“Bitcoin mining offers batteries that can’t be battery-powered. A scalable way to monetize surplus electricity immediately. Instead of paying to reduce renewable energy, you can turn that excess into digital value.
– Kent Halliburton, CEO of Sazmining
Four challenges in the energy market
Since my last article, I have been pondering the role of Bitcoin in energy economics, and I have been unable to realize that Bitcoin is the solution to four new challenges facing today’s energy market.
- Unexpected tariff news that has affected market volatility from the war, including the surge in European natural gas prices in 2022, and impacted global supply chains.
- Energy transition pressure from net zero policy affecting the business of fossil fuels.
- Fast decline in purchasing power and asset value from inflation. Even the S&P 500 averages only 10% per year, giving 3% of that money to the dollar’s inflation rate before taxes. If currency exchanges are involved, an additional 3% could disappear (if reflecting the dollar’s inflation rate).
- Climate and weather uncertainty, from renewable energy systems (RES) to renewable energy systems (RES) around the world.
Integrating volatile renewable energy sources into the power grid is perhaps the biggest challenge we face today.
Res is the fastest growing energy infrastructure on the planet. However, problems include intermittentness, low energy density, derailing investments for load balancing and slow response times for effective risk management.
These are not blessings of abundant cheap energy, but rather pain in res (the sun gives the Earth 7,000 times more solar energy than it is used annually via fossil fuels). To mitigate the drawbacks of energy volatility, many renewable energy systems have been converted to batteries for load balancing.
But is the battery the right solution?
A recent data analysis I conducted concluded that batteries are not as efficient as bitcoin mining to balance the grid.
Batteries are so inefficient that they bleed hundreds of millions of dollars each year in the US alone. That energy should be seen on the trader’s balance sheet and helps me get through the three issues I mentioned in the first place.
In fact, solving this one problem globally could lead to a major step towards strengthening the energy market, and could further lean the scale in favor of Bitcoin mining.
As Bitcoin adoption increases, the third problem of inflation decreases faster (with Bitcoin, there is zero inflation and coins fixed at 21,000,000).
Ultimately, the first issue, the ROI war, is expected to change dramatically on hard money standards, leading to a more harmonious world situation.
In summary, here is my paper:
Bitcoin mining is the best tool for loading down the power grid, and when surplus power reaches the MWH range it significantly outperforms the ROI by storing battery energy.
Data analysis
To prove the paper mathematically, I calculated the numbers. Rather, it crunches the numbers and dulls them. Below is a data analysis generated with the help of chatgpt.
First, we sourced the data.
- Why mining can better monetize excess energy (per MWH) –[1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6]
- Assumptions used in
- (i) Battery statistics (average life expectancy, round-trip efficiency, daily cycles, CAPEX) –[7], [8]
- (ii) Mining statistics (hashprice, pool fee, ASIC efficiency, site infrastructure) – [9], [10]
We then performed data analysis to compare ROI when load balancing using a battery similar to that of the Bitcoin Miner.
Data Analysis Overview
Below is Bitcoin and battery data on the use of surplus renewable energy.
Discover why Bitcoin mining offers a higher ROI than a battery.
Bitcoin Miner (Current Hashpris≈$0.054/s/s/s/s/day, ASIC≈15j/th, Pool Fee + Site Cost of $5/mwh): →≈ $0.142 per kWh of surplus electricity.
Bitcoin mining calculations
- Convert efficiency to energy per Th/s-Day: A 15 j/th device uses 15W per second.
Energy per Th/s-Day: E = 15W x 24H = 360 WH = 0.36 kWh. - Total revenue per KWH (before fees/costs): Hashpris is dollars per day. Divide by energy per day.
r_gross = h/e = 0.054/0.36 = $0.15/kwh. - Pool rates apply:
r_after_fee = r_gross×(1 -f)=0.15×(1 -0.02)=$0.147/kWh - Subtract O&M costs for your site:
r_net = r_after_fee -0.005 = 0.147-0.005 = $0.142/kwh.
Battery calculation
Li-ion battery (85% round trip efficiency):
If you sell energy at $40/mwh (general wholesale average) →≈ $0.034 per kWh.
Even at high peak prices, $70/MWH→≈ $0.060 per kWh.
Earnings per KWH were saved and subsequently discharged from hospital:
Revenue, r = p × efficiency
where
P is the market price per kWh sold.
