When looking at the energy consumption of Bitcoin compared to traditional banking, the numbers tell a surprising story.
Despite all the criticism directed at Bitcoin for its energy-hungry mining process, it turns out that the traditional banking sector actually uses around two times more energy.
Banking systems rely on branches, ATMs, data centers, and other infrastructure, consuming a hefty 263.72 TWh annually, while Bitcoin, with its mining-heavy operations, consumes around 113.89 TWh each year.
Although Bitcoin’s energy usage is high — enough to rival some entire countries — it’s notable that a significant portion of Bitcoin mining is powered by renewable energy sources, with estimates suggesting as much as 70% of mining utilizes renewables.
Meanwhile, the banking sector’s energy use is spread across both physical and digital layers, maintaining vast infrastructures across the globe.
So, while Bitcoin gets hit with eco-criticism for its energy needs, it’s clear that traditional banking is no small player in the energy game either.
Both sectors consume massive amounts of energy, but banking’s reliance on vast infrastructure gives it a much larger footprint overall.
The future will depend on how both systems innovate and transition toward sustainability.
