ERCOT Urging For Energy Conservation

[MissingInAction 24,878]

6 hours ago, Captainant said:

lmao holy shit I forgot about that gem of an argument from @Immaculate Vibes about how bringing bitcoin miners into the state will actually help our power grid

That dude is dumb as fuck.

[Updawg 2,263]

Yes, lots of people doing it now - especially in the Bakken & Perm - anywhere gas is trapped & would other wise be flared, it’s a great idea. Lots of articles out there on it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So do they need a basin or something to Tap the gas to use? That’s what I’ve never understood. It makes sense if it’s feasible but how do you get all that extra gas centrally to somewhere with a good internet connection out in west Texas

[Dahobbs 17,498]

3 hours ago, Immaculate Vibes said:

It’s coming from private money 
 

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/11/23/lancium-raises-150-million-for-renewable-run-bitcoin-mines-in-texas.html
 

And Public money

https://news.yahoo.com/argo-blockchain-bitcoin-begins-building-green-crypto-mine-texas-101532690.html

Those comments and you’re being completely wrong on what makes bitcoin miners profitable has me wondering why you’re so adamant while being wrong. 
 

It’s a complex topic and I’m far from an expert on the grid, but here’s something good I’ve read delving into this. 

 

Yes. There’s multiple companies that help set people up. Here’s a cool video. 
 

This is pretty dope. 
 

 

The money being raised privately is to build mining rigs. The money being raised publicly is to subsidize their efforts and pay for additional power. Again, the public could just subsidize additional power generation for existing demand rather than cater to some group that is going to use up all the new generation. No problem is being solved here, unless you're a Bitcoin miner that wants a handout from the government. You're argument, per usual, is incredibly misguided. 

[Immaculate Vibes 114]

9 hours ago, Updawg said:

So do they need a basin or something to Tap the gas to use? That’s what I’ve never understood. It makes sense if it’s feasible but how do you get all that extra gas centrally to somewhere with a good internet connection out in west Texas

They build it at the site. See the tweets I shared a few posts ago. 
 

9 hours ago, MissingInAction said:

That dude is dumb as fuck.

This is a compliment coming from you. 
 

6 hours ago, Dahobbs said:

The money being raised privately is to build mining rigs. The money being raised publicly is to subsidize their efforts and pay for additional power. Again, the public could just subsidize additional power generation for existing demand rather than cater to some group that is going to use up all the new generation. No problem is being solved here, unless you're a Bitcoin miner that wants a handout from the government. You're argument, per usual, is incredibly misguided. 

You lack a basic understanding of how miners work but call me misguided. Lulz. This is a waste of time. 

[Brisketexan 104,802]

So, IV isn't entirely wrong here.  There IS a model for improving the amount of available generation on the grid by incentivizing construction of generation that can 1) provide power on a near full-time basis to an industrial user, AND 2) be available to serve the remainder of the grid at peak usage times via in "interruptible power" contract with that industrial user, whereby the industrial user goes offline during the period of peak need, and that power is then available for all.

Now, whether the Bitcoin mining angle is a legit example of that approach, isn't a boondoggle, and/or isn't a publicly funded boondoggle (because in Texas, the only good use for our tax dollars is funneling them into the pockets of the already rich), is another question about which I have doubts.

Of course, it's all a shitty model for how to build extra capacity into the grid.  Most every other grid does so with an additional capacity market function.  But that involve fair and uniform allocation of risks and costs, and doesn't make any political donors rich.  So, we won't be doing that.

[Dahobbs 17,498]

19 minutes ago, Immaculate Vibes said:

They build it at the site. See the tweets I shared a few posts ago. 
 

This is a compliment coming from you. 
 

You lack a basic understanding of how miners work but call me misguided. Lulz. This is a waste of time. 

Race against increasing hash rates to get value out of your hardware. Eventually, older hardware becomes functionally useless.  But none of that really matters because the basic problem remains: Bitcoin miners arent providing any benefit to power generation. Their funds benefits themselves, not the grid. You have this misguided notion that the reason we don't have more supply right now is because of lack of demand. That's just not reality. There is plenty of demand, which is why new supply is coming online all the time. The problem is our system in Texas doesn't adequately account for the importance of excess capacity. Increasing demand is poor way to resolve that problem. And increasing demand through government subsidization is an even dumber way to address the problem since the government could just subsidize the excess generation without artificially increasing demand. 

I have no doubt your strategy is good for Bitcoin miners. But it is a terrible way to address lack of excess generation capacity. At best, it marginally increases excess capacity, but very inefficiently given the amount of public resources used. At worst, it results in a pure handout to miners and actually decreases available excess capacity. 

Edited May 4, 2022 by Dahobbs

[Brisketexan 104,802]

1 minute ago, Dahobbs said:

And increasing demand through government subsidization is an even dumber way to address the problem since the government could just subsidize the excess generation without artificially increasing demand. 

The thing is, the government doesn't even need to subsidize it.  The collective ratepayers can.  "Capacity" (to cover needs at times of ultra-high load demands) is functionally insurance.  It's an extra amount people pay for that insurance.  I pay X for my car or house, and then I pay an additional Y for insurance.  A capacity market works functionally the same way.  Everyone pays their electric bill for usage, and then they pay a small additional charge to cover the cost of that extra capacity/generation being constructed and available as needed.

But again, we won't do that, because it's equitable, keeps costs low, ensures capacity generators a reasonable rate of return only (not huge windfall profits), etc.  In short, it's pure communism and you're not a dirty commie are ya?!

[Nice Guy Eddie 13,426]

I used to screw around with crypto mining. Nothing to scale but I was curious about it, and it kept me engaged more with crypto. The formula for mining is simple: hardware costs + electricity costs + crypto (bitcoin) value = mining demand.  Effectively everything becomes dependent on the bitcoin/crypto prices which obviously volatile.

• If the price of bitcoin goes up, then more people/machines jump into it, which raises hardware and electricity demand. 
• If the price of bitcoin goes down, unprofitable machines are turned off. This lowers demand for electricity. Perhaps to a point that no electricity is required.

I'm a crypto fan but even I see an inherent risk in our electricity system that the generation companies will be dependent on bitcoin prices for to make them profitable.

Normal electricity demand is probably somewhat predictable. And even extreme demand (high/low) can be calculated and forecasted to some degree. Does someone really want to throw the price of bitcoin into that equation?

[Immaculate Vibes 114]

This is the second installment by an author I shared above. Goes more in depth. The behind the meter mining is pretty interesting and gives some examples of how it can make green projects more viable. 
 

Also lists some of the potential downsides for people here. 

[CleverNickname 1,299]

Crypto is stupid. Crypto mining is super stupid. Tax dollars having anything anything to do with Crypto is grounds for immediate impeachment.

[Neonmoon 38,127]

21 hours ago, Updawg said:

So do they need a basin or something to Tap the gas to use? That’s what I’ve never understood. It makes sense if it’s feasible but how do you get all that extra gas centrally to somewhere with a good internet connection out in west Texas

They literally park a shipping container full of bitcoin mining tech on the pad site where the actual rig is located. Instead of flaring the natural gas that is a byproduct of drilling for oil, they run a line to the bitcoin shipping container and the natural gas powers it. Actually a brilliant idea to solve two problems. There is internets out there. 

 

[TKthunder2 4,981]

3 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

They literally park a shipping container full of bitcoin mining tech on the pad site where the actual rig is located. Instead of flaring the natural gas that is a byproduct of drilling for oil, they run a line to the bitcoin shipping container and the natural gas powers it. Actually a brilliant idea to solve two problems. There is internets out there. 

Yep this is generally a good plan.  Similarly power generators waste electricity at night (which is why some offer free electricity after dark in hope that you avoid using high energy appliances like washers/dryers until after dark) so having bitcoin miner use that electricity and increase demand will increase their ROI and encourage more new generators which will help during peak consumption periods ESPECIALLY if the miners can be disabled by ERCOT or the like.  I assume we’ll fuck it up somehow but it’s not a bad plan as some here are claiming.

[Neonmoon 38,127]

19 minutes ago, TKthunder2 said:

Yep this is generally a good plan.  Similarly power generators waste electricity at night (which is why some offer free electricity after dark in hope that you avoid using high energy appliances like washers/dryers until after dark) so having bitcoin miner use that electricity and increase demand will increase their ROI and encourage more new generators which will help during peak consumption periods ESPECIALLY if the miners can be disabled by ERCOT or the like.  I assume we’ll fuck it up somehow but it’s not a bad plan as some here are claiming.

Using oil production byproduct that was going to be burned up in the air and wasted anyway is a good plan. Asking taxpayers to subsidize bitcoin generators is in no way similar and a complete waste of money. 

[TKthunder2 4,981]

3 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

Using oil production byproduct that was going to be burned up in the air and wasted anyway is a good plan. Asking taxpayers to subsidize bitcoin generators is in no way similar and a complete waste of money. 

Please quote where I said anything about a subsidy.  I’ll wait.

[Neonmoon 38,127]

3 minutes ago, TKthunder2 said:

Please quote where I said anything about a subsidy.  I’ll wait.

If bitcoin miners want to buy electricity from power companies at night without a subsidy, have at it. It won’t be free 

[The Dog 43,884]

 

[Dahobbs 17,498]

1 hour ago, TKthunder2 said:

Yep this is generally a good plan.  Similarly power generators waste electricity at night (which is why some offer free electricity after dark in hope that you avoid using high energy appliances like washers/dryers until after dark) so having bitcoin miner use that electricity and increase demand will increase their ROI and encourage more new generators which will help during peak consumption periods ESPECIALLY if the miners can be disabled by ERCOT or the like.  I assume we’ll fuck it up somehow but it’s not a bad plan as some here are claiming.

Those free night plans are all gimmicks by retail electric companies. They all include higher rates in the day time when they know you're more likely to use power. The blended rate is actually fine for them and they convince more customers to join their plans (even though there really isn't a difference between that and a flat rate plan). At least in Texas, those plans have little to do with the companies actually generating power. 

[Updawg 2,263]

So a blended 7%

[TKthunder2 4,981]

19 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Those free night plans are all gimmicks by retail electric companies. They all include higher rates in the day time when they know you're more likely to use power. The blended rate is actually fine for them and they convince more customers to join their plans (even though there really isn't a difference between that and a flat rate plan). At least in Texas, those plans have little to do with the companies actually generating power. 

I get that but it’s based on the fact that wind blows harder at night and the windmills generate excess electricity that they sell for pennies on the dollar.  This drives traditional power generators to lower their yields as well.  If you had  a large commercial endeavor that could run at night you could sell that excess energy and make more money which will allow for higher profits and more generators/windmills to pop up since they will be quicker to recoup their investments.  Make them a deal on their energy use between certain hours and have the ability to turn them off during peak hours and this could be highly beneficial for all.

[Larry T. Spider 1,746]

If wind blows more at night, can we residential solar our way out of the peak demand problems in the summer months? Seems like the highest generation times would match highest demand times. No approval for large plants needed. Just start slapping up the panels with a state of Texas rebate to cover some of the cost since we aren’t spending it on a plant.

[Dahobbs 17,498]

8 hours ago, TKthunder2 said:

I get that but it’s based on the fact that wind blows harder at night and the windmills generate excess electricity that they sell for pennies on the dollar.  This drives traditional power generators to lower their yields as well.  If you had  a large commercial endeavor that could run at night you could sell that excess energy and make more money which will allow for higher profits and more generators/windmills to pop up since they will be quicker to recoup their investments.  Make them a deal on their energy use between certain hours and have the ability to turn them off during peak hours and this could be highly beneficial for all.

There is less demand, but there isn't really excess energy. Higher cost power plants are taken off line to balance the grid and maximize generator profit. 

[Dahobbs 17,498]

That said, as long as you have an industry that doesn't rely on quickly depreciating assets (which Bitcoin mining does), this plan could result in higher overall generation capacity compared to peak demand. But, again, this is a poor match for crypto. 

