Research shows: EU carbon taxes force Bitcoin miners to move to Russia

cryptonews.ruPublicado a 2026-08-23Actualizado a 2026-08-23

Resumen

A study suggests that the EU's carbon pricing policies may be pushing Bitcoin mining operations to relocate, operationally, to Russia. The research analyzed daily emissions data and Bitcoin prices from 2019 to 2025, finding a statistical link between higher EU carbon prices and increased emissions in Russia. This correlation implies miners are shifting activity to Russia during low-demand hours to capitalize on the lack of a carbon tax there, maximizing profits. No similar link was found between the EU and the rest of the world. The study notes this is likely an operational shift—companies with equipment in both regions powering down in the EU and up in Russia—rather than physical relocation of hardware. Limitations include the impact of China's 2021 mining ban and other unaccounted factors. Furthermore, Russia's own regional bans on crypto mining, expanded to Moscow in 2025, could complicate this operational migration in the future.

The strict control that the European Union (EU) exercises over carbon emissions may be one of the factors driving the migration of these industries, at least from an operational perspective, to jurisdictions where no carbon emission taxes are levied.

The research "Does carbon pricing lead to carbon leakage from crypto mining? Quantile data on carbon leakage from the energy systems of the EU-27, Russia, and the rest of the world", published by three Vietnamese researchers—Pham Ngoc Toan, Le Tran Trung Hieu, and Nguyen Vu Trung Nguyen—focuses on investigating whether carbon pricing in the EU could be one of the main reasons for the relocation of Bitcoin mining operations to Russia.

To this end, the study analyzed daily emissions in the energy sector of the EU, the rest of the world, and Russia from 2019 to 2025 and compared them with daily Bitcoin closing prices.

The results revealed a statistical correlation between carbon emission pricing in Europe and carbon emissions in Russia, leading to the conclusion that Bitcoin mining operations "migrate" to Russia during off-peak hours when both Bitcoin prices and EU carbon emission allowance prices are rising.

No such statistical connection was observed when analyzing a similar relationship between the EU and the rest of the world, making this finding more significant.

Unlike the EU, Russia lacks a carbon pricing system, meaning mining operations there can be more profitable.

However, since the study did not record the physical relocation of mining equipment to Russia, it emphasizes that this phenomenon may be operational in nature: companies owning equipment in both jurisdictions turn it off in the EU and turn it on in Russia to maximize their profits.

Nevertheless, the study also notes a number of limitations, including the negative impact of China's May 2021 ban on Bitcoin mining on the established correlation, as well as the omission of other significant factors.

Furthermore, starting in 2025, the Russian government introduced a ban on cryptocurrency mining in certain regions, and this year its extension to Moscow was approved, which could complicate the operational relocation of this activity to Russia, narrowing the opportunities for mining companies.

Preguntas relacionadas

QWhat is the main finding of the research paper regarding EU carbon pricing and Bitcoin mining?

AThe research finds a statistical correlation between EU carbon pricing and carbon emissions in Russia, suggesting that Bitcoin mining operations 'migrate' to Russia during off-peak hours when Bitcoin prices and EU carbon allowance prices are high.

QWhat specific limitation regarding China's role does the study acknowledge?

AThe study acknowledges that China's ban on Bitcoin mining in May 2021 may have negatively impacted the established correlation between EU carbon pricing and mining migration to Russia, making it harder to isolate the effect of carbon taxes alone.

QHow does the study describe the potential nature of the mining 'migration' to Russia?

AThe study suggests the migration may be operational rather than physical. Companies owning equipment in both jurisdictions could be powering it down in the EU and powering it up in Russia to maximize profits, as no physical movement of hardware was tracked.

QWhat key regulatory difference between the EU and Russia makes mining potentially more profitable in Russia according to the article?

AUnlike the EU, Russia lacks a carbon pricing system. This absence of carbon taxes means mining operations in Russia can be more profitable from an operational cost perspective.

QWhat new regulatory challenge in Russia does the article mention that could affect future mining operations there?

AThe article mentions that starting in 2025, the Russian government introduced a ban on cryptocurrency mining in certain regions, with an expansion approved for Moscow this year, which may narrow the options for mining companies looking to relocate operations to Russia.

Lecturas Relacionadas

Hardware Wallet Owners Lose Money: The Nuances of Cold Bitcoin Storage in 2026

The article discusses a wave of distrust towards hardware wallets by the summer of 2026, primarily triggered by security incidents. The most significant involved Coldcard wallets from Coinkite, where a firmware bug dating back to 2021 drastically reduced the cryptographic entropy for seed phrase generation. This allowed attackers to brute-force private keys, leading to losses estimated between $115-$153 million in Bitcoin. While Coldcard issued a fixed firmware, the incident damaged the reputation of all hardware wallets. Other manufacturers like Trezor and Ledger issued statements assuring their devices' security, citing their use of secure hardware elements for true random number generation. However, separate data breaches affected SafePal (exposing personal data of ~40,000 users) and Trezor (via a logistics partner, compromising data for ~14,000 users), though no private keys or crypto assets were stolen in these cases. The article clarifies that hardware wallets themselves don't "hold" crypto but store the keys to access it on the blockchain. It argues against abandoning hardware wallets entirely, pointing out that alternatives like paper, memory, or custodial exchange storage have their own significant risks. It concludes that these incidents should be viewed as specific failures, not a condemnation of the entire category. A key underlying challenge highlighted is the dual role of advancing AI, which empowers both defenders to enhance security and attackers to find vulnerabilities more efficiently.

cryptonews.ruHace 23 min(s)

Hardware Wallet Owners Lose Money: The Nuances of Cold Bitcoin Storage in 2026

cryptonews.ruHace 23 min(s)

Trading

Spot
活动图片