For the record — as Robert F Kennedy Jr prepares for his confirmation vote in the Senate — here is an RFK text that I gather few people have seen.
In response to an Economist article (Why Texas Republicans are souring on crypto) from September concerning a subject about which I know little (so I am bringing it to you without any caveats or remarks), Robert F Kennedy Jr writes that the British MSM outlet "perpetuated common myths … while neglecting the real story":
Bitcoin mining and energy
You perpetuated common myths about bitcoin mining while neglecting the real story: bitcoin mining is a powerful new tool for supporting renewable-intensive grids (“Power hungry”, August 31st). It is true that electricity grids are under increasing strain from manufacturing plants, electric vehicles and data centres, and it would be easy to think of bitcoin mining as just one more source of electrical demand.
But whereas data centres and the like will buy electricity regardless of the price, bitcoin mining is different. It operates only when power is cheap and abundant. Whenever power is scarce, and therefore expensive, it curtails its electricity usage in a matter of seconds.
In practice, this means that during severe weather events in Texas say, such as a heatwave, electricity prices spike, and bitcoin miners naturally turn their machines off. But when power is cheap, their machines remain on, providing a steady stream of revenue to energy producers. Having a reliable buyer of energy that does not add to peak demand is ideal for incentivising the building of renewable generation while still reliably delivering power to homeowners and hospitals.
Bitcoin miners also participate in demand-response programmes, allowing grid operators to control their power consumption to stabilise the grid. You characterised demand response as some kind of public gift to the bitcoin-mining industry. In fact, these programmes have been praised as a crucial part of managing a highly renewable system. The International Energy Agency, for example, says we must increase demand-response tenfold, or by 500 gigawatts, within this decade if we are to meet net-zero targets. Far from a giveaway, bitcoin miners participate in these demand-response programmes like any other company, bidding in an open market and driving prices down for consumers.
Moreover, the grid-stabilising behaviour of bitcoin miners puts them in direct competition with natural-gas “peaker” plants, which run only during peak demand. Both technologies help grid operators match fluctuating supply and demand in real-time.
The difference is that a system with more renewable generation and bitcoin miners is far less carbon-intensive than a system with less renewable generation and peaker plants. It is no surprise, then, that the industry lobbying Texas for more peaker-plant construction has also lobbied against its grid-balancing competition.
robert f. kennedy junior
Washington, dc
No comments:
Post a Comment