Demonstrates reduced emissions in blockchain mining through strategic infrastructure investment, indicating improved sustainability.
Purpose Blockchain technology is widely regarded as a disruptive innovation, yet the environmental impact of blockchain mining, particularly greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, has raised serious concerns. Existing research lacks systematic theoretical guidance on how to balance blockchain development with sustainability. This study aims to develop a framework for optimizing blockchain mining operations to mitigate climate impacts while sustaining blockchain stability. Design/methodology/approach We construct a theoretical model from a social planner's perspective to examine optimal allocation of mining activities between low-carbon and high-emission energy regions. The model incorporates infrastructure investment and environmental constraints. We further identify underlying mechanisms and validate the theoretical predictions using numerical simulations to illustrate how investment strategies influence emission outcomes and blockchain performance. Findings The results show that increasing blockchain infrastructure investment can simultaneously reduce GHG emissions and enhance operational stability. Three key effects – shift focus effect, low-carbon preference fostering effect and bi-promotion effect – emerge as crucial drivers of this outcome. Numerical simulations confirm that carefully calibrated investment levels allow blockchain systems to operate efficiently with significantly lower emissions. Originality/value This paper provides a theoretical foundation for sustainable blockchain operations. By linking infrastructure investment with environmental performance, it advances understanding of how blockchain can be managed to reconcile innovation with climate goals. The findings provide actionable insights for policymakers, investors and technology developers seeking to promote environmentally responsible blockchain systems.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sun et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: