Bitcoin Mining Could Help Wind Farms Monetize Wasted Energy

Bitcoin (BTC ) mining has long been criticized for its massive electricity consumption. That is because the decentralized network uses the Proof-of-Work (PoW) consensus mechanism to secure the blockchain.

In PoW, you need a lot of computational power to run specialized computers in order to compete with other miners to solve complex cryptographic puzzles. The environmental costs associated with Bitcoin are huge, and the issue has captured significant attention not only¹ in the research community but also in mainstream media.

But what’s being overlooked is a growing body of research suggesting that this narrative is incomplete. Researchers, grid operators, and energy companies are increasingly exploring how the uniquely flexible demand of Bitcoin mining can help capture wasted renewable power and turn it into revenue, all without putting new strain on the grid.

There’s a growing amount of renewable electricity being generated that can’t be delivered to consumers due to oversupply or a lack of transmission lines to carry it.

A new peer-reviewed study² on the Irish power market, looking into this, suggests that Bitcoin mining is not just an energy consumer but rather a practical tool to monetize excess generation and improve the economics of clean energy projects.

In a modeled 100 MW Irish wind farm, a 20 MW current-generation mining installation absorbed most annual dispatch-down energy and increased total system revenue by nearly one-third.

These findings support a more nuanced view of Bitcoin mining: under the right conditions, it can function as a flexible digital demand that improves renewable project economics rather than simply adding load to the grid.

Bitcoin’s Energy Controversy and Industry’s Response 

The world’s largest cryptocurrency by market capitalization, at $1.26 trillion, Bitcoin functions as digital money without centralized authorities such as central banks or third-party intermediaries like payment processors.

Secured by cryptography, Bitcoin allows users worldwide to send or receive value directly over the internet. Transactions, meanwhile, are recorded permanently and transparently on a distributed public ledger.

The cryptocurrency also has a limited supply of just 21 million BTC, making it a scarce digital asset and thus a highly attractive store of value.

Just over 20 million BTC already exist, but the final Bitcoin won’t be mined until 2140. That’s right: it only took less than two decades for 95.45% of the supply to be mined, while the remaining 4.55% will take more than a century. That’s due to Bitcoin’s built-in halving mechanism, which halves the reward for mining new blocks every 4 years.

Block rewards paid to miners are how new BTC come into circulation. Miners receive rewards, which include a set amount of newly minted BTC (currently 3.125 BTC per block) plus transaction fees, for successfully validating a block of transactions.

Transactions are validated through a resource-intensive process called mining, where computers solve complex cryptographic puzzles.

This mining currently consumes an estimated 150-180 TWh of electricity annually worldwide, per Cambridge’s CBECI estimates, roughly comparable to the energy consumption of a mid-sized country.

These figures are leveraged by critics of Bitcoin to label the network as an environmental liability. The leading cryptocurrency has faced criticism over its energy use since its expansion into a global financial network.

The primary criticism concerns Bitcoin’s high energy demand, which increases carbon emissions, raises electricity prices, and competes with households and businesses for scarce power resources.

The thing is, in its early days, much of Bitcoin’s energy demand was met by the cheapest, most readily available power. This meant miners were utilizing electricity generated from nonrenewable fossil fuels.

For instance, large shares of Bitcoin’s global hashrate used to cluster in places like Xinjiang and Sichuan, China, where it relied on cheap coal power. Then Kazakhstan saw an influx of miners that strained an aging, coal-heavy grid, contributing to local blackouts and a subsequent government crackdown.

But that was then; this is now.

The mining industry has undergone a significant shift over the past several years. Instead of ignoring the criticism, miners have focused on improving Bitcoin’s energy profile.

Miners have sought locations with abundant renewable energy resources, surplus hydroelectric power, flare gas that would otherwise be burned, and other forms of stranded energy with no economically viable alternatives.

Stranded energy refers to electricity that is available to use but can’t be used because it can’t be transported or sold efficiently due to infrastructure constraints, transmission limitations, or geographic isolation.

Then there’s curtailed renewable energy, which represents electricity that wind or solar farms are instructed not to generate because the grid cannot absorb additional supply.

Miners have been of immense help here because Bitcoin mining equipment can be switched on or off within seconds, without any damage or lost production. Moreover, because it requires only electricity and internet connectivity, Bitcoin mining is increasingly viewed as a highly flexible load that can consume energy that would otherwise go unused.

This has shifted the conversation from whether Bitcoin consumes energy to what type of energy it consumes.

According to the Cambridge Digital Mining Industry Report released just over a year ago, more than half of Bitcoin mining’s electricity now comes from zero-emission sources, up from 37.6% in 2022, with the increase driven by hydropower, wind, and nuclear power.

The share of renewables such as hydropower and wind has reached 42.6%, while nuclear accounts for 9.8%, bringing the share of sustainable energy sources to 52.4%. As for the largest energy source, that’s natural gas at 38.2%, up from 25% in 2022, replacing coal, whose share has fallen to a mere 8.9% from 36.6%.

