We had AI read every mention of Bitcoin and energy in more than 7,000 academic papers, and found that most of the case they make against Bitcoin is second-hand, often completely uncited, and often includes errors.
What we found
- Fewer than one in ten negative claims about Bitcoin’s energy use rest on the authors’ own data.
- Papers make more negative claims with no source at all (3,324) than with a source and with their own data combined (2,390).
- Only 1.8% of borrowed claims come with any sign of doubt. The other 98% are repeated as if settled.
- About one copied number in eight is wrong.
- Papers have compared Bitcoin’s energy use with 69 different countries - 40 in 2022 alone.
