IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0283687.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Energy and cost efficiency of Bitcoin mining endeavor

Author

Listed:
  • Małgorzata Jabłczyńska
  • Krzysztof Kosc
  • Przemysław Ryś
  • Paweł Sakowski
  • Robert Ślepaczuk
  • Grzegorz Zakrzewski

Abstract

The main aim of the study is to analyze BTC mining’s efficiency under current market conditions (December 2021), including soaring energy prices produced from many different sources in different geographical locations. After a thorough analysis of initial assumptions concerning the (1) price of mining machine with associated components and its effective amortization period, (2) difficulty and the hash rate of the BTC network, (3) BTC transaction fees, and (4) energy costs from various sources, we have found that currently, BTC mining is not profitable, except for some rare cases. The main reason for this phenomenon is the fast and unpredictable increase of difficulty of the BTC network over time which results in decreasing participation of already purchased mining machines in the BTC network hash rate. The research is augmented with a detailed sensitivity analysis of mining efficiency to initial parameters assumptions, which allows observing that the conditions for BTC mining to be efficient and profitable are very challenging.

Suggested Citation

  • Małgorzata Jabłczyńska & Krzysztof Kosc & Przemysław Ryś & Paweł Sakowski & Robert Ślepaczuk & Grzegorz Zakrzewski, 2023. "Energy and cost efficiency of Bitcoin mining endeavor," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 18(3), pages 1-45, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0283687
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0283687
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0283687
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0283687&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0283687?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jona Derks & Jaap Gordijn & Arjen Siegmann, 2018. "From chaining blocks to breaking even: A study on the profitability of bitcoin mining from 2012 to 2016," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 28(3), pages 321-338, August.
    2. Adam Hayes, 2018. "Bitcoin price and its marginal cost of production: support for a fundamental value," Papers 1805.07610, arXiv.org.
    3. Fama, Eugene F, 1970. "Efficient Capital Markets: A Review of Theory and Empirical Work," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 25(2), pages 383-417, May.
    4. Li, Jingming & Li, Nianping & Peng, Jinqing & Cui, Haijiao & Wu, Zhibin, 2019. "Energy consumption of cryptocurrency mining: A study of electricity consumption in mining cryptocurrencies," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 168(C), pages 160-168.
    5. Delgado-Mohatar, Oscar & Felis-Rota, Marta & Fernández-Herraiz, Carlos, 2019. "The Bitcoin mining breakdown: Is mining still profitable?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    6. Malfuzi, A. & Mehr, A.S. & Rosen, Marc A. & Alharthi, M. & Kurilova, A.A., 2020. "Economic viability of bitcoin mining using a renewable-based SOFC power system to supply the electrical power demand," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sergio Luis Náñez Alonso & Javier Jorge-Vázquez & Miguel Ángel Echarte Fernández & Ricardo Francisco Reier Forradellas, 2021. "Cryptocurrency Mining from an Economic and Environmental Perspective. Analysis of the Most and Least Sustainable Countries," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-22, July.
    2. Flori, Andrea, 2019. "News and subjective beliefs: A Bayesian approach to Bitcoin investments," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 336-356.
    3. Jana, Rabin K. & Ghosh, Indranil & Wallin, Martin W., 2022. "Taming energy and electronic waste generation in bitcoin mining: Insights from Facebook prophet and deep neural network," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).
    4. Mushtaq Hussain Khan & Shreya Macherla & Angesh Anupam, 2025. "Nonlinear connectedness of conventional crypto-assets and sustainable crypto-assets with climate change: A complex systems modelling approach," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 20(2), pages 1-18, February.
    5. Nishant Sapra & Imlak Shaikh & Ashutosh Dash, 2023. "Impact of Proof of Work (PoW)-Based Blockchain Applications on the Environment: A Systematic Review and Research Agenda," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 16(4), pages 1-29, March.
    6. Malfuzi, A. & Mehr, A.S. & Rosen, Marc A. & Alharthi, M. & Kurilova, A.A., 2020. "Economic viability of bitcoin mining using a renewable-based SOFC power system to supply the electrical power demand," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).
    7. Anatolyy Dzyuba & Irina Solovyeva & Dmitry Konopelko, 2023. "Managing Electricity Costs in Industrial Mining and Cryptocurrency Data Centers," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 13(4), pages 76-90, July.
    8. Pavel Ciaian & d’Artis Kancs & Miroslava Rajcaniova, 2021. "The economic dependency of bitcoin security," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 53(49), pages 5738-5755, October.
    9. Andrea Flori, 2019. "Cryptocurrencies In Finance: Review And Applications," International Journal of Theoretical and Applied Finance (IJTAF), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 22(05), pages 1-22, August.
    10. Pham, Son Duy & Nguyen, Thao Thac Thanh & Do, Hung Xuan, 2022. "Dynamic volatility connectedness between thermal coal futures and major cryptocurrencies: Evidence from China," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    11. David M. Ritzwoller & Joseph P. Romano, 2019. "Uncertainty in the Hot Hand Fallacy: Detecting Streaky Alternatives to Random Bernoulli Sequences," Papers 1908.01406, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2021.
    12. Shazia Ghani, 2011. "A re-visit to Minsky after 2007 financial meltdown," Post-Print halshs-01027435, HAL.
    13. Christiane Goodfellow & Dirk Schiereck & Steffen Wippler, 2013. "Are behavioural finance equity funds a superior investment? A note on fund performance and market efficiency," Journal of Asset Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 14(2), pages 111-119, April.
    14. Cagli, Efe Caglar & Taskin, Dilvin & Evrim Mandaci, Pınar, 2019. "The short- and long-run efficiency of energy, precious metals, and base metals markets: Evidence from the exponential smooth transition autoregressive models," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    15. Andrew Weinbach & Rodney J. Paul, 2009. "National television coverage and the behavioural bias of bettors: the American college football totals market," International Gambling Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(1), pages 55-66, April.
    16. Oxelheim, Lars & Rafferty, Michael, 2005. "On the static efficiency of secondary bond markets," Journal of Multinational Financial Management, Elsevier, vol. 15(2), pages 117-135, April.
    17. Shi, Huai-Long & Zhou, Wei-Xing, 2022. "Factor volatility spillover and its implications on factor premia," Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    18. Nuruddeen Usman & Kodili Nwanneka & Nduka, 2023. "Announcement Effect of COVID-19 on Cryptocurrencies," Asian Economics Letters, Asia-Pacific Applied Economics Association, vol. 3(3), pages 1-4.
    19. Robert C. Merton, 2006. "Paul Samuelson and Financial Economics," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 50(2), pages 9-31, October.
    20. Alagidede, Paul & Panagiotidis, Theodore, 2009. "Modelling stock returns in Africa's emerging equity markets," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 18(1-2), pages 1-11, March.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0283687. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.