This trend was in play already, but 2025 was about hastening the retreat Actions: - Negative articles on Bitcoin and energy rebutted: 102 - Letters to authors of those articles: 57 - Letters to researchers who published inaccurate data on Bitcoin mining: 3 - Regulators & Policymakers presented with Bitcoin pro-ESG narrative: 162 Results: - Media outlets still publishing Bitcoin&energy FUD: 5 (down from 41 in 2024) - Retractions of inaccurate articles: 5 - Media who changed their Bitcoin editorial policy: 3 image

Replies (4)

Satoji's avatar
Satoji 3 weeks ago
Thank you for your service Daniel! Its important work you are doing!
Ask (nicely) Daniel Batten <webhelpdesk@publicinterestnetwork.org> wrote: There is an article that Evan Jones has just written about Bitcoin that contains many objective falsehoods that have been debunked multiple times in reputable peer reviewed journals. As an environmentalist who has spent a lot of time studying Bitcoin, I would request that you thoroughly educate yourself about Bitcoin before writing about it, and that you retract the article. https://environmentamerica.org/articles/bitcoins-purposeless-power-problem/ My comments on the article can be found here: Thank you Daniel Batten ——————- Hi Daniel -- Thank you for the feedback. We are pulling down the piece and further reviewing. Best, Mark Morgenstein Director of Media Relations The Public Interest Network