[Captainant 27,523]

8 hours ago, Larry T. Spider said:

If wind blows more at night, can we residential solar our way out of the peak demand problems in the summer months? Seems like the highest generation times would match highest demand times. No approval for large plants needed. Just start slapping up the panels with a state of Texas rebate to cover some of the cost since we aren’t spending it on a plant.

The fact that the state isn't helping to subsidize residential solar is insane. It would significantly reduce load across the grid because they'd be most effective on the hottest, brightest days of the year that would strain the grid. Power generation where it's needed is less load on the lines and gives generators some breathing room to do maintenance and repairs.

But no instead, let's subsidize Bitcoin miners and continue to inflate that ponzi scheme with energy and capital instead of actual public works projects

[elfenix 34,207]

8 hours ago, Larry T. Spider said:

If wind blows more at night

didn't i read some time back that some quant crunched the numbers and found that to not actually be the case?

[Immaculate Vibes 114]

14 hours ago, CleverNickname said:

Crypto is stupid. Crypto mining is super stupid. Tax dollars having anything anything to do with Crypto is grounds for immediate impeachment.

 

13 hours ago, Neonmoon said:

Using oil production byproduct that was going to be burned up in the air and wasted anyway is a good plan. Asking taxpayers to subsidize bitcoin generators is in no way similar and a complete waste of money. 

 

2 hours ago, Captainant said:

The fact that the state isn't helping to subsidize residential solar is insane. It would significantly reduce load across the grid because they'd be most effective on the hottest, brightest days of the year that would strain the grid. Power generation where it's needed is less load on the lines and gives generators some breathing room to do maintenance and repairs.

But no instead, let's subsidize Bitcoin miners and continue to inflate that ponzi scheme with energy and capital instead of actual public works projects

What’s the specific Bitcoin mining subsidy yall are referencing?

2 hours ago, Dahobbs said:

That said, as long as you have an industry that doesn't rely on quickly depreciating assets (which Bitcoin mining does), this plan could result in higher overall generation capacity compared to peak demand. But, again, this is a poor match for crypto. 

ASIC miners can run for years. Maybe you’re thinking of gpu cards that burn out? Those are only economical with smaller shitcoins. 

[Dahobbs 17,498]

1 minute ago, Immaculate Vibes said:

ASIC miners can run for years. Maybe you’re thinking of gpu cards that burn out? Those are only economical with smaller shitcoins. 

It isn't that they stop working entirely (although that certainly happens). It is that they stop working efficiently. Hash rates go up, meaning more time needed for the hardware to generate revenue, meaning more electricity needed for the hardware to generate revenue. As a result, old hardware becomes uneconomical to run. It is better to replace it with newer, faster hardware. It is a race to get value out of your hardware before increasing hash rates make it uneconomical. Downtime is bad.

As a combo investment, Bitcoin mining and renewables can work really well for the investor (even without subsidies). That's because both Bitcoin mining and renewables are generally good investments right now. But it doesn't do shit to add excess capacity to the grid. 

[Johnny Sack 8,397]

How does mining work for bitcoin?  There are a finite amount of bitcoins, right?  So once that number is reached, is there no more mining?

I do not understand crypto well despite trying to and watching a documentary on it.

[Immaculate Vibes 114]

1 minute ago, Johnny Sack said:

How does mining work for bitcoin?  There are a finite amount of bitcoins, right?  So once that number is reached, is there no more mining?

I do not understand crypto well despite trying to and watching a documentary on it.

I’ll take it to DM. Depending on how detailed an explanation you want, it could muck up this thread even more than it already is. 
 

[Captainant 27,523]

8 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

How does mining work for bitcoin?  There are a finite amount of bitcoins, right?  So once that number is reached, is there no more mining?

I do not understand crypto well despite trying to and watching a documentary on it.

last post on BTC from me to stop derailing the thread: this is a solid 25 minute technical explainer of the bitcoin protocol and what "mining" is

 

[crash_davis 23,090]

12 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

I do not understand crypto well despite trying to and watching a documentary on it.

think beanie babies market but for 20-40 year old men.

[Neonmoon 38,127]

7 hours ago, crash_davis said:

think beanie babies market but for 20-40 year old men.

