fbpx
01 / 05
Bitcoin Brought Electricity to Countries in the Global South

Blog Post | Adoption of Technology

Bitcoin Brought Electricity to Countries in the Global South

It won’t be the United Nations or rich philanthropists that electrifies Africa.

Summary: Energy is indispensable for societal progress and well-being, yet many regions, particularly in the Global South, lack reliable electricity access. Traditional approaches to electrification, often reliant on charity or government aid, have struggled to address these issues effectively. However, a unique solution is emerging through bitcoin mining, where miners leverage excess energy to power their operations. This approach bypasses traditional barriers to energy access, offering a decentralized and financially sustainable solution.


Energy is life. For the world and its inhabitants to live better lives—freer, richer, safer, nicer, and more comfortable lives—the world needs more energy, not less. There are no rich, low-energy countries and no poor, high-energy countries.

“Energy is the only universal currency; it is necessary for getting anything done,” in Canadian-Czech energy theorist Vaclav Smil’s iconic words.

In an October 2023 report for the Alliance for Responsible Citizenship on how to bring electricity to the world’s poorest 800 million people, Robert Bryce, author of A Question of Power: Electricity and the Wealth of Nations, sums it as follows:

Electricity matters because it is the ultimate poverty killer. No matter where you look, as electricity use has increased, so has economic growth. Having electricity does not guarantee wealth. But its absence almost always means poverty. Indeed, electricity and economic growth go hand in hand.

To supply electricity on demand to many of those people, especially in the Global South, grids need to be built in the first place and then have enough extra capacity to ramp up production when needed. That requires overbuilding, which is expensive and wasteful, and the many consumers of the Global South are poor.

Adding to the trouble are the abysmal formal institutions of property rights and rule of law in many African countries, and the layout of the land becomes familiar: corruption and fickle property rights make foreign, long-term investments basically impossible; poor populations mean that local purchasing power is low and usually not worth the investment risk.

What’s left are slow-moving charity and bureaucratic government development aid, both of which suffer from terrible incentives, lack of ownership, and running into their own sort of self-serving corruption.

In “Stranded,” a long-read for Bitcoin Magazine, Human Rights Foundation’s Alex Gladstein accounted for his journey into the mushrooming electricity grids of sub-Saharan Africa: “Africa remains largely unable to harness these natural resources for its economic growth. A river might run through it, but human development in the region has been painfully reliant on charity or expensive foreign borrowing.”

Stable supply of electricity requires overbuilding; overbuilding requires stable property rights and rich enough consumers over which to spread out the costs and financially recoup the investment over time. Such conditions are rare. Thus, the electricity-generating capacity won’t be built in the first place, and most of Africa becomes dark when the sun sets.

Gladstein reports that a small hydro plant in the foothills of Mount Mulanje in Malawi, even though it was built and financed by the Scottish government, still supplies exorbitantly expensive electricity—around 90 cents per kilowatt hour—with most of its electricity-generating capacity going to waste.

What if there were an electricity user, a consumer-of-last-resort, that could scoop up any excess electricity and disengage at a moment’s notice if the population needed that power for lights and heating and cooking? A consumer that could co-locate with the power plants and thus avoid having to build out miles of transmission lines.

With that kind of support consumer—guaranteeing revenue by swallowing any excess generation, even before any local homes have been connected—the financial viability of the power plants could make the construction actually happen. It pays for itself right off the bat, regardless of transmissions or the disposable income of nearby consumers.

If so, we could bootstrap an electricity grid in the poorest areas of the world where neither capitalism nor central planning, neither charity worker nor industrialist, has managed to go. That consumer of last resort could accelerate electrification of the world’s poorest and monetize their energy resilience. That’s what Gladstein went to Africa to investigate the bourgeoning industry of bitcoin miners electrifying the continent.

Bitcoin Saves the World: Energy-Poverty Edition

Africa is used to large enterprises digging for minerals. The bitcoin miners springing forth all over the continent are different. They don’t need to move massive amounts of land and soil and don’t pollute nearby rivers. They operate by running machines that guess large numbers, which is the cryptographic method that secures bitcoin and confirms its transaction blocks. All they need to operate is electricity and an internet connection.

