“You can’t fake energy.” Has Bitcoin Finally Got Green Enough For Tesla?

Elon Musk recently revived the “51% renewable energy” benchmark, saying that the energy backing of Bitcoin “can’t be faked.”

The reference is to his earlier promise that Tesla will resume accepting Bitcoin payments once at least half of mining energy comes from clean or low-carbon sources.

However, now that the latest data suggests that the network may have crossed that threshold, Tesla still has not reactivated BTC settlement. Why?

Has Bitcoin Passed the Bar Yet?

According to the Cambridge Center for Alternative Finance’s 2025 Digital Mining Industry Report, sustainable energy now powers approximately 52.4% of surveyed Bitcoin mining activity.

Of that, 42.6% are from renewable energy sources (hydro, wind, solar, etc.) and 9.8% from nuclear or other low-carbon sources. At the same time, fossil fuel contributions have shifted: natural gas now accounts for 38.2% (up from ~25% in 2022), and coal has fallen to 8.9% (down from ~36.6%).

If Musk’s promise is taken literally, Bitcoin could already exceed the 51% “sustainable energy” mark, at least as measured by Cambridge’s survey of firms covering about 48% of global mining capacity.

But that’s only half the story. The wording matters: Musk has referred to renewable energy sources in earlier comments, though in later tweets he says “51% renewable” or “energy you can’t fake.” The Cambridge figure links renewable energy + nuclear power; the pure renewable share is lower (42.6 %).

So, BTC could still fall short depending on the rigidity of Musk’s definition.

Additionally, the Cambridge approach is survey-based and covers only a subset of miners. Off-grid operations, curtailed renewables, regional ownership and temporal mismatches (when renewables produce more or less relative to mining demand) complicate the picture.

Alternative models, such as those based on grid carbon intensity or energy tracking, often produce more conservative estimates of renewable share. That divergence means even a nominal “pass” is subject to debate.

So why didn’t Tesla flip the switch?

Even with Bitcoin now able to qualify under Musk’s sustainability test, Tesla has not reactivated BTC payments. Several pragmatic and symbolic obstacles remain.

The first is due diligence. Musk has previously said that Tesla will only resume payments once it sees “reasonable (~50%) clean energy consumption … and a trend toward increasing that number.” That wording implies he’s looking for persistence, not a one-off data point.

A single report showing 52% sustainable energy may not meet his requirement for a verified and sustained upward trend in Bitcoin’s energy mix.

Another factor is definitional clarity. Tesla will have to decide whether “sustainable” includes nuclear and low-carbon sources or strictly renewable energy such as hydro, wind and solar. The Cambridge data combines these categories, but Musk’s earlier phrasing referred specifically to renewable energy.

Without a universally accepted definition, any decision to resume BTC payments could be accused of greenwashing.

There is also the issue of trader and market risk. Accepting Bitcoin exposes Tesla to price volatility, complex accounting treatment and possible regulatory complications.

Even if the company immediately converts BTC receipts to fiat, fluctuations between order placement and settlement introduce financial uncertainty that may not be worth it for an automaker operating on thin margins.

Branded optics add another layer. Tesla’s image is built on environmental credibility, and even a minor drop in Bitcoin’s energy profile could cause backlash from investors and ESG-minded customers. The company may prefer to err on the side of caution rather than face renewed criticism if mining activities shift back to fossil-heavy regions.

Finally, operational integration cannot be ignored. To bring Bitcoin payments back online, Tesla will need to rebuild wallet infrastructure, transaction pipelines and conversion mechanisms. This requires engineering resources and internal approvals: steps that are far from trivial for a global manufacturer already balancing multiple product launches and software initiatives.

Taken together, these factors suggest that clearing the 51% renewable threshold is not enough in itself. For Musk, the test seems to be as much about confidence, consistency and perception as it is about raw data. Until this is matched, Tesla’s checkout page will likely remain crypto-free.

What this means for adoption

From a narrative standpoint, Musk’s re-engagement has influence. If Bitcoin can credibly hold on to a cleaner energy mix and major commercial peers like Tesla start trading again, it will reinforce a more sustainable narrative for crypto.

Still, Tesla’s continued off-chain status, despite allegations, suggests Musk sees the promise as conditional, not automatic. The test is as much about optics, risk control and narrative as it is about simple statistics.

For now, Bitcoin’s claimed “51%+ sustainable” status offers a compelling rebuttal to critics, but until payments return, it remains more of a symbolic victory than a commercial one.