Slashdot Mirror
Bitcoin Backlash as 'Miners' Suck Up Electricity, Stress Power Grids in Central Washington (seattletimes.com)
An anonymous reader shares a report: Public hearings for rural electric utilities are rarely sellout events. But the crowd that showed up in Wenatchee two weeks ago for a hearing about Bitcoin mining in Chelan County was so large that utility staff had to open a second room with a video feed for the overflow. The turnout wasn't surprising. Chelan County, along with neighboring Douglas and Grant counties, has been at the center of the U.S. Bitcoin boom since 2012, when the region's ultracheap hydropower began attracting cryptocurrency "miners."
[...] As a result, an area famous for apples, wheat and conservative politics has been transformed into a kind of cyber-boomtown, with Bitcoin mining operations that range from large-scale, state-of-the-art warehouses to repurposed cargo containers to backyard sheds. By the end of this year, according to some estimates, the Mid-Columbia Basin could account for as much as 30 percent of the global output of new Bitcoin and large shares of other digital currencies, such as Litecoin and Ethereum. But as in any boomtown, success has come at a cost. As the cryptocurrency industry morphs into larger, more energy-intensive operations, the Basin's three public utilities districts (PUDs) are reassessing how they deal with it, and whether they can -- or should even try to -- keep up.
[...] As a result, an area famous for apples, wheat and conservative politics has been transformed into a kind of cyber-boomtown, with Bitcoin mining operations that range from large-scale, state-of-the-art warehouses to repurposed cargo containers to backyard sheds. By the end of this year, according to some estimates, the Mid-Columbia Basin could account for as much as 30 percent of the global output of new Bitcoin and large shares of other digital currencies, such as Litecoin and Ethereum. But as in any boomtown, success has come at a cost. As the cryptocurrency industry morphs into larger, more energy-intensive operations, the Basin's three public utilities districts (PUDs) are reassessing how they deal with it, and whether they can -- or should even try to -- keep up.
200A at 240V (what most US houses have) can mine a lot of coin. Remember that amps are PEAK load, and most houses use maybe 1/10 of that on average through a day. So there's still room for Bitcoin mining even with average electrical service.
The problem isn't that these machines are out of electrical code, but the combination of all these machines is putting a strain on an otherwise not busy electrical grid.
Ooookay this has GOT to be some class 10 grade A level of delusion so lay it on us....how EXACTLY is a system that is designed to require ever increasing mathematical difficulty (thus requiring more power) to get output is "designed to decrease overtime" because I'm betting those are some flaming logic hoops that Evel Knievel would be impressed by.
Because unless your answer is "it will eventually require more power than the sun can output to generate a coin" I call bullshit, hell even if you can somehow make BC take more power than the sun to generate a coin all that would do is cause the miners to move to LC or ETH so it means diddly damned shit anyway, but I want to hear how BC has magical power reducing powers because this should be some industrial strength crazy talk!
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
So, I completely agree with your questioning of GP. I've no idea how anybody comes to the conclusion that "Bitcoin energy consumption is designed to decrease over time". Bitcoin is designed to lower the reward (measured in terms of BTC) over time; but that's got nothing to do with the energy consumption required to mine a block.
But, it's important to know that Bitcoin doesn't need anywhere near the current electricity demands of the global mining network to it to function.
The Proof of Work (PoW) function in Bitcoin is like a lottery - the algorithm increases or decreases complexity based on the amount of CPU cycles entered in the lottery at any given time. So, whenever someone next door to you plugs in an Antminer and starts mining Bitcoin, at this stage they are doing absolutely nothing to help Bitcoin be Bitcoin, they're just using power to enter into the Bitcoin lottery - and claim their share of the prize whenever anyone in their 'mining pool' wins the lottery.
Here's the critical point that most people either don't know, or don't want to know: If 99 out of 100 people who currently mine bitcoin turned off their miners tomorrow, Bitcoin would work PERFECTLY without them. It would use 1/100th of the current global power requirement and do EXACTLY THE SAME JOB.
If cities have a problem with people using electricity to mine Bitcoin, that's a problem with the pricing of electricity, not a problem caused by Bitcoin.
"Charge what it costs" also calls for higher prices at higher usage, when meeting that demand requires supplies beyond what was planned and contracted for based on normal usage and has to be purchased on the spot market, and when local grids have to be upgraded to handle the demand. Which is demand that will go elsewhere on a moment's notice if the power cost elsewhere is lower. This is not a productive industry making significant local capital investments.