This is the best and simplest explanation I’ve ever read 

[luke duke 6,410]

No, you don't get it. Turning the machines off means less money and less return on investment for their equipment. Cost of energy isn't a big deal because even very expensive energy is still financially productive. Equipment sitting unused IS a big a deal because it isn't financially productive. It is wasted money. 
The only way any of these deals work is if government subsidizes the cost of the downtown time or the cost of producing the new generation. But of course, the government could do that anyway without artificially increasing demand. The idea is bad. 
 
 
 

Most non-essential industrial customers have clauses in their electricity (and natural gas) contracts that allow the utility to curtail their usage during periods of high demand. That said, ERCOT will still find a way to fuck it up.

[Updawg 2,263]

Most non-essential industrial customers have clauses in their electricity (and natural gas) contracts that allow the utility to curtail their usage during periods of high demand. That said, ERCOT will still find a way to fuck it up.

Seems like the problem we have is registration is just an option for everyone. So ercot has no idea who is who

[Dahobbs 17,498]

1 hour ago, luke duke said:

Most non-essential industrial customers have clauses in their electricity (and natural gas) contracts that allow the utility to curtail their usage during periods of high demand. That said, ERCOT will still find a way to fuck it up.

Anyone can be curtailed in periods of very high demand if it is required for grid stability. I don't think those clauses really do anything other than potentially provide some marginal additional legal protection

[luke duke 6,410]

Seems like the problem we have is registration is just an option for everyone. So ercot has no idea who is who

Please repost this in English.

[luke duke 6,410]

Anyone can be curtailed in periods of very high demand if it is required for grid stability. I don't think those clauses really do anything other than potentially provide some marginal additional legal protection

Those clauses make them the 1st in line to be curtailed, before residential.

[Dahobbs 17,498]

2 hours ago, luke duke said:

Those clauses make them the 1st in line to be curtailed, before residential.

My point was that they could do it anyway, even without the clauses. And those clauses don't mandate that any utility actually curtail industry first. They just give some additional legal allowance for that to happen. 

[Bateshorn 9,917]

I hate to be a repetitive ass about this, but as somebody who lives in a regulated utility state: IT DOESNT HAVE TO BE THIS HARD.  I pay a couple of extra dollars a month to ensure Pepco has excess capacity to help pick up Maryland during extreme weather. Fuck, you don’t have to free market your way out of everything. 
 

So do the states around me.  And we then share that power via PGM during major events. 
 

 

Edited May 6, 2022 by Bateshorn

[CleverNickname 1,299]

Hope those business plans accounted for 55% collapse in prices. Hoodl! Diamond hands! LOL

[Captainant 27,523]

ERCOT is projecting a possibility that power generation won't meet demand. Must not have been able to plan for it being hot in May.

[drt 637]

Buckle up, buttercup. 

[crash_davis 23,090]

haven't any news or tweets warning of impending death but i assume they are coming.

 

[crash_davis 23,090]

jerry jones energy company CFO: "we hit the jackpot again!" probably

[Larry T. Spider 1,746]

I assume that is showing energy companies getting higher rates during peak demand times? If so, how do those costs get passed along? I’m sure it’s the consumer in the end but do we all have peak usage stuff in our contracts?

[Captainant 27,523]

1 minute ago, Larry T. Spider said:

I assume that is showing energy companies getting higher rates during peak demand times? If so, how do those costs get passed along? I’m sure it’s the consumer in the end but do we all have peak usage stuff in our contracts?

No, my contract specifies a variable but specified rate depending on time of day. It'll get me when I have my contract renewal with them and the rates go up

[Js1 85,166]

3 hours ago, Captainant said:

ERCOT is projecting a possibility that power generation won't meet demand. Must not have been able to plan for it being hot in May.

Who would have thunk it!?

 

[Steel Shank 9,417]

I thought Abbott said they fixed it?

[immamac 42,736]

How about they just turn all the fucking Bitcoin rigs off. 

[mdmost 42,958]

It's not even the hottest part of the year yet. I really should invest in the whole home generator. 

Edited May 13, 2022 by mdmost

[Biff Tannen 45,597]

It didn't get above 90 in Austin today.  We are all fucked this summer.