The End of Bitcoin Mining as We Know It? Bit Digital CEO's Stark Warning on the Industry's Imminent Collapse

Introduction

In the high-stakes world of cryptocurrency, where the hum of mining rigs once symbolized the decentralized dream, a sobering prediction is echoing through the halls of power. Sam Tabar, CEO of Bit Digital, has declared that the commercial Bitcoin mining industry will be "dead in two years," a dire forecast tied to the April 2028 halving and the entry of sovereign nations into the fray. Once a peer-to-peer car rental venture in China, Bit Digital pivoted to mining amid 2018's lending crackdown but announced in June 2025 it would wind down U.S., Canadian, and Icelandic operations to focus on an Ethereum treasury strategy. As Bitcoin trades at $107,820 amid U.S.-China trade tensions and vulnerabilities like the NPM malware attack expose the ecosystem's fragility, Tabar's words serve as a wake-up call. Is this the death knell for a sector that has consumed billions in energy and capital, or a catalyst for evolution? This is the story of Bitcoin mining's potential twilight, viewed through the lens of one of its former champions.

Tabar's Prediction: A Two-Year Countdown to Obsolescence

Tabar's stark assessment is rooted in the unforgiving math of Bitcoin's halving cycles. The last halving in April 2024 was a "disaster" for miners, slashing block rewards from 6.25 to 3.125 BTC and compressing margins amid rising energy costs and competition. The next, in April 2028, will halve rewards again to 1.5625 BTC, further eroding revenue while global hashrate—already at 700 EH/s—surges as nations with cheap power enter the market. "There’s no way the mining industry can survive another halving and then, at the same time, the sovereigns get into, start participating in Bitcoin mining," Tabar told Cointelegraph Magazine. He points to countries like Bhutan, which mined $1.4 billion worth of BTC using hydroelectricity, and Ethiopia, where production costs $20,000 per Bitcoin versus commercial miners' $100,000 average, per MacroMicro data.Bit Digital's own journey underscores the shift. Founded in 2015 as a P2P car rental service, it pivoted to mining after China's 2018 clampdown but faced profitability woes. In June 2025, Tabar announced the shutdown of operations across three countries, citing unsustainable economics. The company, now the fourth-largest Ether treasury holder with 120,300 ETH worth $500 million, exemplifies the pivot: "There’s no halving in Ethereum. You don’t have to buy these bloody stupid machines all the time. You don’t have to find sources of power that’s cheap. It’s way easier, a much much better business," Tabar remarked. This move aligns with Michael Saylor's advice to "hold Bitcoin on the balance sheet," though Tabar opted for Ethereum's stability.

The Halving's Historical Toll: A Pattern of Pain

Bitcoin halvings, occurring every 210,000 blocks or roughly four years, are baked into the protocol to control supply, but they wreak havoc on miners. The 2016 halving saw hashrate double in a year, crushing small operators, while 2020's event preceded a bull run that masked underlying strain. The 2024 halving, however, exposed cracks: mining revenue plummeted 50%, and over 20% of U.S. miners shuttered operations amid $0.07/kWh electricity costs, per Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance. Tabar predicts the 2028 event will be fatal for commercial players, as sovereigns with free or subsidized power—half of global countries generate electricity publicly—flood the market. China's state-owned grids, India's renewables push, Russia's gas reserves, and Brazil's hydro assets could "push the hashrate through the fucking roof," leaving private firms unable to compete.

Industry Challenges: Sovereigns, Costs, and Centralization

Commercial mining's woes are multifaceted. Sovereign entrants like Bhutan (hydro-powered, $1.4 billion mined) and Ethiopia (5% global hashrate, $220 million earned last year) leverage near-zero marginal costs, per MacroMicro. Private miners, facing $100,000/BTC production, struggle with 60% gross margins pre-halving dropping to 30% post-event. Energy costs, 70% of expenses, are rising 15% annually in the U.S., per EIA, while ASIC hardware depreciates rapidly. Tabar argues nation-states resolve Bitcoin’s long-term security budget issue—miners subsidizing the network via fees—but at the cost of decentralization, as state-backed hashrate could centralize control.Counterpoints exist: Mati Greenspan of Quantum Expeditions sees untapped free power from Texas oil flares, while General Kenobi predicts grid operators will dominate to balance loads. Yet, Tabar’s track record—foreseeing China’s mining ban and treasury strategies—lends weight to his view. Bit Digital’s Ethereum pivot, becoming the fourth-largest holder, exemplifies adaptation, but for pure miners, the writing is on the wall.

The Broader Picture: Mining's Evolution or Extinction?

Bitcoin mining, once a gold rush, is at an inflection point. The $3.81 trillion market sees stablecoins ($286 billion) and DeFi ($95 billion TVL) thriving under the GENIUS Act and MiCA, but $40 billion in illicit flows—including North Korea’s $1.3 billion hacks and the NPM attack’s 2.6 billion downloads—expose risks. Institutional adoption—$29.4 billion in Bitcoin ETF inflows, 17% of BTC in treasuries—shifts focus to holding, not hashing. Sub-Saharan Africa’s 52% growth and Venezuela’s USDT surge show crypto’s utility, but mining’s energy intensity (0.5% global electricity) draws scrutiny amid climate goals.Tabar’s prediction aligns with a pivot: firms like Bit Digital and Marathon Digital explore AI and high-performance computing on mining hardware, per Cointelegraph Magazine. Sovereign mining could stabilize the network, but at decentralization’s expense—China’s 2021 ban scattered hashrate, yet state entry risks re-centralization. The Crypto Fear & Greed Index at 71 (“Greed”) signals froth, per Santiment, but post-halving economics demand reinvention.

Critical Analysis: A Bold Call with Nuanced Oversights

Tabar’s two-year death knell for commercial mining is provocative and data-backed—halvings’ revenue cuts and sovereign advantages are undeniable—but it underplays adaptation. Ethiopia’s $20,000/BTC cost is low, but U.S. miners access subsidies and flare gas, per Greenspan, potentially sustaining niches. The article’s focus on doom overlooks Ethereum’s pivot success, where staking yields 4–6% without energy costs, per StakingRewards. Tabar’s Ethereum choice is pragmatic, but Saylor’s Bitcoin maximalism—holding 636,505 BTC—shows ideological divergence. Overall, the piece effectively spotlights mining’s crossroads but risks alarmism, ignoring how sovereign entry could democratize hashrate if regulated.

Supporting Data

• Global Hashrate: 700 EH/s (Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance).

• Mining Revenue Post-2024 Halving: Down 50%.

• Ethiopia BTC Cost: $20,000/BTC; 5% global hashrate, $220 million earned (MacroMicro).

• Bhutan Mining: $1.4 billion (MacroMicro).

• Bit Digital ETH Holdings: 120,300 ETH ($500 million).

• U.S. Mining Shutdowns: 20% post-2024 halving (Cambridge).

Conclusion

Sam Tabar’s prediction of Bitcoin mining’s demise in two years, driven by the 2028 halving and sovereign competition, is a stark warning for an industry facing $100,000/BTC costs and revenue squeezes. Bit Digital’s Ethereum pivot exemplifies adaptation, but for pure miners, the math is unforgiving. As Bitcoin dips and regulations like GENIUS evolve, the sector must reinvent—perhaps through AI or green energy—or face obsolescence. Sovereign entry could secure the network but risks centralization. In a market of greed and fear, mining’s future lies in evolution, not extinction.