This new reality shows that the overall impact of Bitcoin mining depends largely on where the mining load is located, what type of electricity it consumes, and the system conditions under which it operates.

From a grid perspective, it is a large, flexible electrical load not constrained to a specific location, and that alone doesn’t tell us whether mining is good or bad for the energy system.

A mining facility operating in a region with constrained grids functions as an additional source of demand, competing with businesses and households for scarce electrons, pushing up prices, and potentially crowding out other uses. Also, when mining relies on fossil-fuel generation, it can increase emissions.

But a mining facility located behind the meter at a wind or solar farm is consuming power that would otherwise be curtailed or sold at negative prices, monetizing electricity nobody else wants.

This way, mining can function as a “buyer of last resort” for stranded or surplus energy that has no other offtaker, but only where genuine, persistent surplus exists.

Rather than replacing traditional electricity consumers, Bitcoin mining can create an additional revenue stream for renewable projects during periods when electricity would otherwise be curtailed.

It’s pretty clear that the same technology, deployed in two different locations, is producing two very different outcomes for the grid. This is why blanket claims about Bitcoin’s energy impact, in either direction, tend to mislead.

It’s also why Bitcoin mining should not be evaluated simply by the number of terawatt-hours it consumes. The relevant question isn’t whether mining is good or bad, but what this specific load is displacing, and what would have happened to this specific electron otherwise.

The Energy Economics Study: Co-located Bitcoin Mining for Irish Wind Farms 

The new study, authored by M. Sarnecki and N. Burke from the Department of Polymer & Mechanical Engineering, Technological University of the Shannon, Athlone Campus, Ireland, looked into whether co-located Bitcoin mining can improve the economics of wind farms experiencing renewable curtailment.

The study focuses on Ireland, where the curtailment problem is severe and worsening.

For instance, over 10% of available wind generation was dispatched in 2024. This 1.3 TWh equivalent of generating capacity was instructed to be taken offline, not because of a lack of demand, but because the transmission network cannot accommodate it.

Up from about 4%-5% in 2014-2016, the share had already risen to 11.4% by 2025, data shows, with no signs of stabilizing as renewable deployment continues to outpace transmission investment.

Using publicly available 2024 hourly wind and price data, the researchers modeled a 100 MW Irish wind farm and evaluated six scenarios involving different mining capacities and hardware generations. More specifically, they simulated pairing it with co-located Bitcoin mining at scales ranging from 0 to 90 MW, using both current-generation ASIC hardware (16 J/TH) and older, less-efficient legacy hardware (98 J/TH).

The study found that a 20 MW installation of current-generation ASIC hardware (16 J/TH) absorbed about 83% of annual dispatch-down energy, increasing the farm’s total revenue by 32% and improving its effective capacity factor from 29% to 32%.

Expanding mining capacity to 30 MW increased dispatch-down absorption to roughly 93%. Beyond this point, though, the study found diminishing returns as mining utilization rates declined, along with a longer investment payback period.

Importantly, the researchers found that legacy mining hardware (98 J/TH) was uneconomic under all 2024 scenarios, highlighting that hardware efficiency mattered as much as the curtailment opportunity itself.

The study also challenges a common assumption about mining economics, that BTC price is the primary driver, showing instead that hardware efficiency is a major deciding factor. Investment viability, whether a mining investment succeeds or fails, depends largely on the spread between Bitcoin price growth and global network hashrate growth.

If price and hashrate grow at similar rates, mining revenue per unit of electricity remains relatively stable. What matters is whether price growth is outpacing the competition for that same revenue.

The study suggests that the earliest movers capture the best economics, before other miners enter the constrained, high-curtailment site to compete for the same curtailed energy.

A more holistic view, per the study, is that co-located mining functions as a supply-side flexibility mechanism. Instead of exporting all electricity to the grid, a wind farm can redirect otherwise curtailed generation to on-site mining whenever mining revenue exceeds export value, converting uncompensated curtailment into productive economic activity without requiring immediate transmission upgrades.

Having said that, the authors emphasize that their findings are scenario-specific rather than predictive and are based on deterministic modeling under 2024 Irish market conditions.

Overall, sites with higher dispatch-down rates “achieve positive payback under a wider range of Bitcoin price conditions, which supports targeting co-located installations at the most constrained nodes in the Irish transmission network,” says the study. “At system level, co-located flexible demand addresses both drivers of dispatch-down — system-wide curtailment during high-wind periods and localised transmission constraints — without requiring physical network upgrades or regulatory subsidy.”

Moreover, the results suggest that computational demand could complement batteries, hydrogen production, and transmission expansion as part of a broader renewable integration strategy.

This kind of co-located demand response isn’t currently recognized as a distinct category under Irish grid codes, meaning that real-world deployment would require new regulatory frameworks and safeguards, such as caps on how much wind output a farm can divert to mining and capacity-reporting thresholds, before the benefits could be fully realized.

While yet to be adopted in Ireland, this is already happening in other parts of the world. For instance, in Texas, several wind and solar projects have used pre-commercial Bitcoin mining to monetize electricity before permanent grid connections or long-term agreements become available.

