Topic: [2018-10-21] Ephrata, Washington Imposes Year-Long Ban on New Cryptocurrency Min (Read 181 times)

The reason electricity is so cheap in WA is because of all the hydroelectric (clean energy) capacity there, so the clean energy angle is probably moot.

When miners push the grid beyond capacity, they increase the electricity price for everyone else. It makes no sense to only view things as if the miners are helpless victims being punished by utilities. Businesses (including mining businesses) actually pay less than residents. On average, Washington businesses pay 7.68¢/kWh while residents pay 8.53¢/kWh. Businesses are already receiving significantly subsidized electricity costs vs. residents. Why should that be?

What do these localities gain by having miners set up operations? It only makes sense to incentivize businesses if they actually help local economic growth and prosperity. If they are increasing costs of living for everyone else -- and this is the primary concern in all of these cases -- it makes sense to stop subsidizing them and to disincentivize them from operating in the first place.

Does Ephrata receive tax revenues, and how significant are they? Are miners contributing to the local economy, or do they simply drive up everyone else's electricity costs and give back nothing? If I lived there, I would only take a pro-mining stance if there were benefits for me and my community. It's irrational to take a blindly pro-miner stance because it would only mean higher electricity costs for me, and possibly an unreliable electrical grid.

I would call this an opportunity for the local authority there to start their thinking engine inside their minds and find out a solution rather than increasing the electricity price.
Impose clean energy for new miners?
3 years to switch to clean energy for the already installed ones?...
This will benefit everyone. But no, authorities around the world act the same way indeed : turn off your mind when you get elected then if you have a problem = increase the price! =  problem solved (shortly of course, since once the population rise or new industries open up then they will have the same problem)...

I don't see any conspiracy here. Us peons probably don't realise how much power mining can eat.

You have a nice peaceful area in the pacific NW. Suddenly a bunch of dirty miners show up out of nowhere and push the power generation to the max and beyond. You can't magic up that extra generating capacity out of nowhere. It takes years to approve, design and build more by which point the miners will be long gone and they're left with a load of capacity doing nothing.

It's better to price the shit out of the miners or simply tell them to go away and not come back than have daily life fall apart. I can see a time when miners finance their own power generation facilities. I don't think mining and regular generation will coexist for long.

higher electricity rates for a mining related business is nonsense
lack of electricity? seriously, it sounds like a pretext indeed, if not to raise the prices then to
single out the crypto related ventures and create unnecessary  hype around them
they are going to ban the four existing mining operators, so they will simply leave the area and stop paying taxes and electricity bills
lack of judgement or a direct order from above?

If that was the other way round there would be no problems. I mean, isn't that obvious that businesses should pay higher prices than regular citizens? Residents of the area should not suffer but should rather benefit from the businesses around them.

Only maybe they do benefit from the businesses already, and if the commercial electricity rates will rise the businesses will leave the area and the overall situation will become worse for the residents. If that is the case then Council members have to weigh all the pros and cons before making serious decisions, and thus the desire of "taking a one-year “break” in order to “see what’s going” in the sphere" is understandable.

it sounds like other industries were never a problem. that makes sense if you consider that in other industries, electricity rates are usually not the determining factor in choosing operating location. that's not the same for agriculture, lumber and metal refining which is much of eastern washington's industry.

so it makes a lot of sense to charge miners higher rates to either force them to pay for the overages they're causing (because going over grid capacity means utilities have to buy the power elsewhere) or otherwise discourage them from setting up in the first place. as long as electricity is cheaper than elsewhere, miners are going to move in, take it, and cause these problems.

Everyone will prefer that any business have to pay a higher rate if it exceeds the excess of energy 
Since it isn't the first case, i am afraid that they will select mining firms only in the future to pay higher rates without including other industries that consume also too much electricity. That's all 

I don't think it's "hidden" at all. This is happening across the northern US and Canada, and local governments have been pretty upfront about the problem: Foreign mining businesses are setting up in town and taking far more than excess (unused) energy. As a result, they're driving up rates for residents and threatening the area with blackouts.

It should be no surprise if cities and utility districts answer to their residents rather than to foreign businesses threatening the local electricity grid for profit. Either residents need to pay for the privilege of allowing miners into town (by paying higher residential rates and/or lowering usage), or the miners need to pay for the privilege. Which would you prefer if you lived there?

I'm all for miners soaking up excess capacity, but if they're driving up electricity rates, they should pay the difference. Not residents.

This is the main reason causing the suspension of the new mining activity. The hidden reason is to regulate this business and maybe impose higher electricity rates.

The city of Ephrata, Washington, will halt new crypto mining developments in the city for the next 12 months, Eastern Washington and North Idaho daily newspaper The Spokesman Review reports Friday, Oct. 19.

The recently announced suspension will only affect new crypto operations from being established in Ephrata, while the existing four businesses already there will continue operating. According to Ephrata city administrator Wes Crago, those four crypto operations — including two at the Port of Ephrata, one in an industrial area of the city, as well as one in a residential area — are being relocated at the moment.

The decision for the suspension was taken by a city council vote, with six council members voting in favor of the new cryptocurrency regulations, and only one commissioner, Matt Moore, voting against.

Moore noted that even a temporary ban can pose a threat for the city’s economic development since it puts the industry “outside the city’s expertise,” adding that he does not want to “surrender any economic opportunity big or small.”

Council member Kathleen Allstot clarified that the new ban implies taking a one-year “break” in order to see “see what’s going” in the sphere, as well as to find out how mining fits both in Ephrata and the Grant County Public Utility District (PUD).

Full article : https://cointelegraph.com/news/ephrata-washington-imposes-year-long-ban-on-new-cryptocurrency-mining-operations