The electricity mix of Bitcoin (BTC) has drastically changed over the past few years, with nuclear energy and natural gas becoming the fastest growing energy sources powering Bitcoin mining, according to new data.
The Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance (CCAF) on Tuesday released a major update to its Bitcoin mining-dedicated data source, the Cambridge Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index (CBECI).
According to the data from Cambridge, fossil fuels like coal and natural gas made up almost two-thirds of Bitcoin’s total electricity mix as of January 2022, accounting for more than 62%. As such, the share of sustainable energy sources in the BTC energy mix amounted to 38%.
The new study suggests that coal alone accounted for nearly 37% of Bitcoin’s total electricity consumption as of early 2022, becoming the largest single energy source for BTC mining. Among sustainable energy sources, hydropower was found to be the largest resource, with a share of roughly 15%.
Despite Bitcoin mining significantly relying on coal and hydropower, the shares of these energy sources in the total BTC energy mix have been dropping over the past several years. In 2020, coal power powered 40% of global BTC mining. Hydropower’s share has more than halved from 2020 to 2021, tumbling from 34% to 15%.
Bitcoin mining electricity mix from 2019 to 2022. Source: CCAF
In contrast, the role of natural gas and nuclear energy in Bitcoin mining has been notably growing over the past two years. The share of gas in the BTC electricity mix surged from about 13% in 2020 to 23% in 2021, while the percentage of nuclear energy increased from 4% in 2021 to nearly 9% in 2022.
According to Cambridge analysts, Chinese miner relocations were a major reason behind sharp fluctuations in Bitcoin’s energy mix in 2020 and 2021.
China’s crackdown on crypto in 2021 and the associated miner migration resulted in a major drop in the share of hydroelectric power in the BTC energy mix. As previously reported, Chinese authorities shut down a number of crypto mining farms powered by hydroelectricity in 2021.
“The Chinese government’s ban on cryptocurrency mining and the resulting shift in Bitcoin mining activity to other countries negatively impacted Bitcoin’s environmental footprint,” the study suggested.
The analysts also emphasized that the BTC electricity mix hugely varies depending on the region. Countries like Kazakhstan still rely heavily on fossil fuels, while in countries like Sweden, the share of sustainable energy sources in electricity generation is about 98%.
The surge of nuclear and gas energy in Bitcoin’s electricity mix allegedly reflects the “shift of mining power towards the United States,” the analysts stated.
According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, most of the nation’s electricity was generated by natural gas, which accounted for more than 38% of the country’s total electricity production. Coal and nuclear energy accounted for 22% and 19%, respectively.
Among other insights related to the latest CBECI update, the study also found that greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with BTC mining accounted for 48 million metri tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MtCO2e) as of Sept. 21, 2022.
That is 14% lower than the estimated GHG emissions in 2021. According to the study’s estimates, the current GHG emissions levels related to Bitcoin represent roughly 0.1% of global GHG emissions.
Combining all the previously mentioned findings, the index estimates that by mid-September, about 199.6 MtCO2e can be attributed to the Bitcoin network since its inception. The analysts stressed that about 92% of all emissions have occurred since 2018.
Total greenhouse emissions related to Bitcoin as of mid-September 2022. Source: CCAF
As previously reported, the CCAF has been working on CBECI as part of its multi-year research initiative known as the Cambridge Digital Assets Programme (CDAP). The CDAP’s institutional collaborators include finance institutions like British International Investment, the Dubai International Finance Centre, Accenture, EY, Fidelity, Mastercard, Visa and others.
The new CDAP findings noticeably differ from data by the Bitcoin Mining Council (BMC), which in July estimated the share of sustainable sources in Bitcoin’s electricity mix at nearly 60%.
“It doesn’t include nuclear or fossil fuels so from that you can imply that around 30-40% of the industry is powered by fossil fuels,” Bitfarms chief mining officer Ben Gagnon told Cointelegraph in August.
According to CBECI project lead Alexander Neumueller, the CDAP’s approach is different from the Bitcoin Mining Council when it comes to estimating Bitcoin’s electricity mix.