By co-locating and building with electricity generation, bitcoin miners remove some major obstacles to bringing power to the world’s poorest billion. In the rural area of Malawi that Gladstein visited, there was nowhere to offload the expensive hydro power and no financing to connect more households or build transmission lines to faraway urban areas: “The excess electricity couldn’t be sold, so the power stations built machines that existed solely to suck up the unused power.”

Bitcoin miners are in a globally competitive race to unlock patches of unused energy everywhere, so in came Gridless, an off-grid bitcoin miner with facilities in Kenya and Malawi. Any excess power generation in these regions is now comfortably eaten up by the company’s onsite mining machines—the utility company receiving its profit share straight in a bitcoin wallet of its own control, no banks or governments blocking or delaying international payments, and no surprise government currency devaluations undercutting its purchasing power.

No aid, no government, no charity; just profit-seeking bitcoiners trying to soak up underused energy. Gladstein observes:

One night during my visit to Bondo, Carl asked me to pause as the sunset was fading, to look at the hills around us: the lights were all turning on, all across the foothills of Mt. Mulanje. It was a powerful sight to see, and staggering to think that Bitcoin is helping to make it happen as it converts wasted energy into human progress. . . .

Bitcoin is often framed by critics as a waste of energy. But in Bondo, like in so many other places around the world, it becomes blazingly clear that if you aren’t mining Bitcoin, you are wasting energy. What was once a pitfall is now an opportunity.

For decades, our central-planning mindset had us “help” the Global South by directing resources there—building things we thought Africans needed, sending money to (mostly) corrupt leaders in the hopes that schools be built or economic growth be kick-started. We squandered billions in goodhearted nongovernmental organization projects.

Even for an astute and serious energy commentator as Bryce, not once in his 40-page report on how to electrify the Global South did it occur to him that bitcoin miners—the very people who are turning the lights on for the poorest in the world—could play a crucial role in achieving that.

It’s so counterintuitive and yet, once you see it, so obvious. In the end, says Gladstein, it won’t be the United Nations or rich philanthropists that electrifies Africa “but an open-source software network, with no known inventor, and controlled by no company or government.”

Blog Post | Energy Prices

The Declining Time Price of Kilowatt-Hours

We're getting more energy for less time.

Summary: Energy powers economic progress, and it has become much more abundant since 1980. Despite nominal price increases, electricity is more affordable in terms of labor. A blue-collar worker today can buy much more electricity per hour worked than in 1980. Thanks to rising productivity and innovation, we’re getting significantly more energy for less time.


Energy is essential to creating abundance. Whether it’s used to organize and move atoms or to store and transmit information, economic development depends on energy. Although energy is available in many forms and measured in various units, the kilowatt-hour (kWh) is a common standard of comparison, especially in electricity-related contexts. A kWh represents the energy delivered by one kilowatt of power sustained over one hour. For perspective, a standard 42-gallon barrel of crude oil contains approximately 1,700 kWh of energy, though the exact amount depends on the oil’s grade.

The US Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) tracks average electricity prices over time in nominal terms. The chart below shows the U.S. average price per kWh from 1980 to the present—rising from about 6 cents per kWh in 1980 to 17.6 cents today.

To convert the money price into a time price, we compared the US blue-collar hourly compensation rate for each year, indexing 1980 as the baseline (1.0). The result shows that the time required to purchase a kWh of electricity has declined by 26.6 percent since 1980.

Another way to understand electricity prices is to ask: how many kWh can you buy with one hour of work? This chart illustrates that relationship. In 1980, an hour of US blue-collar labor could buy 152 kWh; today, it buys 207 kWh—a 36 percent increase in energy abundance.

The regression line plotted on the chart suggests a steady gain of about two additional kWh per year for the same amount of work. Although time prices have spiked in the past three years, the long-term trend still indicates growing abundance..

If you started your first job as an unskilled worker in 1980 and “upskilled” to a blue-collar job by 2024, your time price for electricity would have dropped by 67.3 percent. For the time it took to earn enough to buy 100 kWh in 1980, you could now purchase 306 kWh—representing a 206 percent increase in electricity abundance.

Find more of Gale’s work at his Substack, Gale Winds.

News | Energy Production

Fusion Breakthrough Could Reduce Cost of Future Power Plant

“TAE Technologies, a private fusion energy company developing the cleanest and safest approach to commercial fusion power, has achieved a first-of-its-kind breakthrough that fundamentally advances the performance, practicality and reactor-readiness of the company’s proprietary fusion technology.

