Riot taps into an existing ( sometimes shaky) energy grid, while Greenidge generates its own electricity. It’s important to note that Greenidge occupies a unique role, and it’s difficult to directly compare these different facilities and how they affect the communities around them. Though other mining facilities, such as Riot Platforms’ center outside of Austin, Texas, have played bigger roles in the bitcoin mining debate, Greenidge occupies a prominent spot in discussions in Albany (New York’s capital city) and Washington, D.C. New York, along with Texas, has become a hotspot for that debate, and Greenidge has become an unlikely poster child. Nor is CoinDesk making an attempt to answer the question of whether bitcoin mining is “worth it.” ![]() The debate around mining has thus far only picked at this philosophical conversation, without really getting into the nuances. These debates have become highly politicized, a near-intractable conflict between environmentalists and bitcoiners that is, on its face, an environmental debate and, at its core, a philosophical debate about value that the cryptocurrency industry provides to the world – and whether that value is worth shouldering a clear, and potentially heavy, environmental cost. This month, someone hacked Kelles’ Twitter account while she was testifying about bitcoin mining before lawmakers in Pennsylvania, and used her feed to promote pepecoin (PEPE), a meme coin that was enjoying its 15 minutes of fame. The most fervent of these bitcoin advocates attack anyone who disagrees with them. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), who chairs the Senate panel, called the hearing “one of the most informative hearings that Congress has had in a long time.”Īt the same time, lobbyists and advocates for the industry are breathlessly touting the potential benefits of bitcoin mining more and more, saying this sector of the crypto industry could boost investments in renewable or clean energy and bolster energy grids that otherwise would have no reason to be improved. ![]() Senate's Environment and Public Works Subcommittee and the Pennsylvania House of Representatives' Environmental Resources and Energy Committee. This year alone, Kelles has testified before the U.S. The bill's supporters, including New York Assemblywoman Anna Kelles, a Democrat who represents a number of towns south and east of Cayuga Lake, national environmental groups like Earthjustice and the Sierra Club and hyperlocal groups like the Seneca Lake Guardian, heralded its passage as a major victory. Supporters of the bill argued the plant was responsible for spewing hot water into the glacial lake, killing thousands of fish and contributing to toxic algal blooms that were harmful to other aquatic life. Members of a local union and residents near Greenidge Generation, a power plant that mines bitcoin at the center of this debate, opposed the moratorium. The landmark New York law came after months of debate about the impact bitcoin (BTC) mining was having in the state. ![]() Kathy Hochul signed a two-year ban on new crypto mining facilities powered by carbon-based energy sources, such as gas power plants. ![]() While the rhetoric used by all sides in the larger bitcoin mining debate is often based on misinformation, in upstate New York environmentalists are actually influencing legislation with arguments that are full of inaccuracies.īut locals who live near the facility say they’ve been cut out of the conversation, and the broader debate ignores the role Greenidge plays in their lives.ĭRESDEN, N.Y. In New York at least, this debate has led to legislation targeting companies like Greenidge. New York-based crypto mining facility Greenidge Generation has found itself at the center of state and national debates about the impact mining firms have on the environment and their local communities.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |