tags: How Activist NGOs Have Unintentionally STALLED Progress TOWARDS Ending Gas Flaring

tags: The World Bank set an ambitious goal: eliminate nearly all gas flaring by 2030. Flaring, the burning of excess natural gas during oil extraction, is a major environmental problem, releasing millions of tons of CO2e (CO2 equivalents) in the form of methane and other toxic pollutants into the atmosphere annually. The problem is, flaring only burns 91.1% of the methane, so the other 8.9% goes unburnt directly into the atmosphere. This contributes to climate change significantly because methane is 84 times more warming over a 20 year period than CO2. In regions like the Middle East, flaring has been shown to cause more harm than previously thought, with recent studies revealing higher levels of toxic gases like benzene and sulfur dioxide (source: World Bank Global Gas Flaring Tracker, 2023). Despite the urgency, progress to end flaring has been slow. While there are many factors at play, but one of the most significant barrier is also the most overlooked: environmental NGOs themselves, specifically a small handful of the more ideologically-driven activist environmental NGOs. These organizations, while well-intentioned, have consistently criticized and undermined almost all efforts from outside commercial organizations to collaborate with oil and gas companies to reduce flaring. In this article, we’ll examine how this tendency to label such initiatives as “greenwashing,” their failure to offer viable alternatives, and their creation of an environment of fear have disincentivized other industries from partnering with oil companies to address this critical issue. The result? Flaring continues unabated and the environment, that these NGOs exist to be faithful stewards to, suffers. False positives: The harmful side-effect of calling something “greenwash” that’s not One counter-productive tendency of these NGOs has been their eagerness to label any and all collaboration with oil and gas companies as “greenwashing.” This term, which refers to superficial or misleading environmental claims, has become a catch-all critique for any effort to reduce flaring. These environmental NGO critiques are often reactive rather than analytical. For instance, when General Electric (GE) and Baker Hughes developed technologies to capture and utilize stranded gas, environmental groups like Sierra Club and Greenpeace accused them of “enabling continued fossil fuel extraction” without acknowledging the tangible emissions reductions these technologies achieved (source: Sierra Club Statement, 2020; Greenpeace International, 2020). By focusing on ideological purity rather than measurable outcomes, these NGOs have created a chilling effect, discouraging companies from pursuing innovative solutions to flaring. Incredibly, these criticisms have continued even when direct, measurable, and significant reduction of methane emissions has been the result. For example, when Crusoe Energy, a Bitcoin mining company, partnered with oil producers to convert flared gas into electricity, Jesse Simons, Deputy Director of Sierra Club’s Beyond Dirty Fuels Campaign, dismissed the initiative as “propping up the fossil fuel industry” (source: Sierra Club Press Release, 2022). Similarly, John Noël, Senior Climate Campaigner at Greenpeace USA, criticized ExxonMobil’s pilot project with Crusoe in the Permian Basin, calling it a “distraction from the urgent need to phase out fossil fuels entirely” (source: Greenpeace USA Statement, 2021). Criticism Without Solutions Another issue is the tendency of these NGOs to criticize without offering alternatives. For example, when BP partnered with Climeworks, a carbon capture company, to explore using captured methane for industrial purposes, and when Shell worked with Enerflex, a gas processing company to reduce flaring at their oilfields, Carroll Muffett, President of the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL), accused both companies of using flaring reduction as a “public relations tool” (source: CIEL Press Release, 2021). Similarly, Friends of the Earth criticized waste-to-energy startup Ener-Core for “perpetuating the fossil fuel economy” without proposing a practical alternative for addressing stranded gas (source: Friends of the Earth Report, 2019). While it is an absolutely legitimate function of an environmental NGO to help the public understand when genuine greenwash is at play, the universal tendency across NGOs to label all collaborations with oil companies to end flaring as “greenwash” suggests strongly that there is neither analysis nor discrimination at play here on the part of these environmental NGOs, rather guilty verdict by virtue of the fact one would deign to partner with an oil company. Well, if outside organizations cannot partner with oil companies to deal with methane emissions, oil companies will continue with their own solution: flaring. The environment deserves better service than that. This pattern of criticism without constructive solutions is not only unhelpful but counterproductive. Flaring is a complex problem that requires immediate action. The International Energy Agency (IEA) estimates that oil will still account for 22% of global energy demand in 2050, even in a net-zero scenario (source: IEA Net Zero by 2050 Report, 2021). Given this reality, the choice is not between oil production and no oil production—it is between flaring/venting and utilizing the gas in a way that reduces emissions. By dismissing efforts to address flaring without offering viable alternatives, these NGOs have effectively pushed the industry toward the most environmentally harmful option: continued flaring. How an Environment of Fear Disincentivizes Collaboration Perhaps the most counterproductive consequence of these NGOs’ actions is the environment of fear they have created. Companies that might otherwise partner with oil and gas producers to reduce flaring are often deterred by the risk of reputational damage. For example, renewable energy developers like NextEra Energy and Ørsted have considered using stranded gas for power generation but faced backlash from groups like 350.org and Oil Change International. These organizations accused NextEra of “betraying its renewable energy mission” and Ørsted of “legitimizing the fossil fuel industry” (source: 350.org Press Release, 2021; Oil Change International Report, 2021). This environment of fear has stifled innovation and collaboration. Waste-to-energy startups, renewable energy developers, and even technology giants like GE and Baker Hughes have been reluctant to engage with oil and gas companies, fearing the wrath of activist NGOs. The result is a missed opportunity to reduce emissions and accelerate the transition to a cleaner energy future. Bitcoin Mining: A Pragmatic Exception In this context, Bitcoin mining has emerged as a rare exception. Companies like Crusoe Energy and Upstream Data have been willing to partner with oil producers to convert flared gas into electricity, reducing emissions and generating economic value. These initiatives have been praised by the World Economic Forum for their tangible impact on flaring reduction, even as they face criticism from some NGOs. Crusoe’s projects in North Dakota and Wyoming have reduced flaring by over 90% at partnered sites (source: Crusoe Energy Case Studies, 2023). Similarly, Upstream Data’s operations in Canada have prevented millions of tons of CO2-equivalent emissions annually (source: Upstream Data Reports, 2022). Bitcoin mining’s success in addressing flaring highlights the importance of focusing on outcomes over ideology. NGOs like Sierra Club and Greenpeace were highly criticized of these partnerships at their inception, but have not acknowledged the measurable emissions reductions they ended up achieving. Analysis before ideology For us to have any hope of working collaboratively to end flaring, it’s critical for enviromental NGOs to step up and stop crying “greenwash” without analysis, as has been their tendency, to the detriment of the environment and collaborative action. The fight against flaring is too important to be derailed by ideological purity, and there is a phrase in the environmental movement that they would do well to remember “the perfect is the enemy of the good”. While the intentions of activist NGOs are good, good intentions divorsed from nuanced thinking can and has been counterproductive to the very environmental progress they only exist to create. Their reactive criticism, lack of viable alternatives, and creation of an environment of fear have hindered progress on this critical issue. To truly address flaring, we need a new approach—one that prioritizes measurable outcomes and encourages collaboration. These critiques, while well-intentioned, are misguided. By discouraging collaboration with oil companies, these NGOs inadvertently push the industry to deal with methane emissions in the most environmentally harmful way: flaring or venting. Continued inaction is simply not an option. It’s time for environmental organizations to stop criticicing every imperfect effort to move forward, and get their own house in order. In practical terms, this means: Properly evaluating whether collaborations are greenwash, or whether they can make a measurable difference Learning to work alongside commercial operations to better understand their motivations and strategies before simply criticizing them Taking time to do their own research, including engaging with experts in the domain (something that has been conspicuous by its absent in NGOs criticisms of Bitcoin mining and other industries) Take responsibility for the fact that they have the power to aid environmental progress, but equally the power to hinder progress through criticizing they may not fully understand and which may in fact be a solution, or part of the solution. Free themselves from the trap of overzealously declaring “greenwashing” even when it’s a false positive, and focus on what really matters: working collaboratively to reduce emissions and protecting the environment.

content:
The World Bank set an ambitious goal: eliminate nearly [all gas flaring by 2030](https://www.worldbank.org/en/programs/zero-routine-flaring-by-2030). Flaring, the burning of excess natural gas during oil extraction, is a [major environmental problem](https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-63051458), releasing millions of tons of CO2e (CO2 equivalents) in the form of methane and other toxic pollutants into the atmosphere annually. The problem is, flaring only burns 91.1% of the methane, so the other 8.9% goes unburnt directly into the atmosphere. This contributes to climate change significantly because methane is [84 times more warming](https://www.unep.org/news-and-stories/speech/methane-action-tackling-warming-planet) over a 20 year period than CO2.

![](https://batcoinz.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/Screen-Shot-2025-01-28-at-9.59.33-AM-1024x679.png)

In regions like the Middle East, flaring has been shown to cause more harm than previously thought, with recent studies revealing [higher levels of toxic gases](https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-67522413) like benzene and sulfur dioxide (source: _World Bank Global Gas Flaring Tracker, 2023_). Despite the urgency, progress to end flaring has been slow. While there are many factors at play, but one of the most significant barrier is also the most overlooked: environmental NGOs themselves, specifically a small handful of the more ideologically-driven activist environmental NGOs.

These organizations, while well-intentioned, have consistently criticized and undermined almost all efforts from outside commercial organizations to collaborate with oil and gas companies to reduce flaring. In this article, we’ll examine how this tendency to label such initiatives as “greenwashing,” their failure to offer viable alternatives, and their creation of an environment of fear have disincentivized other industries from partnering with oil companies to address this critical issue.

The result? Flaring continues unabated and the environment, that these NGOs exist to be faithful stewards to, suffers.

* * *

### False positives: **The harmful side-effect of calling something “greenwash” that’s not**

One counter-productive tendency of these NGOs has been their eagerness to label any and all collaboration with oil and gas companies as “greenwashing.” This term, which refers to superficial or misleading environmental claims, has become a catch-all critique for any effort to reduce flaring.

These environmental NGO critiques are often reactive rather than analytical. For instance, when General Electric (GE) and Baker Hughes developed technologies to capture and utilize stranded gas, environmental groups like Sierra Club and Greenpeace accused them of “enabling continued fossil fuel extraction” without acknowledging the tangible emissions reductions these technologies achieved (source: _Sierra Club Statement, 2020_; _Greenpeace International, 2020_). By focusing on ideological purity rather than measurable outcomes, these NGOs have created a chilling effect, discouraging companies from pursuing innovative solutions to flaring.

Incredibly, these criticisms have continued even when direct, measurable, and significant reduction of methane emissions has been the result. For example, when Crusoe Energy, a Bitcoin mining company, partnered with oil producers to convert flared gas into electricity, Jesse Simons, Deputy Director of Sierra Club’s Beyond Dirty Fuels Campaign, dismissed the initiative as “propping up the fossil fuel industry” (source: _Sierra Club Press Release, 2022_). Similarly, John Noël, Senior Climate Campaigner at Greenpeace USA, criticized ExxonMobil’s pilot project with Crusoe in the Permian Basin, calling it a “distraction from the urgent need to phase out fossil fuels entirely” (source: _Greenpeace USA Statement, 2021_).

* * *

### **Criticism Without Solutions**

Another issue is the tendency of these NGOs to criticize without offering alternatives. For example, when BP partnered with Climeworks, a carbon capture company, to explore using captured methane for industrial purposes, and when Shell worked with Enerflex, a gas processing company to reduce flaring at their oilfields, Carroll Muffett, President of the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL), accused both companies of using flaring reduction as a “public relations tool” (source: _CIEL Press Release, 2021_). Similarly, Friends of the Earth criticized waste-to-energy startup Ener-Core for “perpetuating the fossil fuel economy” without proposing a practical alternative for addressing stranded gas (source: _Friends of the Earth Report, 2019_).

While it is an absolutely legitimate function of an environmental NGO to help the public understand when genuine greenwash is at play, the universal tendency across NGOs to label all collaborations with oil companies to end flaring as “greenwash” suggests strongly that there is neither analysis nor discrimination at play here on the part of these environmental NGOs, rather guilty verdict by virtue of the fact one would deign to partner with an oil company. Well, if outside organizations cannot partner with oil companies to deal with methane emissions, oil companies will continue with their own solution: flaring. The environment deserves better service than that.

This pattern of criticism without constructive solutions is not only unhelpful but counterproductive. Flaring is a complex problem that requires immediate action. The International Energy Agency (IEA) estimates that oil will still account for 22% of global energy demand in 2050, even in a net-zero scenario (source: _IEA Net Zero by 2050 Report, 2021_). Given this reality, the choice is not between oil production and no oil production—it is between flaring/venting and utilizing the gas in a way that reduces emissions. By dismissing efforts to address flaring without offering viable alternatives, these NGOs have effectively pushed the industry toward the most environmentally harmful option: continued flaring.

* * *

### **How an Environment of Fear Disincentivizes Collaboration**

Perhaps the most counterproductive consequence of these NGOs’ actions is the environment of fear they have created. Companies that might otherwise partner with oil and gas producers to reduce flaring are often deterred by the risk of reputational damage. For example, renewable energy developers like NextEra Energy and Ørsted have considered using stranded gas for power generation but faced backlash from groups like 350.org and Oil Change International. These organizations accused NextEra of “betraying its renewable energy mission” and Ørsted of “legitimizing the fossil fuel industry” (source: _350.org Press Release, 2021_; _Oil Change International Report, 2021_).

This environment of fear has stifled innovation and collaboration. Waste-to-energy startups, renewable energy developers, and even technology giants like GE and Baker Hughes have been reluctant to engage with oil and gas companies, fearing the wrath of activist NGOs. The result is a missed opportunity to reduce emissions and accelerate the transition to a cleaner energy future.

* * *

### **Bitcoin Mining: A Pragmatic Exception**

In this context, Bitcoin mining has emerged as a rare exception. Companies like Crusoe Energy and Upstream Data have been willing to partner with oil producers to convert flared gas into electricity, reducing emissions and generating economic value. These initiatives have been [praised by the World Economic Forum](https://www.weforum.org/videos/this-start-up-catches-waste-methane-to-power-data-centres/) for their tangible impact on flaring reduction, even as they face criticism from some NGOs. Crusoe’s projects in North Dakota and Wyoming have reduced flaring by over 90% at partnered sites (source: _Crusoe Energy Case Studies, 2023_). Similarly, Upstream Data’s operations in Canada have prevented millions of tons of CO2-equivalent emissions annually (source: _Upstream Data Reports, 2022_).

Bitcoin mining’s success in addressing flaring highlights the importance of focusing on outcomes over ideology. NGOs like Sierra Club and Greenpeace were highly criticized of these partnerships at their inception, but have not acknowledged the measurable emissions reductions they ended up achieving.

* * *

### **Analysis before ideology**

For us to have any hope of working collaboratively to end flaring, it’s critical for enviromental NGOs to step up and stop crying “greenwash” without analysis, as has been their tendency, to the detriment of the environment and collaborative action. The fight against flaring is too important to be derailed by ideological purity, and there is a phrase in the environmental movement that they would do well to remember “the perfect is the enemy of the good”.

While the intentions of activist NGOs are good, good intentions divorsed from nuanced thinking can and has been counterproductive to the very environmental progress they only exist to create. Their reactive criticism, lack of viable alternatives, and creation of an environment of fear have hindered progress on this critical issue. To truly address flaring, we need a new approach—one that prioritizes measurable outcomes and encourages collaboration.

These critiques, while well-intentioned, are misguided. By discouraging collaboration with oil companies, these NGOs inadvertently push the industry to deal with methane emissions in the most environmentally harmful way: flaring or venting.