Experimental results published in the peer-reviewed journal Nature Communications prove TAE has invented a streamlined approach to form and optimize plasma that increases efficiency, significantly reduces complexity and cost, and accelerates the company’s path to net energy and commercial fusion power.”

From TAE.

Blog Post | Energy Prices

Gasoline Abundance Increases with Population Growth

Since 1950, the global population has increased by 229 percent while the time price of gasoline fell by 35 percent.

Summary: Since 1950, the global population has grown by 229%, yet the time price of gasoline for US blue-collar workers has fallen by 35 percent, illustrating an enormous increase in personal gasoline abundance. By fostering free markets and entrepreneurial energy, societies like the United States have shown how the power of knowledge and innovation can transform finite physical resources into increasingly abundant commodities.


Since 1950, the time price of gasoline for US blue-collar workers has fallen by 35 percent. For the time it took to earn enough money to buy a gallon of gasoline in 1950, today’s blue-collar workers can buy 1.54 gallons. That means personal gasoline abundance has increased by 54 percent.

Crude oil is refined to make gasoline, and the market for crude oil is global. Since 1950, the world population increased by 229 percent, from 2.5 billion to almost 8.2 billion. How is that possible, since, according to Thomas Robert Malthus and Thanos, the opposite should occur? It’s because Malthus and Thanos mistakenly assumed that only atoms could be resources and that since we have a finite number of atoms, we must also have a finite number of resources.

The truth is that atoms without knowledge are not, in fact, resources; they have no intrinsic economic value. It’s only when we add knowledge to atoms that they become resources. Since there’s no limit to the amount of knowledge yet to be discovered, created, and shared, resources can be infinite.

The gasoline-population chart shows that more people mean more abundant gasoline, proving Malthus and Thanos wrong in their assumptions.

In the 1970s, people obsessed over the number of barrels of oil in proven reserves. They thought we had discovered all the oil. By dividing the quantity in proven reserves by the annual consumption, they calculated the date we would run out. That flawed approach of Malthus and Thanos fails to recognize that it’s the price of a resource, not its quantity, that matters. Humans react to increasing prices in a variety of ways; they consume less, search for more, look for substitutes, recycle, etc. These actions ultimately reduce prices and increase abundance. What increasing prices really does is focus our energy on discovering new knowledge, which transforms scarcity into abundance.

When prices go up, we not only look for more oil, but we also innovate ways to use it more efficiently. The top-selling car in 1980 was the Oldsmobile Cutlass. Gas mileage on this vehicle averaged 20 miles per gallon (17 city/23 highway). By 2023, the Honda CR-V was the most popular two-wheel drive car. The CR-V reported mileage at 31 miles per gallon (28 city/34 highway). This improvement in mileage represents an increase of 55 percent over this 43-year period (1980–2023). Mileage has been increasing at a compound rate of around 1 percent a year. Today’s cars are also much safer and more reliable, durable, and comfortable.

The lesson of gasoline over the past 74 years is that as the price increases, we find more of it, and we find more productive ways of using it. Then the price goes down. That has been true for all kinds of products, not just gasoline.

The exceptions are those manipulated by the government on the supply and/or demand side. President Richard Nixon imposed price controls in the early 1970s that were not fully removed until President Ronald Reagan did so in the early 1980s, allowing the free market to work its magic. Then fracking and horizontal drilling were applied to oil exploration, thanks in part to Harold Hamm’s Continental Resources in Oklahoma City. That company was a major player in the development of the Bakken formation in North Dakota, which led directly to massively increased domestic production and eventually resulted in the United States becoming a net exporter of oil.

With government price controls, there was almost immediate scarcity for nearly a decade, but when prices were allowed to freely operate, abundance soon overflowed. That shows how governments tend to create scarcity while entrepreneurs (such as Hamm) produce abundance. In the United States, property owners have subsurface property rights. In most other countries, the government owns all the underground oil. These private property rights, a free market and lots of entrepreneurs and innovators have made the United States the most productive energy producer on the planet. The country has led the world in crude oil production since 2018:

Can you guess where gasoline is the most affordable on the planet? Please read “Where Gasoline is Most Affordable.”

Entrepreneurs create abundance; bureaucrats almost always create scarcity. Choose wisely.

Find more of Gale’s work at his Substack, Gale Winds.