Bitcoin mining’s annualized electricity demand climbed to about 190 terawatt-hours in December 2025, up 38% from 138 TWh in June 2024, according to preliminary research reported by theEnergyMag.

Alexander Neumueller of the Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance presented the figures at the Energy Investors Forum in Dallas. Cambridge expects to publish the second edition of its Digital Mining Industry Report later in 2026.

The preliminary findings also show that hydropower has overtaken natural gas as Bitcoin mining’s largest single energy source. Low-carbon power accounted for 59.4% of the reported mining mix, compared with 52.4% in the previous study. Even with that shift, Cambridge’s estimated greenhouse-gas emissions rose 20%, from about 40 million to 48 million tonnes of carbon-dioxide equivalent. The combination matters because Bitcoin mining’s climate impact depends both on total electricity use and on where that electricity comes from.

Cambridge: Hydropower Overtakes Natural Gas as Bitcoin Mining’s Largest Energy Source Preliminary data from the Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance shows Bitcoin mining’s annualized electricity consumption rose 38% from 138 TWh in June 2024 to about 190 TWh in December… pic.twitter.com/VtzLh6ZXVa — Wu Blockchain (@WuBlockchain) July 26, 2026

Cambridge: Hydropower Overtakes Natural Gas as Bitcoin Mining’s Largest Energy Source Preliminary data from the Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance shows Bitcoin mining’s annualized electricity consumption rose 38% from 138 TWh in June 2024 to about 190 TWh in December… pic.twitter.com/VtzLh6ZXVa

Hydropower takes the largest share of mining power

The 2025 Cambridge Digital Mining Industry Report found that natural gas supplied 38.2% of surveyed miners’ electricity, making it the largest single source at that time. Renewables supplied 42.6% in total, while nuclear power contributed 9.8%. Coal’s share had fallen to 8.9%, down from 36.6% in Cambridge’s earlier 2022 estimate.

The preliminary update changes that ranking. Hydropower now stands ahead of natural gas, although Cambridge has not yet released a full source-by-source breakdown. Neumueller linked part of the shift to stronger survey coverage in markets with significant hydroelectric resources, including Ethiopia.

Ethiopia has expanded Bitcoin mining around low-cost electricity from the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam. Crypto.news previously reported that Ethiopian Bitcoin mining received a 600 MW boost as the country signaled support for the industry. The example also shows why geographic coverage can change energy-mix estimates: miners clustered near large hydroelectric projects can materially affect the reported share of hydropower.

Electricity demand rises faster than emissions

Bitcoin mining’s annualized power use increased by about 52 TWh between the two reference points. Annualized demand measures how much electricity the network would use over a year if the December 2025 rate continued. It does not mean miners consumed exactly 190 TWh during the 2025 calendar year.

Emissions increased more slowly than electricity demand because miners reported a lower-carbon power mix. Cambridge’s estimate still rose from roughly 40 million to 48 million tonnes of CO₂ equivalent. The cleaner mix slowed the rate of emissions growth, but it did not offset the effect of higher overall electricity consumption.

More mining machines joined the network during the measured period, increasing total computing power. Newer hardware can perform more calculations for each unit of electricity, but efficiency gains did not fully counter the increase in hashrate. Cambridge’s Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index tracks how prices, transaction fees, mining equipment and network difficulty can affect estimated electricity demand over time.

Preliminary figures carry survey limits

Cambridge based the new estimates mainly on responses from mining companies representing slightly more than half of global Bitcoin hashrate. The wider coverage gives researchers a larger sample than the first report, but the final publication may revise some figures after Cambridge completes further checks.

The 2025 report also warned that survey participation can distort geographic estimates. U.S. companies supplied a large share of responses, which likely overstated the country’s portion of global mining activity. The latest rise in reported hydropower may partly reflect better coverage of miners in Ethiopia and other markets that rely more heavily on hydroelectric generation.

Cambridge’s earlier study estimated 39.8 million tonnes of emissions using its survey-based method. A separate location-based model produced a much higher estimate of 69.6 million tonnes. The difference shows that results depend on assumptions about mining locations, electricity contracts, grid mixes and the use of stranded or flared energy.

Miners explore AI, but deployments remain limited

The new survey also examined whether Bitcoin miners are shifting power capacity into artificial intelligence and high-performance computing. About 10% of respondents said they had already allocated some power to AI or accelerated computing services. More than 40% of the remaining miners said they were actively exploring the option.

Neumueller cautioned that “intent to look into it is not commitment to deploy.” AI data centers require costly networking, cooling and reliability systems that basic Bitcoin mining sites may not have. Miners can quickly reduce Bitcoin loads when electricity prices rise, while AI customers usually require steady power and stronger service guarantees.

Still, almost nine in ten respondents expected AI and HPC diversification to gain ground over the next several years. As crypto.news reported, listed miners have already announced more than $70 billion in AI and HPC contracts as they seek steadier revenue outside Bitcoin production.

The shift is already visible in some company results. TeraWulf generated more revenue from HPC hosting than from Bitcoin mining during the first quarter of 2026. It reported $21 million from HPC services, compared with less than $13 million from digital asset mining.

The Cambridge findings point to two developments occurring at the same time. Bitcoin mining is using more electricity, while hydropower and other low-carbon sources represent a larger share of the reported mix. Mining companies are also assessing whether their power connections and sites can support AI services. Cambridge’s full report is expected to provide a detailed energy breakdown and final methodology later in 2026.