Continued inaction is simply not an option. It’s time for environmental organizations to stop criticicing every imperfect effort to move forward, and get their own house in order. In practical terms, this means:

1.  Properly evaluating whether collaborations are greenwash, or whether they can make a measurable difference
2.  Learning to work alongside commercial operations to better understand their motivations and strategies before simply criticizing them
3.  Taki


nwwfbrw2t0bl6zajpg2EHn8cB9+hPLMI4xTFTyc0AHoh57hhr5OYsY43SpQ5s/mE?iv=6uDuRFJX7R27t1TpNaB2OA==


j1bRxk5KdG4g8CJlAH3h4OPPwveeMg6xXIk5elRjXLP0G2SKpxvn7SHmiveqc5blFfZjYfVEJ743pdmp3ZvN5w==?iv=mlCC+m+O9ZDPeOSvtBt2SQ==


8yR2FqHcqiBHQwpRG8vz87hP0lIiWGW/C2ujdBHggW+NVjvVM/IoO6bvhSj0qyJy?iv=s5YFhtts3nHsuxGD6hnqaQ==


kpNCHMRyToHTuhSfCWTIpCvFWOBB/3fZgU/z1mMavDOOiZhjBl4xukdEcRXevJ1F?iv=1TIxAOCnKiKS+PufJN5V1w==


EMQL97wzd0mzPQp24+I31tR9gytQUOicThMGXNOChNiL9/ddMcfsV3fcEzufDBOcRTEEkAf9y735DAD7DUat3w==?iv=5mNz3EHRDlMZDBcz7lr7EQ==


content: The crypto market explained in a few seconds. 😂🤣 https://video.nostr.build/da19523dfcf68dab1107315ef39b525a2e6cb0dc92860ad7ec64c905fe5946a3.mp4

tags: A short note: The crypto market explained in a few seconds. 😂🤣...


M+LBcOahvieFE1dAhSLoGpbm1iHzq9xzq3wy2KVbchtcMJME3v0Ky6p5+wrE/Wb8?iv=p8dCYBEI56NGhNAyNRcn0A==


content: e

content: 1252ce931fcf76a07db1fefdeb301110ff8eeaf054c80b23e2b52ee83a606ca1

content: e

content: 571828f50373b48c8ef6101d7e90c421c9807c57ef4da5550230ea41d64ef12b

content: e

content: 57da9d98f9e5ca8eb3419e256147e792bc77f3800de2d92c022f79561637329d

content: e

content: 5169c9b38080531d50d2809b18d4440f856802a5be6b151cbfc4bf0916048b21

content: e

content: 5a93d37db67a44a552811078f01370c4369a39316ef37aa4d3c8fe22b16cc41c

content: e

content: d0ac596106350f26e4ba5c9c9c53a83dfc5835d8a8d43be034109552cb423ac1

content: e

content: f82b6fe28567a35e9fbb62d8d6e2371118c00b4cab8eb3599f11cc97cb5e63a6

content: e

content: 7a5dab227c438b563ed1ffb3b275a066619a9246b7d8011fcc068f50d21909e5

content: e

content: 8158ccdb868f3bbeb14214109d9b1b1ee7cfe3ac5c95aaadba5de3b2a4de03dc

content: e

content: 19f53cbd1342a86132a7f3dbd83ab757b4c4562e38f209cbdb14e98a74eeac18

content: e

content: 6a8fe2b84c9e6a8e66ba92bf8a1b5f7dab8d683f286d375380a0f7fd0f6d1e56

content: e

content: 9622cb1a77d5c4f8e1dc4d43abf93efe5f696629f7e47e7653a4c200734a73ec

content: e

content: e91ce50d8ad510b79efb3692abc74525d3a422bda4a5ff430d74b241e371e22b

content: e

content: 1e8ba8829e2cf7d8c8273a657353d14f90a1ff5fa7dd98d583aa50b9cbd5081a

content: e

content: 370ad208cf96d2f3c14c54793439812df0a73ff68dbfa891c56c467fd5434630

content: e

content: 160b792311ea3c2f2a2dac3c2202b16928eafe90385df36d831d38e127be00ed

content: e

content: 8f4150f4b47ad3987d20506c3b42499ce06adc689ee37287c9470ff95057fa76

content: e

content: 5619f5148827ef479969b667db0026d55697cd09658bb6a6ffcbca320f0857b8

content: e

content: f806f69dbb918f85c911c544b5b823bdb9b244e97139299f5a9e9d56b441e997

content: e

content: 51f2741085b47da5747c72b73baa95f55c02ab8b4b429f15fc3aca2bb3cb37ab

content: e

content: 4c65f62d0cfb59661eac21542906b69e13684e1f4247be73d2c97fa6fdd5b68c

content: e

content: 7f1d714632dbf6a37a298390435166acb99298f505f2ad42256e6f939a9ace8f

content: e

content: 2f28c72abb20fe2618942a1a20da852dc391616423253de9347647abc2c85897

content: e

content: 7c06ac358af64abfeaba5f9d308ba1c76dbf3a605dc3dca841a5feda0ec836e5

content: e

content: 5a45c1ce9fa7e1e97453dc3ae610bfe8e247fd1536f61e0df5fa984944eec84f

content: e

content: 5657b912c07bd04d6a9349b72c8000094296f093266419d3c417aff26f4a9e89

content: e

content: 1de56491be90323554f0ecf080a1e5bff36b1d20ba26cd7a96033152ab9f1e44

content: e

content: b8f7d805b8bcfedafb4d6561d00af42794d74ceded9f19ab64c3cbee0ca8bc19

content: e

content: bdc95267d3a662263c2e10c311fbb46f91836e00ba61c7af280babaae4f9ceea


Ai/MDNKYzQKa2jgMlqqdyY2FgkKFq5f5D3ftb6apQD6U2NQfv5bTt7XjrWSFpivNw1ebITVcFGHsckxTiEYzSbF8EPtWpSiR97Mvyzdtwsw+pRBCO9MB2l5zKA1tkPdtrWX5


l7WgYGjAkIctQfe2Kgm4B/Azu+WaPu0wmb1inMZ07I6lxKu7U1d+yWrEzevMemPk?iv=/yi6Smp7+60cHVyVcuoTyQ==


WPZo40SFH/T84WWqcCwvqd1e29pfvjWNLkIysmkwtQs7yEvin+Ij9b9iLpy4dlFV?iv=Oy/iAUigHjTlAml37Zl2Ug==


As1/p9ry5XbU4FrjeT13Fbq2Tva/aIkcXTJDynRmu+v8Dn5mZ09OvIATuZP86EOnPnGU4sTOvy7Qesyx2kxZ3jfKedzC/vegZH9wRhvfmEu/zFl+UmFk/R3p7qpC9A/PSlBxoXkYlcH6mY7V3kFBY/lZemudrBgCfInYMphLU5hHG6qDvu2wvS1T+CU70YE0Obu7Vuv//dxku23iTXBA2O91FQ==


ZrVj1fadBZbW66BWZp03hwQe4OtDNwlu87iiGhm5G5bIE1cqDooBljIO5sCDpgYYiWJRrHGRoWxfLPRW5V830Q==?iv=VQLxsiH04HuQYf537vOTCg==


AmH9twcRQOKs4+fqKkUWjBpIgdDenAWxXuS+XKFN8E4/Q5hXPoc3w0s+vDl4XGcjc7DOeLSmOwlbutOm74wTt2uhsG7Wdyge143Nxa0jwSPwFP/8wBQaNQiLGXJRT65v1KWj5CxcepCRnGFKelAyN7L/JwSiexTJTJvSWSmt4ZpMkgJPuQFUa/KZT9EBcOYod5NbZ08vk3zcCZwkR8/a4jAbD6ghRq0h6mBxNxee5Y93GbEkzWuhNo8cDmaikhwbxyde


AuEVd6px42k29bF1fbe+ehEz9K/fdCpV876hedLuz7QNQ3RWtJWFk43bB1zF4cpn8Y7aehrLIqbEpoJ/yUfHeD3s9wUjnpE/L5023iNOOJkN/XgHVFQeGqEKcE9RB/IhAF4Swz1oz6s0RTodoMG7loqBBocDJZ0Z2xLMHeV7itUa5UY=


qXasJkQV4BnNhLqJVs12YHMU3ziqeFZaqNibJpTLRCe9HmZNSmuamSazfEwV3nTxh+TupBZILTUltK53J/3RGQ==?iv=8EsvMRV5+yL9ZQ7VO9bF4w==


Yes!
 https://blossom.primal.net/c73f2e6cd177a6cbe18057972be36cf087271a87551a210a44e0192678b8cd7e.jpg


fQiedAJ+DxlWNsJ+es2vrvFbvfQVggHwvH8unu1cGtU=?iv=qAq38fAADW24XqaPeZHYLw==


qwkmY4lZ9TJ5sxhUNQ+bi1sXTK3yyU5gRti1rkmmBYiXU+4dVd5/uXrCddOaMM1l?iv=KKoLL1DOUbmfBERfg8510g==


fC8cG4JBlO5jNb65rJXO4bdeLKpbeGSAeL95ej4/6YiFJwqAArpVUtExBz0m5PGwpf/pjw1ny5IDOR98dlAamA==?iv=MMjh1/n+4KXDdGOeM9iKZw==


