‘Green’ crypto used 18 times more energy than claimed

A cryptocurrency built to dodge bitcoin’s brutal energy footprint now faces the same old question: how green is green when the numbers don’t hold up?

Reports indicate the currency uses 18 times more energy than its makers claim, a gap large enough to rattle one of the industry’s most important selling points. The project positions itself as a cleaner alternative to bitcoin, which has long drawn criticism for the electricity demanded by its mining system. That pitch matters because crypto companies increasingly frame lower energy use as proof that digital assets can coexist with climate goals.

The new finding cuts straight at that narrative. If the estimates hold, the issue goes beyond one disputed metric and lands on a broader problem: the public often has to trust energy claims that sit behind technical models, selective disclosures, or company messaging. In a market full of environmental branding, a large mismatch between promise and performance can quickly become a credibility test.

The clash over this cryptocurrency’s power use shows how fragile green branding becomes when independent scrutiny meets bold corporate claims.

That last point may prove crucial. The makers say changes are coming, suggesting the project plans to reduce its energy demand and close the gap between image and reality. But promises of future efficiency rarely settle present concerns. Readers, investors, and regulators tend to focus on what a system consumes now, not only what developers say it could consume after upgrades.

What happens next matters well beyond a single token. As pressure grows on tech companies to back sustainability claims with hard evidence, cryptocurrencies that advertise themselves as clean will likely face tougher examination. If this case pushes the sector toward clearer reporting and independent verification, it could mark a turning point in how the industry sells — and proves — its environmental credentials.