Bitcoin Miners Urged to Take Direct Action on Energy Policy Education

Bitcoin mining industry leaders are calling on operators nationwide to proactively engage with policymakers as the sector positions itself as a critical infrastructure solution for America's energy grid and artificial intelligence buildout, according to discussions at Bitcoin Park's recent Nashville Energy & Mining Summit.

The push comes as the industry faces mounting questions about supply chain security, grid reliability, and national competitiveness, particularly as China's total AI computing capacity has grown 30% since 2020 while U.S. capacity increased just 5% over the same period. Industry advocates say direct education efforts by mining operators themselves, rather than waiting for regulation, could determine whether the sector becomes viewed as essential infrastructure or faces restrictive oversight.

"It's really a lot of it still all comes down to education and being upfront with policymakers," said Michael Sullivan, principal at White Oak Strategies and former senior advisor to Senator Bill Hagerty. "You don't have to orange pill every policymaker. You've just got to be able to assure them that you pose no threat."

Sullivan, whose work helped arrange the notable Mar-a-Lago roundtable where President Trump declared he wanted "all of the Bitcoin to be mined in America," emphasized that operators must address varying concerns across government levels. Local officials focus on noise and infrastructure impacts, while federal policymakers examine grid resilience, supply chain origins, and cybersecurity threats.

Will Paul, who heads payments and hardware policy for Block, noted the regulatory landscape has shifted dramatically from environmental concerns in 2021-2022 toward questions about what he called "verifiability"—policymakers now want detailed information about hardware supply chains, firmware security and operational procedures for grid management.

"The complexity now is that when you say we're critical to the grids and we're critical to the build out and we co-locate AI, policymakers and regulators are talking to us and saying, okay, what's in that box? It's time for the industry to get ahead of that before you're regulated."

During the panel, moderated by Zack Cohen of the Bitcoin Policy Institute, both Sullivan and Paul emphasized that successful policy engagement doesn't require sophisticated lobbying operations. Sullivan's practical advice: "Pick up the phone and make the call. It's just really that easy to get a hold of a Senate office."

Paul recommended mining operators bring tangible hardware to meetings, noting that showing policymakers physical mining chips consistently breaks through abstract blockchain confusion. He stressed focusing on concrete benefits, jobs created, community investments made, grid support provided, rather than cryptocurrency philosophy.

The speakers also highlighted a strategic advantage for Bitcoin mining: its unique ability to power down within minutes during grid emergencies, contrasting sharply with traditional data centers that run continuously. This load flexibility, they argued, positions mining as enabling rather than competing with AI infrastructure development.

"It's way easier to convert a Bitcoin mining facility into an AI data center, than it is to build an AI data center."

Sullivan noted how mining operations establish the power infrastructure AI requires.

For operators concerned about resource constraints, Paul and Sullivan recommended joining state and national trade associations like the Texas Blockchain Council to coordinate messaging and share logistical burden. They emphasized that even small operators can make meaningful impact by focusing on their immediate congressional representatives rather than only high-profile Bitcoin advocates.

Cohen framed the discussion around the intersection of Bitcoin mining with AI development and national security concerns, noting that roughly half of U.S. GDP growth last year came from AI-related activity, making the conversation increasingly urgent for policymakers weighing America's technological competitiveness.

The fundamental message from the panel: operators should approach policymakers with transparency about their operations, evidence of community benefit, and willingness to demonstrate how their hardware and software actually work before regulations force such disclosures under less favorable terms.