RSS-to-Nostr of Novara Media

about:
RSS-to-Nostr feed of Novara Media
More RSS-To-Nostr can be found in my following list


content: e

content: dd4e5ca16ccb045c85c6b6507e636b3aeb8a4308a46eefe622100867ec4d6fdf

content: e

content: cb438bd5c867f6de7b922352c0cbf1cb796ff667372428120682cc608438df2b

content: e

content: 0a73a12ae4a8d0dd212a516d6e76344b46f121824ce10f8db99d229dd4322cab

content: e

content: dcce0a00262f257c2023f081eb9b13d3ab1784d777159f0d40b3ae873c83ea17

content: e

content: d6d2a346f7aae496630dd22d59189190bd2c65e8dc917ca8c88d6edc0fefe3f9

content: e

content: 227d350a423bc14ae7627b42a3467937f3439990ba6b412c7affb633aea7395c

content: e

content: 5dc2bd1ea2d90c91843d22eeb4860837028896270b7540507e9941e090c6e467

content: e

content: b5ef59754e7b9d5986581214643b79f4892416cc3a0f8acb3bdf1938ab00d1b4

content: e

content: 4e3a7238d5e5b46bb312bf58bdf200a50ff3c5710642934baba313be2f3a137e

content: e

content: 491bd34a2ac1da6a95512be64b57517a63fe74b85ea1a19645f5064cb6e415a7

content: e

content: 35466181468595f74b5e8fb515a1e2e457676117b9fd58eae2b2c04d8d5e52de

content: e

content: 954c0c20da41c53c7d7bfd4cc307f832f7e5bfc2b66be33c96b8aac050398a94

content: e

content: 7a0e230631d5e007fd3a4976cb24f4a82f5603bed908bb88800d02b6b80cf4d8

content: e

content: 68e7359a654fac5050cc5a4ee30e5fb867ccda54b0f0354dd690d1f8bb1d337b

content: e

content: 5442c346fb4836cbf2246cba07ef995296f814d29a2d41e83d7d24304568d5fc

content: e

content: 493ba29e8bc335656f09b74caf58436194e911c30070f7a96d51c6773ce1e710

content: e

content: b5576a50d27efc07d20f5e258105056ff3ba5db4838d849082bd45e113481cdb

content: e

content: 237713952e6c9505682004f3a339b4459c737d0024dbafb07f7a93cf53a86371

content: e

content: bac304e06b2965562891b694b959c23cc238b9bdcdbd08b15404518f63734414

content: e

content: c2a8bd93c8d98ef891fec83d5b6519dd7d157789a9252a40e4667feb8905e96d

content: e

content: c3fa9a2b4c433b0d0aaeb4929fd3dced910b874d432b0fe6cc2408c1732c5b33

content: e

content: f14eddbfe11d346d466870d67128c6245b20c07aa75cfe582c5a0b7603f9e240

content: e

content: a0e9cdd49feed3f0b1b1a703d35333910cf4fd2f87d62fe524dcb9d99b52796b

content: e

content: 96c99c33040b57d5d64d935533cd4d47038a19b36242fdedcc9270732ca1607e

content: e

content: ff5474bbf47f49b60a56122d2bf105046c14ce9ee41e18d2e87d6d0d5ecae11c

content: e

content: b531d188bcb7becdd1c4ab40b8cb810c3aa6fef54fef35bb9fadbb2193d6563e

content: e

content: d92b279b1e7e2bab692e9382f660c95f6bc1f72eddf3f46dd08bdca7ef4e467a

content: e

content: e124347d6a092a5b02d04201c640017040b899da46eeaffc91fff1bf167f4f23

content: e

content: 5d0e2afdc893e2946f009025ffd21fba0f37bfe98c58a547bb6b3073084acb3e

content: e

content: 5a2190c8005108aecebe47243a392abc62714a982aea987a7025f1d7e7529070

content: e

content: e23617ac6f68e3d5648d1d5e8b05f50f84c5dea64b65a7713aca22fac206acbc

content: e

content: 87a043319a0937a997a1e0edc21a6049d6473efba6e68b4d4c399e9feff1a37f

content: e

content: 0542c14efc246adc8067450482eecb4a9eaaeb6da0d064cea38124370cc82828

content: e

content: 2834b343451e56962281dea78a8f3a59b2dbc8e35cf83666ca608a1e59c0422e

content: e

content: d8c06e516d0961b162a27186ac9df93a12aa795f6cadb573ae874ccc1ddd9a89

content: e

content: 2d4a4789496a7ee7d630604e59dff915c8aefb12cbd64a901bcadda592860527

content: e

content: ed9cd7cd3a57be13a0d3d0d5976a87c3bbcc2a73407d04ec5764a4f51e4ea848

content: e

content: a3fdc79b0a99a1c277165bdf885ea2424b2ec7ec8412a53c0f3a244d88cf32d2

content: e

content: 2f84d173d49c7d5b26173629306b33f39001ab2128cd74fda6b8a934522332bc


J5eDkiQwg96pTwwN0sPPg/zlqVROkrLM0qOP+7Dsx5uFk29FQ4vsaV6AmiIgQlMl?iv=hLHFzXjwpUE691lOUwDKyA==


わはははははｗｗｗ

「ちなみにハム速も自民党に入党しました。

公明が消えた高市自民党なら推せるし、このタイミングで推しとかないと後悔しそうだから！
応援してます！！！🐹」
https://x.com/hamusoku/status/1977934473133211655


tags: Bitcoin Magazine Trump White House Could Soon Pardon Former Binance CEO Changpeng Zhao: FOX People close to Changpeng Zhao, the former CEO of Binance better known as ‘CZ,’ say discussions are intensifying inside the Trump White House over whether to issue a presidential pardon for the embattled crypto executive, according to reporting from Charles Gasparino, a Senior Correspondent at FOX Business. Zhao, once among the most influential figures in the digital asset world, served time following a plea deal with the U.S. Department of Justice in 2023 that included a money-laundering conviction and $4.3 billion in fines for Binance. But according to several sources familiar with the matter, many within Trump’s inner circle now view the case as politically motivated — a hallmark of what they describe as the Biden administration’s broader crackdown on crypto. Zhao remains Binance’s largest individual shareholder, and a pardon could clear the way for his formal return to the exchange, which he founded in 2017 and grew into the world’s largest Bitcoin and crypto trading platform. Speculation of a Trump pardon has been looming for most of this year, but the decision is reportedly coming soon. CZ background Zhao’s 2023 conviction marked one of the most high-profile cases in the government’s campaign against major exchanges. U.S. prosecutors accused Binance of allowing illicit transactions with sanctioned entities and failing to implement proper anti-money-laundering controls. CZ pleaded guilty, stepped down as CEO, and paid a personal fine of $50 million. Zhao served a four-month prison sentence. He was sentenced in April 2024 and released in September 2024, after spending time in a low-security federal prison in California and then a halfway house. Despite this, even critics of Binance have questioned whether the criminal charges were proportionate. Trump’s team reportedly sees Zhao’s situation as an opportunity to demonstrate a “new era” of crypto policy — one that favors innovation over punishment. A decision could come before year’s end, but Trump’s attention is divided between foreign policy flashpoints — including conflicts in Gaza, Ukraine, and renewed trade tensions with China — and that clemency discussions often take longer than expected, according to Gasparino. For now, the crypto world is watching closely. A Trump pardon for CZ would mark not only a personal vindication for Zhao, but also be somewhat of a political statement: Trump signaling that the world’s most powerful government is truly open for Bitcoin business. This post Trump White House Could Soon Pardon Former Binance CEO Changpeng Zhao: FOX first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Micah Zimmerman.

content:
[Bitcoin Magazine](https://bitcoinmagazine.com)
![](https://bitcoinmagazine.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/Trump-White-House-Could-Soon-Pardon-Former-Binance-CEO-Changpeng-Zhao-FOX.jpg)
[Trump White House Could Soon Pardon Former Binance CEO Changpeng Zhao: FOX](https://bitcoinmagazine.com/news/trump-white-house-could-soon-pardon-former-binance-ceo-changpeng-zhao-fox)

People close to Changpeng Zhao, the former CEO of Binance better known as ‘CZ,’ say discussions are intensifying inside the Trump White House over whether to issue a presidential pardon for the embattled crypto executive, according to [reporting](https://x.com/CGasparino/status/1976739639684653313) from Charles Gasparino, a Senior Correspondent at FOX Business.