“We use information from our mining map to see where Bitcoin miners are located, and then examine the country, state, or province’s electricity mix. As I understand it, the Bitcoin Mining Council asks its members to self-report this data in a survey,” Neumueller stated. He still mentioned that there are still a few nuances related to lack of data in the study.
The market is currently in a news-driven environment where the prices of cryptocurrencies have been determined by news agenda rather than fundamentals.
Bitfinex analysts have warned crypto investors to be cautious as bitcoin’s (BTC) recovery over the weekend is not a sign that its correction is over; the asset could witness more bloodshed in the near term.
In the latest Bitfinex Alpha report, experts deemed the market’s reaction this week critical, especially as supply alleviated over the weekend could return when traditional markets open.
“No Man’s Land”
Since Saturday, bitcoin has risen almost 10% from $57,600 to $63,000, closing last week in the green. The asset has surged above the 125-day range low of $60,200, which it broke through earlier this month after news of the German government’s massive BTC selling hit the market.
Market sentiment began to improve after reports that wallets linked to the German government were almost empty. However, the positive sentiment may not be sustained for long as the BTC the German authorities moved to trading desks and exchanges are yet to be sold.
While the supply from Germany appears to have been factored into bitcoin’s market price, Bitfinex analysts believe the end of selling pressure depends on how the involved trading desks execute their trades in the coming days.
Although the shift in sentiment underscores the market’s capacity to integrate new information and adjust expectations quickly, analysts think the market’s reaction over the first two trading days of the week cannot be overlooked for two reasons.
First, the low support level in the $60,200 range has now become a potential resistance line. Second, trading patterns over the past three months suggest that weekends are usually favorable for markets, especially on Saturdays when supply pressure seems to subside.
“We are now in no man’s land until we get clear resolution above or below this level,” the analysts said.
A News-Driven Environment
Besides the potential resistance level and three-month weekend trading pattern, the market is currently in a news-driven environment, where the prices of cryptocurrencies have been determined by news agendas rather than fundamentals.
Since selling pressure concerns are not yet completely obsolete due to upcoming Mt Gox creditor distributions, Bitfinex analysts expect such headlines to continue to have some impact on price movements. As such, the analysts urged investors to exercise caution in their trading strategies.
BlackRock’s IBIT led with $117.25 million in inflows on July 15, also being the most traded Bitcoin ETF.
The US spot Bitcoin ETFs recorded a daily net inflow of $301 million on July 15th. This extended their winning streak to seven consecutive days amidst a broader market recovery.
None of the ETFs recorded outflows for the day.
Bitcoin ETFs Rake in $16.11B in Net Inflows Since Jan
According to the data compiled by SoSoValue, BlackRock’s IBIT, the top spot Bitcoin ETF by net asset value, recorded the largest net inflows of the day at $117.25 million. IBIT was also the most actively traded Bitcoin ETF on Monday, with a volume of $1.24 billion. Ark Invest and 21Shares’ ARKB came in close behind with net inflows of $117.19 million.
Fidelity’s FBTC experienced net inflows of $36.15 million on Monday, while Bitwise’s BITB saw $15.24 million in inflows. VanEck’s HODL, Invesco and Galaxy Digital’s BTCO, and Franklin Templeton’s EZBC funds also recorded net inflows. Meanwhile, Grayscale’s GBTC and other ETFs, such as Valkyrie’s BRRR, WisdomTree’s BTCW, and Hashdex’s DEFI, registered no flows for the day.
A total of $2.26 billion was traded on Monday. The trading volume for these ETFs was less than in March when it exceeded $8 billion on some days. Meanwhile, these funds have collectively attracted $16.11 billion in net inflow since their January launch.
What’s Next For Bitcoin?
Earlier this month, bitcoin’s price decline was mainly due to fears of massive selling pressure from Mt. Gox and the German government’s BTC sales.
But the assassination attempt on pro-crypto former US President and presumptive Republican candidate Donald Trump at Saturday’s rally seemed to spark a recovery in the world’s largest digital asset, and experts are bullish on the asset’s price trajectory going forward. Bitcoin surged more than 9% over the past week and was currently trading slightly below $64,000.
