for miners, with energy expenses accounting for roughly 80% of total operational costs.
- Median reported electricity rate: $45/MWh
- Median all-in cost (electricity plus opex): $55.5/MWh
- Electricity share of cash opex: more than 80%
Public Miner Energy Strategies
- MARA Holdings operated approximately 490,000 mining rigs globally as of December 31, 2025, with an energized hashrate of approximately 66.4 EH/s and 8,799 bitcoin mined during the year, generating $907 million of revenue, anchored by cloud-mining operations and a Granbury, Texas immersion-cooled site. MARA’s Granbury site supports approximately 300 megawatts of total capacity and is one of the largest containerized liquid immersion-cooled sites worldwide.
- IREN operates on 100% renewable energy through the purchase of RECs across 2,910 MW of grid-connected power, reporting full-year FY25 revenue of $501.0 million (a 168% year-over-year increase) and a Bitcoin mining capacity of 50 EH/s (up 400%).
- CleanSpark deployed 245,199 miners across a power portfolio of more than 1.4 GW under contract, with 808 MW utilized and a calendar-year production of 7,746 bitcoin at a peak fleet efficiency of 16.07 J/TH.
| Miner | FY revenue | Hashrate | BTC mined | Power strategy |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MARA Holdings (FY2025) | $907 million | 66.4 EH/s | 8,799 | Natural gas + Texas immersion |
| IREN (FY25) | $501.0 million | 50 EH/s | n/d | 100% renewable (BC hydro + Texas) |
| CleanSpark (CY2025) | n/d | 50.0 EH/s | 7,746 | Diversified US power portfolio |
Source: MARA Holdings Form 10-K, IREN FY25 results, CleanSpark December 2025 mining update.
The takeaway: The three largest North American public miners run on different power strategies: MARA leans into natural gas with 300 MW Texas immersion sites, IREN built on 100% renewable hydropower in British Columbia, and CleanSpark squeezed fleet efficiency to 16.07 J/TH across 245,199 miners. No single strategy dominates the public-miner playbook, which means the industry-average sustainable share masks wide variance at the firm level.
Ethereum and the Proof-of-Stake Transition
Ethereum, the second-largest cryptocurrency by market cap, reduced its electricity demand by an amazing 99% in 2022 by changing its mining mechanism. The Ethereum Merge in September 2022 reduced Proof of Work consumption to negligible levels for that network. Bitcoin is estimated to have consumed 120 TWh by 2023, contributing to a total cryptocurrency electricity demand of 130 TWh, meaning Bitcoin alone accounted for roughly 92% of the post-Merge crypto sector’s electricity use.
- Ethereum’s post-Merge electricity reduction: 99%
- Bitcoin 2023 electricity estimate: 120 TWh
- Total cryptocurrency electricity 2023: 130 TWh
Readers comparing SEC crypto enforcement data on energy disclosures will find that the proof-of-work / proof-of-stake distinction now dominates regulatory framing; proof-of-stake networks face fewer energy-disclosure obligations because their electricity intensity is roughly four orders of magnitude lower per transaction.
E-Waste and Water Footprint of Bitcoin Mining
The carbon footprint is the most-discussed externality, but Bitcoin mining also generates significant electronic waste and water usage at cooling and power-generation sites. Digiconomist’s live index reports annual electronic waste at 21.51 kt, comparable to the small IT equipment waste of the Netherlands, and freshwater consumption at 3,222 GL, comparable to the total water use of Switzerland. Per-transaction footprints are also high: 91.20 grams of electronic waste (the weight of 0.56 iPhones 12) and 13,662 liters of fresh water (the volume of a backyard swimming pool).
- Annual e-waste: 21.51 kt
- Annual fresh water consumption: 3,222 GL
- Per-transaction electrical energy: 866.86 kWh
- Per-transaction e-waste: 91.20 grams
- Per-transaction fresh water: 13,662 liters
| Externality | Annual total | Per Bitcoin transaction |
|---|---|---|
| Electrical energy | 204.44 TWh | 866.86 kWh |
| Carbon footprint | Czech Republic equivalent | 483.50 kgCO2 |
| Electronic waste | 21.51 kt | 91.20 grams |
| Fresh water | 3,222 GL | 13,662 liters |
Source: Digiconomist Bitcoin Energy Consumption Index, live snapshot May 2026.
Methodology Differences Between CCAF and Digiconomist
- CCAF methodology: bottom-up survey of 49 digital mining firms representing nearly 48% of the implied Bitcoin network hashrate
- Digiconomist methodology: profitability-based modeling that back-solves total network electricity consumption from miner revenue economics, which generally produces a higher figure than CCAF’s bottom-up survey.
CCAF’s 138 TWh estimate and Digiconomist’s 204.44 TWh figure generate the most-asked-about discrepancy in Bitcoin energy reporting. CCAF runs a bottom-up survey of mining firms; Digiconomist back-solves from miner revenue.
Choosing between the two depends on the question being asked. CCAF gives you the most defensible bottom-up figure with named respondents in 23 countries. Digiconomist captures the live network’s economic state and surfaces moments when miner revenue spikes pull more energy onto the grid before efficiency catches up. Both are valid; neither is the “real” number.
Common Questions
Is cryptocurrency mining sustainable?
Sustainable energy sources powered 52.4% of Bitcoin mining, up from 37.6% in 2022, so more than half of the sector now runs on low-carbon generation. The IEA still forecasts cryptocurrency electricity demand rising to around 160 TWh by 2026, meaning absolute consumption is climbing even as the renewable share grows. Whether that counts as sustainable depends on whether the framework prioritizes intensity (improving) or absolute load (still rising).
Why does Bitcoin mining use so much electricity?
Bitcoin’s proof-of-work consensus mechanism requires miners to run specialized ASIC chips solving cryptographic puzzles around the clock. Ethereum reduced its electricity demand by 99% in 2022 by changing its mining mechanism, which demonstrates the gap is mechanism-driven rather than blockchain-inherent. The network hashrate reached 894.5 EH/s as of February 2026. Every additional petahash of competing hashrate adds incremental electricity demand under proof-of-work, a feature of the Nakamoto consensus, not a bug.
Conclusion
Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance’s 138 TWh estimate covers approximately 0.54% of global electricity, with 75.4% concentrated in the U.S., and 52.4% of that load now powered by sustainable sources, up from 37.6% in 2022. The coal-to-gas swap drove the sustainable-share jump; miners swapped coal contracts for gas and added nuclear and hydropower allocations as electricity markets repriced.
The trajectory from here will be set by three forces: the IEA’s projection that cryptocurrency electricity demand will reach around 160 TWh by 2026, the 2.3% upper bound the EIA placed on U.S. national power consumption from mining, and the 28 J/TH fleet-weighted efficiency that frontier 2026 rigs are already cutting in half. Across cryptocurrency security data, electricity-mix variance at the firm level (MARA gas vs IREN hydro vs CleanSpark efficiency) matters more than the global headline percentage.