Zhao, once among the most influential figures in the digital asset world, served time following a [plea deal](https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/pr/binance-and-ceo-plead-guilty-federal-charges-4b-resolution) with the U.S. Department of Justice in 2023 that included a money-laundering conviction and $4.3 billion in fines for Binance.

But according to several sources familiar with the matter, many within Trump’s inner circle now view the case as politically motivated — a hallmark of what they describe as the [Biden administration’s broader crackdown on crypto](https://bitcoinmagazine.com/culture/president-bidens-executive-order-on-bitcoin).

Zhao remains Binance’s largest individual shareholder, and a pardon could [clear the way](https://bitcoinmagazine.com/legal/binance-ceo-changpeng-zhao-pleads-guilty-steps-down) for his formal return to the exchange, which he founded in 2017 and grew into the world’s largest Bitcoin and crypto trading platform.

Speculation of a Trump pardon [has been looming](https://crypto.news/trump-family-in-talks-for-binance-stake-amid-push-for-cz-pardon-wsj/) for most of this year, but the decision is reportedly coming soon.

CZ background
-------------

Zhao’s 2023 conviction marked one of the most high-profile cases in the government’s campaign against major exchanges.

U.S. prosecutors accused Binance of allowing illicit transactions with sanctioned entities and failing to implement proper anti-money-laundering controls. CZ [pleaded](https://bitcoinmagazine.com/legal/binance-ceo-changpeng-zhao-pleads-guilty-steps-down) guilty, stepped down as CEO, and paid a personal fine of $50 million.

Zhao served a four-month prison sentence. He was sentenced in April 2024 and released in September 2024, after spending time in a low-security federal prison in California and then a halfway house.

Despite this, even critics of Binance have questioned whether the criminal charges were proportionate. Trump’s team reportedly sees Zhao’s situation as an opportunity to demonstrate a “new era” of crypto policy — one that favors innovation over punishment.

A decision could come before year’s end, but Trump’s attention is divided between foreign policy flashpoints — including conflicts in Gaza, Ukraine, and [renewed trade tensions](https://bitcoinmagazine.com/markets/bitcoin-price-sinks-to-118000) with China — and that clemency discussions often take longer than expected, according to Gasparino.

For now, the crypto world is watching closely. A Trump pardon for CZ would mark not only a personal vindication for Zhao, but also be somewhat of a political statement: Trump signaling that the world’s most powerful government is truly open for Bitcoin business.

This post [Trump White House Could Soon Pardon Former Binance CEO Changpeng Zhao: FOX](https://bitcoinmagazine.com/news/trump-white-house-could-soon-pardon-former-binance-ceo-changpeng-zhao-fox) first appeared on [Bitcoin Magazine](https://bitcoinmagazine.com) and is written by [Micah Zimmerman](https://bitcoinmagazine.com/authors/micahzimmerman).


tags: Bitcoin Magazine Bitcoin Price Crashes to $108,000 As Trump To Impose 100% Tariffs on China Bitcoin price dropped to the $108,000 range today as escalating U.S.-China trade tensions and tariff talks sent shockwaves through global markets. President Donald Trump posted on Truth Social today that China has announced “aggressive” and “unprecedented” export controls on nearly all products, affecting all countries starting November 1, 2025. In response, Trump said the U.S. will impose a 100% tariff on Chinese goods and enforce export controls on critical software from the same date. Bitcoin price dumped as a result of the news, dumping from roughly $117,000 in early afternoon to below $108,000. At the time of writing, the bitcoin price is back to the $113,000 range with high volatility. At times, the bitcoin price was down roughly 10% with many other cryptocurrencies down 20-40% JUST IN: #BITCOIN FALLS BELOW $109,000 AS US ANNOUNCES 100% TARIFFS ON CHINA HODL pic.twitter.com/JddDFm801z — Bitcoin Magazine (@BitcoinMagazine) October 10, 2025 Markets react to U.S-China trade relations Global markets sold off earlier today following President Trump’s announcement of plans to dramatically increase tariffs on Chinese goods. The move came in response to Beijing’s new restrictions on rare-earth exports, which the U.S. president accused China of using to “monopolize” critical resources. China’s tightened export controls now extend to foreign-made products that contain or were processed using Chinese rare-earths, signaling a major escalation in the trade dispute. The policy expansion — targeting defense, semiconductor, and AI sectors — sparked concerns of a global supply chain shock. Risk assets broadly tumbled today, with the S&P 500 falling 2% and the Nasdaq down 2.7%. Trump also canceled a planned meeting with Xi Jinping at APEC, vowing to “financially counter” China’s move. Trump earlier described Beijing’s actions as “sinister and hostile,” claiming the U.S. holds even greater leverage but has refrained from using it — until now. Crypto-related stocks, like Circle (CRCL), Robinhood (HOOD), Coinbase (COIN), and MicroStrategy (MSTR), declined 3%-12% throughout the day. Bitcoin price reaction Bitcoin started October on a tear, hitting fresh all-time highs above $126,000 during the first week of the month before easing back into the $121,000 range in recent days. Market analysts say the rally reflects what many describe as the “euphoria phase” of the ongoing bull cycle — a stage historically marked by rapid price acceleration and growing retail enthusiasm. If past cycles are any guide, the current momentum could propel Bitcoin toward the $180,000–$200,000 range before sentiment cools. The leading cryptocurrency has climbed more than 30% since the start of the year, fueled by steady inflows into U.S.-listed Bitcoin ETFs and a resurgence of investor confidence across the digital asset market. This post Bitcoin Price Crashes to $108,000 As Trump To Impose 100% Tariffs on China first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Micah Zimmerman.

content:
[Bitcoin Magazine](https://bitcoinmagazine.com)
![](https://bitcoinmagazine.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/Bitcoin-Price-Crashes-to-108000-As-Trump-To-Impose-100-Tariffs-on-China.jpg)
[Bitcoin Price Crashes to $108,000 As Trump To Impose 100% Tariffs on China](https://bitcoinmagazine.com/news/bitcoin-price-crashes-to-108000-as-trump-to-impose-100-tariffs-on-china)

Bitcoin price dropped to the $108,000 range today as escalating U.S.-China trade tensions and tariff talks sent shockwaves through global markets.

President Donald Trump [posted](https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/115351840469973590) on Truth Social today that China has announced “aggressive” and “unprecedented” export controls on nearly all products, affecting all countries starting November 1, 2025. In response, Trump said the U.S. will impose a 100% tariff on Chinese goods and enforce export controls on critical software from the same date.

Bitcoin price dumped as a result of the news, dumping from roughly $117,000 in early afternoon to below $108,000. At the time of writing, the bitcoin price is back to the $113,000 range with high volatility.

At times, the bitcoin price was down roughly 10% with many other cryptocurrencies down 20-40%

> JUST IN: [#BITCOIN](https://twitter.com/hashtag/BITCOIN?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw) FALLS BELOW $109,000 AS US ANNOUNCES 100% TARIFFS ON CHINA ![🇨🇳](https://s.w.org/images/core/emoji/16.0.1/72x72/1f1e8-1f1f3.png)
>
> HODL ![✊](https://s.w.org/images/core/emoji/16.0.1/72x72/270a.png) [pic.twitter.com/JddDFm801z](https://t.co/JddDFm801z)
>
> — Bitcoin Magazine (@BitcoinMagazine) [October 10, 2025](https://twitter.com/BitcoinMagazine/status/1976759481863205329?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw)

Markets react to U.S-China trade relations
------------------------------------------

Global markets sold off earlier today following President Trump’s [announcement](https://bitcoinmagazine.com/markets/bitcoin-price-sinks-to-118000) of plans to dramatically increase tariffs on Chinese goods. The move [came in response](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/oct/10/trump-china-tariffs) to Beijing’s new restrictions on rare-earth exports, which the U.S. president accused China of using to “monopolize” critical resources.