Veteran trader Peter Brandt discussed bitcoin’s price outlook, suggesting a potential major rally. He referred to a pattern he terms “Hump->Slump->Bump->Dump->Pump” and highlighted that the July 5 double top attempt was a bear trap, confirmed by the July 13 close. He sees a likely continued upward trend but warned that a close below $56,000 would negate this bullish view.
“Bitcoin $BTC could be unfolding its often-repeated Hump…Slump…Bump…Dump…Pump chart construction. Jul 5 attempt at the double top was a bear trap, confirmed by Jul 13 close. Most likely scenario now is that bears are trapped. Close below $56k negates this interpretation”
PeckShield alert reveals LI.FI’s protocol vulnerability is similar to a March 2022 attack, with the same bug recurring.
The decentralized finance (DeFi) platform LI.FI protocol has suffered an exploit amounting to over $8 million.
Cyvers Alerts reported detecting suspicious transactions within the LI.FI cross-chain transaction aggregator.
LI.FI Issues Warning After $8 Million Exploit
LI.FI confirmed the breach in a statement on July 16 via X: “Please do not interact with any http://LI.FI powered applications for now! We’re investigating a potential exploit.” The team clarified that users who did not set infinite approval are not at risk, emphasizing that only those who manually set infinite approvals seem to be affected.
According to Cyvers Alerts, more than $8 million in user funds have been stolen, with the majority being stablecoins. According to on-chain data, the hacker’s wallet holds 1,715 Ether (ETH) valued at $5.8 million and USDC, USDT, and DAI stablecoins.
Cyvers Alerts advised users to revoke relevant authorizations immediately, noting that the attacker is actively converting USDC and USDT into ETH.
Crypto security firm Decurity provided insights into the exploit, stating that it involves the LI.FI bridge. “The root cause is a possibility of an arbitrary call with user-controlled data via depositToGasZipERC20() in GasZipFacet, which was deployed 5 days ago,” Decurity explained on X.
“In general, the risks behind routers, cross-chain swaps, etc. are about token approvals. Raw native assets like (unwrapped) ETH are safe from these kinds of hacks b/c they don’t have approvals as an option. Most users & wallets also no longer do “infinite approvals” which gives a smart contract total control on removing any amount of their tokens. It’s important to understand which tokens you’re approving to which contracts.
This dashboard looks for all transactions of a user that intersects Lifi. Not all of these transactions indicate risk- but you can see how, broadly, integrations & layers of tech (like how Metamask bridge uses Lifi on BSC) can complicate how users do or don’t put their assets at risk. Revoke Cash is the most well known approval manager app.
But it’s also good security practice to simply rotate your address. New addresses start with 0 approvals, so starting fresh by moving your tokens to a fresh address is another good security practice.” – commented Carlos Mercado, Data Scientist at Flipside Crypto.
Recent Exploit Mirrors March 2022 Attack
Further analysis by PeckShield alert revealed that the vulnerability is similar to a previous attack on LI.FI’s protocol that occurred on March 20, 2022. That incident saw a bad actor exploit LI.FI’s smart contract, specifically the swapping feature, before bridging.
The attacker manipulated the system to call token contracts directly within their contract’s context, making users who had given infinite approval vulnerable. This exploit resulted in the theft of approximately 205 ETH from 29 wallets, affecting tokens such as USDC, MATIC, RPL, GNO, USDT, MVI, AUDIO, AAVE, JRT, and DAI.
“The bug is basically the same. Are we learning anything from the past lesson(s)?” PeckShield Alert said in a July 16 X post.
Following the 2022 incident, LI.FI disabled all swap methods in its smart contract and worked on developing a fix to prevent future vulnerabilities. However, the recurrence of a similar exploit raises concerns about the platform’s security measures and whether adequate steps were taken to address the vulnerabilities identified in the previous breach.
LI.FI is a liquidity aggregation protocol that allows users to trade across various blockchains, venues, and bridges.
