That makes no sense.
I mean, it's great that the energy is being used for something useful but it's still CH4+202 -> CO2+2H20
Left-wing math, presumably.
If the methane is burned off (hence flare gas), then it's purely an economic issue when it's used for bitcoin mining instead but many oil companies just vent the gas (since it's less dense than air) into the atmosphere rather than burn it and in that case, the unburned methane has somewhere over 20 times the effect of CO2 as a greenhouse gas. This is why they're going after cattle as well. We're going to have to tap those cattle next for bitcoin mining. Bitcoin miners will also try to make the case that using flare gas removes some reliance from other fossil fuels which have a higher carbon content and coal (pretty much all carbon). I'm not sure I buy that logic because if the energy comes cheaply enough from flare gas, then older, less efficient bitcoin miners could be used where they would be too inefficient for use within the existing electrical distribution system.