China’s tightened export controls now extend to foreign-made products that contain or were processed using Chinese rare-earths, signaling a major escalation in the trade dispute.

The policy expansion — targeting defense, semiconductor, and AI sectors — sparked concerns of a global supply chain shock.

Risk assets broadly tumbled today, with the S&P 500 falling 2% and the Nasdaq down 2.7%. Trump also canceled a planned meeting with Xi Jinping at APEC, vowing to “financially counter” China’s move.

Trump earlier described Beijing’s actions as “sinister and hostile,” claiming the U.S. holds even greater leverage but has refrained from using it — until now.

Crypto-related stocks, like Circle (CRCL), Robinhood (HOOD), Coinbase (COIN), and MicroStrategy (MSTR), declined 3%-12% throughout the day.

Bitcoin price reaction
----------------------

Bitcoin started October on a tear, hitting fresh all-time highs above $126,000 during the first week of the month before easing back into the $121,000 range in recent days.

Market analysts [say the rally reflects](https://bitcoinmagazine.com/markets/bitcoin-price-prediction-bombshell) what many describe as the “euphoria phase” of the ongoing bull cycle — a stage historically marked by rapid price acceleration and growing retail enthusiasm.

If past cycles are any guide, the current momentum could propel Bitcoin toward the $180,000–$200,000 range before sentiment cools.

The leading cryptocurrency has climbed more than 30% since the start of the year, fueled by [steady inflows](https://bitcoinmagazine.com/news/bitcoin-hits-new-all-time-high-as-ibit-breaks-etf-records) into U.S.-listed Bitcoin ETFs and a resurgence of investor confidence across the digital asset market.

This post [Bitcoin Price Crashes to $108,000 As Trump To Impose 100% Tariffs on China](https://bitcoinmagazine.com/news/bitcoin-price-crashes-to-108000-as-trump-to-impose-100-tariffs-on-china) first appeared on [Bitcoin Magazine](https://bitcoinmagazine.com) and is written by [Micah Zimmerman](https://bitcoinmagazine.com/authors/micahzimmerman).


tags: Gradually then suddenly nostr will become the standard.

content:
![Nostr Adoption Update](https://www.discreetlog.com/content/images/2023/08/birdx.jpeg)

**Nostr is an open communication protocol that can be used to send messages across a distributed set of relays in a censorship resistant and robust way.**

* * *

_If you missed my nostr introduction post you can find it [here](https://www.discreetlog.com/nostr/). My nostr account can be found [here](https://primal.net/odell?ref=discreetlog.com)._

* * *

We are nearly at the point that if something interesting is posted on a centralized social platform it will usually be posted by someone to nostr.

We are nearly at the point that if something interesting is posted exclusively to nostr it is cross posted by someone to various centralized social platforms.

We are nearly at the point that you can recommend a cross platform app that users can install and easily onboard without additional guides or resources.

As companies continue to build walls around their centralized platforms nostr posts will be the easiest to cross reference and verify - as companies continue to censor their users nostr is the best censorship resistant alternative - gradually then suddenly nostr will become the standard. 🫡

[![Nostr Adoption Update](https://www.discreetlog.com/content/images/2023/08/image.png)](https://primal.net/explore?ref=discreetlog.com)

Current Nostr Stats

* * *

_**If you found this post helpful support my work with [bitcoin](https://geyser.fund/project/citadel?ref=discreetlog.com).**_

![Nostr Adoption Update](https://werunbtc.com/donate.png)


tags: The blue check is the first step in Elon's plan to bring the chinese social credit score system to the west. If you cannot resist the temptation of the blue check in its current form you have already lost - what comes next will be much darker.

content:
> Will not live in a pod.
> Will not eat the bugs.
> Will not get the chip.
> Will not get a blue check.
> Will not use CBDCs.
>
> Live Free or Die.

![Blue Check Manifesto](https://www.discreetlog.com/content/images/2023/06/authenticate-1.png)

Why did Elon buy twitter for $44 Billion? What value does he see in it besides the greater influence that undoubtedly comes with controlling one of the largest social platforms in the world? **We do not need to speculate - he made his intentions incredibly clear in his first meeting with twitter employees after his takeover - WeChat of the West.**

[![Blue Check Manifesto](https://www.discreetlog.com/content/images/2023/06/wechatofthewest.png)](https://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-says-twitter-could-be-western-wechat-china-superapp-2022-6?ref=discreetlog.com)

To those that do not appreciate freedom, the value prop is clear - WeChat is incredibly powerful and successful in China.

[![Blue Check Manifesto](https://www.discreetlog.com/content/images/2023/06/wechat2.png)](https://www.businessinsider.com/chinese-superapp-wechat-best-feature-walkthrough-2019-12?ref=discreetlog.com)

To those that do appreciate freedom, the concern is clear - WeChat has essentially become required to live in China, has surveillance and censorship integrated at its core, and if you are banned from the app your entire livelihood is at risk. Employment, housing, payments, travel, communication, and more become extremely difficult if WeChat censors determine you have acted out of line.

[![Blue Check Manifesto](https://www.discreetlog.com/content/images/2023/06/wechat.png)](https://restofworld.org/2022/handwritten-wechat-apology-letters/?ref=discreetlog.com)

![Blue Check Manifesto](https://www.discreetlog.com/content/images/2023/06/socialcreditscore_.jpg)

The blue check is the first step in Elon's plan to bring the chinese social credit score system to the west. Users who verify their identity are rewarded with more reach and better tools than those that do not. **Verified users are the main product of Elon's twitter - an extensive database of individuals and complete control of the tools he will slowly get them to rely on - it is easier to monetize cattle than free men.**

![Blue Check Manifesto](https://www.discreetlog.com/content/images/2023/06/bluecheck.png)

If you cannot resist the temptation of the blue check in its current form you have already lost - what comes next will be much darker. If you realize the need to resist - [freedom tech provides us options](https://www.discreetlog.com/nostr/).

* * *

_**If you found this post helpful support my work with [bitcoin](https://geyser.fund/project/citadel?ref=discreetlog.com).**_

![Blue Check Manifesto](https://werunbtc.com/donate.png)


tags: Bitcoin transaction fees limit network abuse by making usage expensive. There is a cost to every transaction, set by a dynamic free market based on demand.

content:
![High Fees? Bitcoin is Working As Designed](https://www.discreetlog.com/content/images/2023/05/mempoolspace.png)

There must be a limit to how much data is transferred across the bitcoin network in order to keep the ability to run and use your own node accessible. **A node is required to interact with the global bitcoin network - if you do not use your own node then you must trust someone else's node.** If nodes become inaccessible to run then the network will centralize around the remaining entities that operate them - threatening the censorship resistance at the core of bitcoin's value prop. **The bitcoin protocol uses three main mechanisms to keep node operation costs low - a fixed limit on the amount of data in each block, an automatic difficulty adjustment that regulates how many blocks are produced based on current mining hash rate, and a robust dynamic transaction fee market.**

Bitcoin transaction fees limit network abuse by making usage expensive. There is a cost to every transaction, set by a [dynamic free market](https://www.discreetlog.com/utxos/) based on demand for scarce block space. It is an incredibly robust way to prevent spam without relying on centralized entities that can be corrupted or pressured.

After the 2017 bitcoin fee spike we had six years of relative quiet to build tools that would be robust in a sustained high fee market. Fortunately our tools are significantly better now but many still need improvement. Most of the pain points we see today will be mitigated.

**The reality is we were never going to be fully prepared - pressure is needed to show the pain points and provide strong incentives to mitigate them.**

**It will be incredibly interesting to watch how projects adapt under pressure. Optimistic we see great innovation here.**

* * *

_If you are willing to wait for your transaction to confirm you can pay significantly lower fees. Learn best practices for reducing your fee burden [**here**](https://www.discreetlog.com/utxos/).

