436
Texas paid bitcoin miner more than $31 million to cut energy usage during heat wave
(www.cbsnews.com)
this post was submitted on 08 Sep 2023
436 points (97.8% liked)
News
37079 readers
3661 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Honestly, why allow them to mine on the grid at all until it is upgraded? It’s just a big wasteful use of energy that uses public resources but doesn’t benefit the public at all. It just prints money for the guys doing it.
Also, $31 million could go towards better infrastructure that could allow this in the future.
Logic has no power here! —- said in Gandalf’s voice.
Wait, wasn't that wormtongue
We’re both wrong, it was Saruman.
You are advancing towards TolkienBoomer
Sure, but I don't know how much that would matter. In the short-term, batteries might be a viable solution, but $31million would get you about a ~15MW storage system from my understanding, which is about 1 order of magnitude too small to be more than a rounding error and 2 orders of magnitude off from being a fix. Also, electric companies profit off of cryptominers (which theoretically could be used to improve the grid) and ERCOT sees them as a flexible demand that can be turned off in emergencies (at the cost of money).
Fixing the power grid works be socialism or something...
“Mah freedoms!”
Because they are buying the power, which pays for grid upgrades. The grid won't be improved without demand, and miners provide a flexible, profitable demand for power.
ERCOT's incentives are a bit off, though. They should be offering power to miners at very low rates when they have excess supply available, then jacking up the rates to miners well beyond the point of profitability when they don't have it. Ideally, they would convince the miners to install their own solar and wind generation (and maybe pumped storage as well) and pay them more than they would earn mining to backfeed the grid during power shortages.
Paying miners not to use power is just fucking stupid.
It probably falls under a general policy where they compensate big industrial users if they shut down to save the grid, think like a factory shutting down for the day. It would make sense in those instances, but for crypto mining it's just wasteful.
That makes sense, but if that's the case, ERCOT needs to adjust its rates for that plan. They need to increase the cost of power and decrease the reward for discontinuing their use.
Miners should be pushed toward a plan with highly variable power costs. They should have the very lowest rates when power is plentiful, but the highest rates when it is scarce. They are ideal candidates for this kind of "demand shaping".
Yeah, a compensation plan should basically compensate a user for their fixed costs involved in shutting down (wages, etc), and not things like opportunity cost (the products you would've otherwise been able to produce and sell).
Thing is, you can't tailor different rates per customer, so a crypto miner is probably always going to be ahead, because they basically have no running costs besides electricity. The only other cost is basically the cost of acquiring the ASICs and having a security guard on site.
You certainly can establish different rate plans for your customers to choose from. You don't need a fixed cost per kWh. You could offer discounts for off-peak consumption, and surcharges for on-peak. You could establish reliability tiers, where you get a discount in exchange for being ready to shut down consumption when needed. The lower the tier you select, the cheaper your power, but the more you have to shut down.
Agreed. This is a good solution for the wasteful energy usage of the miners. I don’t see how they arrived at paying them not to use the grid. Does literally any private citizen get paid not to use large amounts of electricity?
Certain large industrial customers might get paid to voluntarily shed loads as part of a service level agreement, but those agreements should include rates structured to make mining unprofitable.
Because it’s Texas land of the free.
Individuals can do whatever they want and the costs are set appropriately. Mining bitcoin is more profitable than the cost of electricity. They can either jack the prices up for everyone, or pay miners not to mine. It’s cheaper to pay.
Is it cheaper to ban mining or improve infrastructure? Sure, but there is no societal good, only individual. Banning mining would be an “infringement on the right to make money”.
Texas.
Women might have something to say about "the rights of the individual" in Texas...
Yeah, well. A lot of Texans have a strong belief in who qualifies as an individual, and who may as well be property.
Because its Texas: the state run by idiots that refuse to connect to the rest of the american grid because if they did, theyd have to actually get everything to code eventually.
They also built much of the solar in one region instead of diversifying. So even when other places are under fire-weather watch from high winds, we can have low wind energy because of low winds where they're built...
So capitalism?
Err yew insineratin the free merkert is wrong?
Because normally they make a small profit on the miners. They just didn't expect prices to shoot up.
I am sure they will change their contracts to have contingency clauses for the future.