Bitcoin Consumes as Much Electricity as Argentina—Cash Is the Sustainable Alternative

By Frane Maroevic, Director General, International Currency Association

Bitcoin consumes as much electricity as an entire country—Argentina. That striking fact, highlighted by the International Monetary Fund (IMF), should give every policymaker pause. While the digital payment world is celebrated as convenient and cutting-edge, it carries a hidden and massive energy bill that rarely makes it into official economic statistics or climate debates.

The updated System of National Accounts (SNA)—the global standard governments use to measure economic activity and wealth—now officially recognizes crypto assets like Bitcoin for the first time. The IMF’s own commentary makes a critical point: despite using colossal amounts of electricity, Bitcoin is not counted in GDP because it doesn’t create traditional goods or services. This disconnect hides the environmental cost of digital finance from view.

Cash: The Low-Energy Champion

While it does take some energy to produce and distribute cash, it is the “offline” payment method. It needs no electricity, no network, no data centers humming 24/7. A banknote works even during blackouts or internet failures. For millions lacking stable internet or bank accounts, cash is not obsolete—it’s essential.

Where Bitcoin and other digital payments demand energy-heavy servers and complex computing, cash is quiet, reliable, and low-impact. It’s a survivor in an age of power shortages and growing energy insecurity.

The IMF’s revelation about Bitcoin’s energy use puts a spotlight on the environmental risks of a “cashless” future. Bitcoin mining alone matches the electricity consumption of a mid-sized country, and that doesn’t even count other digital payment infrastructures. These energy demands are an external cost rarely accounted for in the economic data that drive policy decisions.

Some digital payment proponents claim their systems are greener, but these claims often ignore the full energy chain—from network devices and cloud servers to hardware manufacturing and usage patterns. The reality is complex, and emerging studies show that cash’s environmental footprint, especially when factoring in recycled currency and energy-efficient production methods, remains impressively low.

A Pragmatic Choice for Policy

As the world wrestles with energy challenges and climate commitments, rejecting cash outright is reckless. Governments should embrace a balanced payment ecosystem—where cash continues to play a vital role alongside digital options.

Cash is an energy-saving hedge against the power-hungry digital economy. It supports inclusion for those left behind digitally, ensures payment resilience, and keeps the environmental costs transparent.

The Bottom Line

The IMF’s update to global economic standards reveals what should be obvious: not all money is created equally. Bitcoin’s staggering electricity use signals that digital financial innovation comes with hidden costs. Meanwhile, cash quietly manages billions of transactions with minimal energy consumption.

For a greener, more equitable payment future, cash is not a fallback—it’s an essential foundation.