Bitcoin miners often cite job creation as a major benefit to mining; however on a per kilowatt basis, the total number of jobs produced by bitcoin mining operations are only 0.5% (1 per 200) of that of any other company in any other industry.

A common misconception spread by bitcoin miners is that mining creates jobs; however, facts don’t support that argument.  For instance, Riot Blockchain 1GW Navarro Texas facility employed 270 people when the mine was only consuming 400MW.  Assuming that they expand their work force in proportion to their electricity consumption, they will end up employing less than 700 people.  For comparison, Toyota Manufacturing in Georgetown Kentucky consumes 50 MW on average while employing over 7,000 people and paying over $500M in salaries.  That 50 MW facility assembles up to 550,000 cars every year. If Toyota were to expand that facility to 1GW, it would employ over 149,000 people and pay more than $10B in salaries to the local community.  But because its bitcoin, Riot Blockchain will employ only 700 people with total salaries less than $50M while consuming a total of 8.76TWh of electricity per year.  Put simply, any company in any other industry that used as much electricity as bitcoin mining would hire 200 people for every 1 employee mining bitcoin.

Why You’re Paying Bitcoin’s Energy Bill

The vast computing power needed to create new bitcoins has driven up energy bills for residents and businesses.

For specific studies that look at the impact of bitcoin mining on job creation, researchers from the University of California Berkley estimated in 2021 that bitcoin mining added $1B a year onto electricity bills for residential and business ratepayers. Specifically in upstate New York, the researchers determined that, because of bitcoin mining’s power usage, households paid an additional $165 million a year in energy costs, while businesses paid an extra $79 million. Again reflecting on the lack of jobs being created by bitcoin, that same study concluded that bitcoin mining only accounted for an increase in tax revenue of just $40 million, while the local welfare cost including higher electricity bills came to more than $240 million. So the benefits in taxes were greatly outweighed the added electricity costs on consumers.