40 dollars/mwh:
r = 0.040×0.85 = 0.034 $/kwh
$70/mwh:
R = 0.070×0.85 =0.0595≈0.060$/kWh
This shows that Bitcoin Miners offer higher cash returns per unit of excess energy than batteries.
Outperformance rate (per kWh)
Pairs and batteries are available for sale in the $40/MWh market:
(0.142–0.034)/0.034≈318.
Batteries sold in the market vs. $70/MWH:
(0.142–0.060)/0.060≈137.
This will allow Bitcoin Miners to return 3.18 times more money than high-end batteries, and 1.37 times more money on the low-end.
Absolute profit gap
$40/mWh Case: Bitcoin earns About $0.108Other Approximately the surplus kWh.
For $70/mWh: Bitcoin earns About $0.082Other Approximately the surplus kWh.
This shows that bitcoin mining is coming back overall $0.108 per kWh High-end surplus electricity, and $0.082 per kWh In the low end, it’s better than a battery.
Multiply this by the amount of TWH of renewable energy reduced worldwide.
example
- California (CAISO) to reduce 2024 = 3.423 TWH (3.423×10⁹kWh) – [11]
Mining vs $40/MWH Battery: $0.108×3.423E9≈ $370 million
Mining vs $70/MWH Battery: $0.082×3.423E9≈ $281 million - Texas (Elcott, West Zone), 2024 Reduction ≈5.3Twh (3.1 Twh Wind + 2.2 Twh Solar) – [12]
Mining vs $40/MWH Battery: $0.108×5.3E9≈ $572 million
Mining vs $70/MWH Battery: $0.082 x 5.3E9≈ $435M
Caiso’s reduction data comes from the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), and Texas (Ercot, West Zone) reduction data comes from Factset.
Alas, Kaiso and Elcott may pass this money. This is a documentary of Kyokaso and Elcott, released on August 6, 2025. [13]
The title shows that it is written in favor of battery, and does not mention Bitcoin mining (Ercot and Caiso demonstrate the reliability benefits of renewable energy and energy storage systems))
“…The discussion will focus on how renewable energy can enhance the reliability of the grid.”that says.
But who will strengthen the reliability of these renewable energies? Quis custodiet ipsos Castor?
We have since assumed at least one mention of reduction contracts as DR – response to demand (given how renewable energy fluctuates, large-scale renewable energy systems will reduce/let go of some excess power generation systems by covering solar panels.
There is a mention on page 7 with a link – [14]. However, there are no numbers either. Not fair, Kaiso and Elcott!
Returning to page 7, you will read: “Demand Response refers to programs and policies that include customer participation.”
“Customer participation” has many meanings. It involves paying people to consume (problematic) electricity, as they did in Germany.
Be careful as they always have surplus so that bitcoin miners are set up and RES can get surplus power.
For the US, this is better than printing more debt (now over $37 trillion) to encourage energy consumption. This isn’t even worth calling a demand response.
A simple history of money and energy
Humans have come a long way with energy and money. Thousands of years ago, we used cowley shells as money, trading them for our own hard muscle labor and energy.
Cowrie Shells worked for 4,000 years, but was unable to support 21st century commercial transactions. Neither muscle could effectively ship oil, coal, or electricity from one place to another.
With money, we made a quantum leap into gold.
It also upgraded the human muscle labor to mechanical force. This was pioneered during the British Industrial Revolution. This is a country facing an energy crisis that is being helped by Bitcoin mining, as I analyzed.
According to Reuters, inflation and the cost of unrealistic net zero policy is liable (two of the four challenges mentioned first).
Machine power was quickly upgraded to a global semi-separated energy mix. This transports energy goods from one location to another, sometimes across the continent.
The problem with this energy mix is that it is not completely decentralized, and many interventions today, from carbon credits to subsidized batteries – are adopted for personal leverage rather than grounded research.
It needs to go by to build a more robust electrical grid that will help everyone.
And finally, Li-ion batteries are suitable for all kinds of small and personalized energy needs, from smartphones and electric toys to electric cars. It is not suitable for large power needs, such as load balancing of planetary electric grids.
Using Li-Ion batteries, civilization does not climb to the Kardashev scale.
“…There’s no day to go where you don’t read that. Ah, they’ve developed glass batteries, flow batteries, straw batteries.
– Vaclav Smil, Energy Systems Expert [15]
(Disclaimer: I am not an insider or an expert, so I am providing this data without asserting practical accuracy and would be happy to receive input or correction if anyone has more insights).