The argument against Bitcoin mining is couched in terms of energy and emissions, but one panelist said it is really about control. That was a central thread of a panel recorded at Mining Disrupt Miami, July 26–28, 2022, titled Proof Proof of Work Works. In July 2022, Bitcoin traded at $21,268. By October 2026, that price had climbed to $83,769.
Ben Gagnon of Bitfarms, then the company's chief mining officer, moderated. The panelists included Scot Johnson of Digital Shovel, who said his company fabricates and builds mining data centers; Alex Brammer, who had just moved to Talen Energy; and Ethan Vera, then CEO of Luxor Technology, along with other mining executives. Gagnon opened with the core question: the industry is 13 years old, every block and every transaction has been processed, and there have been no disruptions to the network. So why does the opposition exist at all?
The Threat Is Control, Not Carbon
Alex Brammer, who said he came from about 15 years in the military before moving into mining, answered first. The arguments against Proof of Work, he said, are couched in terms of emissions, lack of regulation and investor protection, but they are really about the loss of control. Because Proof of Work cuts powerful institutions and people out of the middle and makes their jobs irrelevant, he said, it is very threatening to them.
He added that if investor protection were really the concern, it would be Proof of Stake that regulators were scrutinizing. Later in the panel, the point came back as a question of barriers: setting up mining machines, whether a container in an austere environment or steel in the ground at large scale, is an enormous barrier to entry to the creation of money.
Why Fiat Is Proof of Stake by Another Name
One panelist challenged the idea that Proof of Stake is a more efficient or fair alternative, arguing that the world already lives under Proof of Stake by another name: fiat based central banking.
fiat-based central banking um where it is relatively inexpensive to create money it is relatively inexpensive to manipulate markets
A panelist · 11:59
In that system, he said, it is relatively inexpensive to create money and to manipulate markets, including the single most important price signal, the price of money. Proof of Work, by contrast, ties the creation of money to real infrastructure and real work.
The China Ban as the Ultimate Stress Test
Gagnon pointed to the China mining ban as likely the greatest test the Bitcoin network has ever faced. Almost overnight, he said, 60 percent of the network went offline. Brammer added that miners reallocated their assets within 12 months, restoring full performance with significantly lower emissions intensity.
how many transactions didn't get processed how many blocks didn't get processed none the thing worked 60 percent of capacity goes offline and everything still moves
Ben Gagnon · 40:40
Not a single block or transaction failed to process, Gagnon said, calling it the proof that the system works. Another panelist argued that this is what makes a 51 percent attack so implausible today: for any country, military, corporation or individual, the investment in chips, power, containers and locations needed to try it would be enormous.
Mining as the Engine of the Energy Transition
The conversation shifted to the role of mining in the broader energy transition. Panelists described mining on associated gas from oil wells, including sites as far north as the Northwest Territories in Canada, using gas that would otherwise have gone to nothing. One panelist said Proof of Work is the only incentive that exists to reduce flare gas emissions, because governments have figured out how to tax emissions but not how to incentivize their reduction. Another contrasted Alberta, where he said operators cannot get away with flaring, with Texas, where gas is simply burned off, and called mining a way to monetize that gas while reversing some of the environmental damage.
without bitcoin mining the energy transition will not happen uh once that is widely understood and the regulatory hedwoods become regulatory tailwinds
A panelist · 35:07
One panelist argued that regulatory headwinds will turn into tailwinds once it is widely understood that mining is needed for the energy transition. Another described large mining loads in Texas that curtail when needed as almost like creating a reverse peaker plant, using underutilized resources instead of building new peak generation.
The Case for Low Time Preference
The panel also made a philosophical argument for low time preference. One panelist said the easy money standard had moved society away from what is productive and efficient toward what is cheap in the moment, and that Bitcoin is helping bring long term thinking back. Large mining infrastructure projects, another noted, lose money for years before they return it, which is itself the definition of low time preference investing.
the fundamental genius of proof-of-work is how uh difficulty and profits play against each other to create an equilibrium
A panelist · 29:11
That panelist explained that the equilibrium means there is always an incentive to mine: if people are mining at too expensive a rate, those that can continue will keep the network secure. Earlier, another panelist had pointed to the structure of the mining pool ecosystem, and the inability to censor control of the hash, as one of the most important parts of keeping Bitcoin a permissionless system. Understanding that, he admitted, takes a significant level of detail about the whole mining value chain. Panelists agreed the industry needs to translate these technical details into simple terms, the kind a congressional staffer with 30 minutes to read a paper can absorb, and to take the message beyond the echo chamber of a mining conference to local politicians and friends outside the industry. This conversation is expected to continue at Intelligence Disrupt 2027, March 22 to 24 in Irving, Texas.