According to research cited in this latest study, 32 Texas wind and solar projects generated about $47 million in revenue from BTC mining operations, demonstrating that flexible computing loads can create value from energy that would otherwise remain underutilized.

Brazil is yet another example in which renewable curtailment exceeded 32 TWh between 2021 and 2025. Wind operators in the nation’s northeast region moved to deploy co-located Bitcoin mining to address transmission constraints.

In Paraguay, miners are working in partnership with the state power administration to absorb surplus hydropower from the Itaipu Dam that the country cannot export or use domestically. With this move, Bitcoin miners are helping the South American country monetize electricity that would otherwise go unsold, generating millions of dollars in economic activity.

Investing in Sustainable Bitcoin Mining

In the world of Bitcoin mining, MARA Holdings (MARA ) stands out as one of the oldest players. It is known for its massive scale and strategic pivot into energy-backed digital infrastructure for Artificial Intelligence (AI) and High-Performance Computing (HPC).

What’s more, the digital infrastructure company has put into practice what the study models on paper.

It has acquired the Great Plains wind farm in Hansford County, Texas, a 114 MW facility with 240 MW of interconnection capacity, with the goal of running a behind-the-meter mining operation powered entirely by the site’s wind output.

“This acquisition serves as a blueprint for how the energy and data center sectors can collaborate to create long-term value while advancing sustainability initiatives,” said CEO Fred Thiel at the time. “By repurposing machines and energizing them with 100% renewable, zero-marginal energy cost, we’re leveraging renewable resources that would have otherwise been curtailed, reducing our bitcoin production costs through vertical integration, and demonstrating MARA’s commitment to environmental stewardship.”

With a market cap of $5.6 billion, MARA shares are currently trading at $14.86, up 63.70% YTD, compared to Bitcoin’s YTD drawdown of 29.26%, while Bitcoin is trading just under $63,000. MARA has an EPS (TTM) of -5.91 and a P/E (TTM) of -2.49.

As for the company’s financial strength, MARA recently announced its Q1 2025 results, reporting an 18% decrease in revenue to $174.6 million, primarily driven by an 18% drop in Bitcoin price. Meanwhile, net loss was ($1.3 billion), or ($3.31) per diluted share, and adjusted EBITDA was ($1.0 billion).

MARA delivered a record energized hashrate of 72.2 EH/s and won 653 blocks in 1Q26.

In addition to deploying about 5,000 new miners with a current fleet efficiency of 17.6 joules per terahash, this period also saw the acquisition of 2.4 EH of next-generation used ASIC miners.

During this period, MARA produced 2,247 BTC but also sold 20,880 BTC at an average price of $70,137. It reports a cost per kWh of $0.04 for its owned sites in 2026. The company noted in the shareholder letter:

“Historically, we held the bitcoin we produced as a long-term investment, and in 2025, we began selling bitcoin to fund operations. As 2026 progresses, we expect to continue to monetize bitcoin opportunistically to enhance our financial flexibility, including to provide liquidity or to fund capital projects and other initiatives.”

At the end of the quarter, MARA held 35,303 BTC, including 9,995 Bitcoin loaned or pledged as collateral. This, combined with unrestricted cash and cash equivalents ($513.7 million), amounted to $2.9 billion. Notably, the company retired about 30% of its outstanding convertible debt.

Other factors that made this quarter strong included several partnership advancements. These included completing the acquisition of a majority interest in Exaion and advancing its integration to expand private cloud capabilities. The Starwood strategic partnership was also executed, alongside a definitive agreement to acquire Long Ridge Energy & Power from FTAI Infrastructure Inc (FIP ). 

Long Ridge will provide MARA with additional land, power, fuel supply, and interconnection for a premier data center campus.

All these actions have accelerated “MARA’s evolution into a leading digital infrastructure company built to convert energy into high-value compute across AI, HPC, and critical IT loads, and Bitcoin mining,” with the company noting, “We believe the next phase of digital infrastructure value creation will be shaped by control of power: where it is located, when it is available, and how it can be best monetized.”

Conclusion

The debate surrounding Bitcoin’s energy consumption has evolved from how much electricity mining uses to where that electricity comes from and what alternatives exist.

After a decade of criticism over mining’s electricity use, the industry has not only shifted toward cleaner power sources but also begun providing a dedicated outlet for energy that has nowhere else to go. The recent study provides evidence that co-located mining could significantly increase wind farm revenues while absorbing a sizable share of curtailed energy, particularly when paired with modern, efficient hardware.

As renewable generation continues to expand faster than grid infrastructure in many regions, flexible computational loads, such as Bitcoin mining, may become one of several tools to improve renewable integration.

References

1. Bashari, M., Ghavidel Doostkouei, S., Fathabadi, M. & Soufimajidpour, M. The environmental cost of cryptocurrency: Analyzing CO2 emissions in the 9 leading mining countries. Sustainable Futures, 100792 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sftr.2025.100792
2. Sarnecki, M. & Burke, N. Bitcoin mining as supply-side flexibility in Irish wind energy integration. Energy Economics, 160, 109454 (2026). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2026.109454