My guide for running and using your own bitcoin node can be found **[here](https://werunbtc.com/bitcoincore?ref=discreetlog.com)**._

* * *

_**If you found this post helpful support my work with [bitcoin](https://geyser.fund/project/citadel?ref=discreetlog.com).**_

![High Fees? Bitcoin is Working As Designed](https://werunbtc.com/donate.png)


3EouJzaUpzc/c0KqkzFAn6jZiE2QudOmCZgIC83Sc4xWg0WCW0S4GMpgHRI9sQ9F?iv=66j99HW0qDHXLGTFaa0WYw==


tags: How Ideologically-Driven Environmental NGOs Have Hindered the Phase-Out of Gas Peaker Plants

tags: Gas peaker plants, which fire up during periods of high electricity demand, are a critical yet environmentally damaging component of many energy grids. These plants emit significant amounts of CO2, nitrogen oxides (NOx), and particulate matter, disproportionately impacting low-income communities near their locations. While there is broad consensus on the need to phase them out, progress has stalled. Surprisingly, a key barrier comes from an unexpected source: ideologically driven environmental NGOs. Despite advocating for cleaner energy, these groups have often opposed pragmatic solutions to reduce peaker plant reliance. By dismissing collaborations with utilities and energy companies as “greenwashing” outright, and refusing to engage with transitional technologies, they inadvertently prolong the lifespan of these polluting facilities. The Problem with “All or Nothing” Activism Many environmental NGOs operate under a rigid ideological framework that rejects any solution involving fossil fuel infrastructure, even if it demonstrably reduces emissions in the short term. This stance has led to the dismissal of viable bridge technologies, such as: Retrofitting Peaker Plants with Carbon Capture or Efficiency Upgrades In 2021, Duke Energy proposed retrofitting gas peaker plants in North Carolina with carbon capture systems and hybrid natural gas-battery systems to cut emissions by 50%. However, the Sierra Club and Sunrise Movement labeled the plan a “false climate solution,” arguing it legitimized fossil fuels. The project was shelved, leaving older, higher-emitting peakers in operation (source: Duke Energy Sustainability Report, 2022). Renewable-Natural Gas Hybrid Projects In California, where peaker plants contribute to poor air quality, startups like Mote Hydrogen sought to convert peakers to run on hydrogen-blended natural gas. While this would reduce NOx emissions by 30%, NGOs like 350.org criticized the effort as a “distraction from true renewables,” despite the lack of large-scale battery storage to replace peakers entirely (source: California Air Resources Board, 2023). These examples highlight a pattern: NGOs frequently attack projects that could meaningfully reduce emissions while offering no scalable alternatives. The result? Utilities default to maintaining outdated peaker plants rather than risk reputational damage from NGO backlash. Criticism Without Grid-Scale Alternatives The International Energy Agency (IEA) estimates that even in net-zero scenarios, natural gas will supply 15% of global electricity by 2040 due to grid stability needs (source: IEA World Energy Outlook, 2022). Transitioning away from peaker plants requires bridging solutions, yet NGOs often reject these outright. For instance, when NextEra Energy proposed replacing Florida peaker plants with solar farms paired with gas turbines (to ensure reliability during cloudy periods), the Center for Biological Diversity accused the utility of “greenwashing fossil fuel dependence.” No alternative plan was put forward, leaving aging peakers operational (source: Tampa Bay Times, 2021). Similarly, in New York, the closure of the Astoria peaker plant was delayed after local NGOs opposed a replacement facility using lower-emission turbines, demanding immediate 100% renewables—a goal the grid couldn’t yet support (source: NYISO Reliability Report, 2022). This absolutism ignores grid realities. Battery storage remains costly and limited in duration, leaving peaker plants as a necessary backstop. By blocking incremental improvements, NGOs ensure dirtier status-quo operations persist. Bitcoin Mining: A Pragmatic Alternative to Gas Peaker Plants in Texas While gas peaker plants have long been the default solution for grid stability during peak demand, Bitcoin mining has emerged as a scalable, cost-effective, and environmentally superior alternative—particularly in Texas. By acting as a flexible demand-side resource, Bitcoin mining has already demonstrated its ability to reduce reliance on peaker plants, even as ideologically driven NGOs and fossil fuel interests continue to oppose it. How Bitcoin Mining Replaces Gas Peaker Plants Gas peaker plants are designed to activate only during periods of extreme electricity demand, typically running fewer than 1,500 hours annually. However, their high costs, methane emissions, and environmental harms make them a poor long-term solution. Bitcoin mining, by contrast, provides grid operators with a unique tool: the ability to rapidly curtail energy consumption during peak demand, stabilizing the grid without the need for additional fossil fuel infrastructure. In Texas, this approach was pioneered by ERCOT CEO Brad Jones following the catastrophic 2021 Winter Storm Uri, which exposed the fragility of relying solely on peaker plants. Jones recognized that Bitcoin miners—unlike traditional industrial loads—could shut down operations within seconds, freeing up gigawatts of power for critical needs during emergencies. This flexibility allowed ERCOT to: Avoid building 3 GW of new gas peaker plants proposed by Berkshire Hathaway Energy, saving Texans an estimated $18 billion in infrastructure costs. Integrate more renewables by providing a “buyer of last resort” for excess solar and wind energy, which incentivizes renewable development. Reduce emissions by displacing peaker plants, which emit 0.4–0.6 tons of CO2 per MWh and leak methane even while idling. Peer-reviewed studies validate this strategy. Bruno et al. (2023) found that Bitcoin mining with demand response eliminated the need for gas peaker plants entirely while reducing annual carbon emissions by 48.67 million metric tons compared to baseline scenarios (Table 1). Rhodes et al. (2024) further concluded that Bitcoin mining’s flexibility enables grids to prioritize renewable energy over fossil fuels, accelerating decarbonization. Texas: A Proof of Concept By 2024, Bitcoin mining operations in Texas had grown to 3 GW of flexible load capacity, participating actively in ERCOT’s demand response programs. This resource proved critical during extreme weather events, such as the July 2023 heatwave, when miners voluntarily powered down to free up 1.2 GW of electricity—equivalent to the output of three large peaker plants. ERCOT has since reported zero blackouts despite record demand, crediting Bitcoin mining as a key factor in grid resilience. Dr Rian Dewhurst, of the Digital Assets Research Institute explains “Bitcoin mining doesn’t just stabilize the grid—it helps build a cleaner one. Grid operators no longer need expensive, polluting peaker plants idling on standby.” Opposition from Fossil Fuel Interests Despite its proven benefits, Bitcoin mining faces fierce opposition from entities invested in gas peaker plants. Berkshire Hathaway Energy, which lobbied aggressively for $18 billion in peaker plant contracts, has funded lobbying efforts to discredit Bitcoin mining through proxies like Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick. Patrick has repeatedly claimed Bitcoin “destabilizes grids,” a narrative debunked by ERCOT and academic research. This backlash underscores Bitcoin mining’s disruptive potential. As Dewhurst noted, “When you have 3 GW of flexible load, the business case for peaker plants evaporates.” Texas’ experience demonstrates that Bitcoin mining is not merely a theoretical alternative to gas peaker plants—it is a proven, scalable solution. By prioritizing grid needs over ideology, ERCOT has shown how collaboration with Bitcoin miners can phase out peaker plants while saving costs, cutting emissions, and accelerating the renewable transition. Toward Pragmatism: A Call for NGO Accountability The climate crisis demands urgency, but dogmatism and poor research stifles progress. To phase out peaker plants, NGOs must: Evaluate Collaborations Objectively Assess whether partnerships with utilities or energy firms yield measurable emissions reductions rather than reflexively crying “greenwash.” Engage with Grid Realities Acknowledge the role of transitional technologies until renewables and storage scale sufficiently. Prioritize Outcomes Over Ideology Recognize that the perfect is the enemy of the good — hybrid systems are better than perpetuating outdated peakers, and Bitcoin mining based solutions are better again, because they can accelerate the phasing out of gas peaker plants without any gas-powered backed to compensate for variable renewable energy intermittency. The perfect cannot be the enemy of the good. By clinging to purity tests, NGOs risk becoming unwitting allies of the very fossil fuel systems they seek to dismantle. It’s time to embrace pragmatism—before another decade of peaker plants locks in avoidable emissions.

content:
Gas peaker plants, which fire up during periods of high electricity demand, are a critical yet environmentally damaging component of many energy grids. These plants emit significant amounts of CO2, nitrogen oxides (NOx), and particulate matter, disproportionately impacting low-income communities near their locations. While there is broad consensus on the need to phase them out, progress has stalled. Surprisingly, a key barrier comes from an unexpected source: ideologically driven environmental NGOs.

![](https://batcoinz.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/Screen-Shot-2025-01-29-at-9.43.50-AM-1024x742.png)

Despite advocating for cleaner energy, these groups have often opposed pragmatic solutions to reduce peaker plant reliance. By dismissing collaborations with utilities and energy companies as “greenwashing” outright, and refusing to engage with transitional technologies, they inadvertently prolong the lifespan of these polluting facilities.

### **The Problem with “All or Nothing” Activism**

Many environmental NGOs operate under a rigid ideological framework that rejects any solution involving fossil fuel infrastructure, even if it demonstrably reduces emissions in the short term. This stance has led to the dismissal of viable bridge technologies, such as:

1.  **Retrofitting Peaker Plants with Carbon Capture or Efficiency Upgrades**
    In 2021, Duke Energy proposed retrofitting gas peaker plants in North Carolina with carbon capture systems and hybrid natural gas-battery systems to cut emissions by 50%. However, the Sierra Club and Sunrise Movement labeled the plan a “false climate solution,” arguing it legitimized fossil fuels. The project was shelved, leaving older, higher-emitting peakers in operation (source: _Duke Energy Sustainability Report, 2022_).
2.  **Renewable-Natural Gas Hybrid Projects**
    In California, where peaker plants contribute to poor air quality, startups like Mote Hydrogen sought to convert peakers to run on hydrogen-blended natural gas. While this would reduce NOx emissions by 30%, NGOs like 350.org criticized the effort as a “distraction from true renewables,” despite the lack of large-scale battery storage to replace peakers entirely (source: _California Air Resources Board, 2023_).

These examples highlight a pattern: NGOs frequently attack projects that could meaningfully reduce emissions while offering no scalable alternatives. The result? Utilities default to maintaining outdated peaker plants rather than risk reputational damage from NGO backlash.

* * *

### **Criticism Without Grid-Scale Alternatives**

The International Energy Agency (IEA) estimates that even in net-zero scenarios, natural gas will supply 15% of global electricity by 2040 due to grid stability needs (source: _IEA World Energy Outlook, 2022_). Transitioning away from peaker plants requires bridging solutions, yet NGOs often reject these outright.

For instance, when NextEra Energy proposed replacing Florida peaker plants with solar farms paired with gas turbines (to ensure reliability during cloudy periods), the Center for Biological Diversity accused the utility of “greenwashing fossil fuel dependence.” No alternative plan was put forward, leaving aging peakers operational (source: _Tampa Bay Times, 2021_). Similarly, in New York, the closure of the Astoria peaker plant was delayed after local NGOs opposed a replacement facility using lower-emission turbines, demanding immediate 100% renewables—a goal the grid couldn’t yet support (source: _NYISO Reliability Report, 2022_).

This absolutism ignores grid realities. Battery storage remains costly and limited in duration, leaving peaker plants as a necessary backstop. By blocking incremental improvements, NGOs ensure dirtier status-quo operations persist.

### **Bitcoin Mining: A Pragmatic Alternative to Gas Peaker Plants in Texas**

While gas peaker plants have long been the default solution for grid stability during peak demand, Bitcoin mining has emerged as a scalable, cost-effective, and environmentally superior alternative—particularly in Texas. By acting as a flexible demand-side resource, Bitcoin mining has already demonstrated its ability to reduce reliance on peaker plants, even as ideologically driven NGOs and fossil fuel interests continue to oppose it.

![](https://batcoinz.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/Screen-Shot-2025-01-29-at-9.44.29-AM-1024x612.png)

#### **How Bitcoin Mining Replaces Gas Peaker Plants**

Gas peaker plants are designed to activate only during periods of extreme electricity demand, typically running fewer than 1,500 hours annually. However, their high costs, methane emissions, and environmental harms make them a poor long-term solution. Bitcoin mining, by contrast, provides grid operators with a unique tool: the ability to rapidly curtail energy consumption during peak demand, stabilizing the grid without the need for additional fossil fuel infrastructure.

In Texas, this approach was pioneered by ERCOT CEO Brad Jones following the catastrophic 2021 Winter Storm Uri, which exposed the fragility of relying solely on peaker plants. Jones recognized that Bitcoin miners—unlike traditional industrial loads—could shut down operations within seconds, freeing up gigawatts of power for critical needs during emergencies. This flexibility allowed ERCOT to:

*   **Avoid building 3 GW of new gas peaker plants** proposed by Berkshire Hathaway Energy, saving Texans an estimated [$18 billion in infrastructure costs](https://www.da-ri.org/articles/how-bitcoin-mining-saved-texans-18-billion).
*   **Integrate more renewables** by providing a “buyer of last resort” for excess solar and wind energy, which incentivizes renewable development.
*   **Reduce emissions** by displacing peaker plants, which emit 0.4–0.6 tons of CO2 per MWh and leak methane even while idling.

Peer-reviewed studies validate this strategy. [Bruno et al](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0928765523000313?via%3Dihub). (2023) found that Bitcoin mining with demand response eliminated the need for gas peaker plants entirely while reducing annual carbon emissions by 48.67 million metric tons compared to baseline scenarios (Table 1). [Rhodes et al](https://lancium.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/Lancium_Flexible_Data_Center_Whitepaper_4.2022.pdf). (2024) further concluded that Bitcoin mining’s flexibility enables grids to prioritize renewable energy over fossil fuels, accelerating decarbonization.

#### **Texas: A Proof of Concept**

By 2024, Bitcoin mining operations in Texas had grown to 3 GW of flexible load capacity, participating actively in ERCOT’s demand response programs. This resource proved critical during extreme weather events, such as the July 2023 heatwave, when miners voluntarily powered down to free up 1.2 GW of electricity—equivalent to the output of three large peaker plants. ERCOT has since reported zero blackouts despite record demand, crediting Bitcoin mining as a key factor in grid resilience.

Dr Rian Dewhurst, of the [Digital Assets Research Institute](https://www.da-ri.org/) explains “Bitcoin mining doesn’t just stabilize the grid—it helps build a cleaner one. Grid operators no longer need expensive, polluting peaker plants idling on standby.”

#### **Opposition from Fossil Fuel Interests**

Despite its proven benefits, Bitcoin mining faces fierce opposition from entities invested in gas peaker plants. Berkshire Hathaway Energy, which lobbied aggressively for $18 billion in peaker plant contracts, has [funded lobbying efforts to discredit Bitcoin mining](https://www.da-ri.org/articles/how-bitcoin-mining-saved-texans-18-billion) through proxies like Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick. Patrick has repeatedly claimed Bitcoin “destabilizes grids,” a narrative debunked by ERCOT and academic research.

This backlash underscores Bitcoin mining’s disruptive potential. As Dewhurst noted, “When you have 3 GW of flexible load, the business case for peaker plants evaporates.”

Texas’ experience demonstrates that Bitcoin mining is not merely a theoretical alternative to gas peaker plants—it is a proven, scalable solution. By prioritizing grid needs over ideology, ERCOT has shown how collaboration with Bitcoin miners can phase out peaker plants while saving costs, cutting emissions, and accelerating the renewable transition.

### **Toward Pragmatism: A Call for NGO Accountability**

The climate crisis demands urgency, but dogmatism and poor research stifles progress. To phase out peaker plants, NGOs must:

1.  **Evaluate Collaborations Objectively**
    Assess whether partnerships with utilities or energy firms yield measurable emissions reductions rather than reflexively crying “greenwash.”
2.  **Engage with Grid Realities**
    Acknowledge the role of transitional technologies until renewables and storage scale sufficiently.
3.  **Prioritize Outcomes Over Ideology**
    Recognize that the perfect is the enemy of the good — hybrid systems are better than perpetuating outdated peakers, and Bitcoin mining based solutions are better again, because they can accelerate the phasing out of gas peaker plants without any gas-powered backed to compensate for variable renewable energy intermittency.

The perfect cannot be the enemy of the good. By clinging to purity tests, NGOs risk becoming unwitting allies of the very fossil fuel systems they seek to dismantle. It’s time to embrace pragmatism—before another decade of peaker plants locks in avoidable emissions.