mining operation has made a [] lake 'so warm you feel like you're in a hot tub'

[NeuroticFish]

A controversial bitcoin mining operation has made a New York lake 'so warm you feel like you're in a hot tub'

Yet another "Bitcoin is bad" kind of "news for dummies".
Of course, in their world, Bitcoin mining is done by computers and New York state depends on this sole power plant to meet the green energy goals.

Judith Enck, a former Environmental Protection Agency regional administrator, said that New York wouldn't meet its greenhouse gas emission reduction goals if Greenidge continued mining bitcoin.

Of course, they're OK by the law, but who cares about the law when one can blame Bitcoin?

Greenidge CEO Jeff Kirt told NBC News that "the environmental impact of the plant has never been better than it is right now," and that the facility was operating within its environmental permits. Greenidge said that it would make its operations carbon neutral by buying credits to offset its emissions.

Who has this time interest to keep average Joe from Bitcoin? Any takers?

[1715085330]

1715085330

[1715085330]

1715085330

[1715085330]

1715085330

[1715085330]

1715085330

[1715085330]

1715085330

[pixie85]

Local residents say a power plant is heating Seneca Lake and emitting huge amounts of greenhouse gases.
The gas-fired plant is used to power at least 8,000 computers that are mining bitcoin.

They used to say that burning natural gas is good for environment when compared to gasoline or coal, so we could call this power plant green, yet some people are so into attacking bitcoin that now even this green operation is bad because it suddenly emits greenhouse gases. Meaning what? CO2? All of us do it, planes do it, cars do it, nobody stops cars and planes from operating so what's the big deal?

Why don't they try to make use of that. The power plant discharges hot water so maybe you could build a swimming pool and a hot spring spa or whatever nearby and make money for free? You could divert some of the water towards residential buildings and heat them up for free.

I'd pay to take a bath in a warm lake in winter and I'm sure I'm not the only one.

[crwth]

If New York has a problem with it, they need to assess their regulations regarding the laws they are putting up on their daily water intake. Consuming millions of gallons daily is a lot for sure and returning them even hotter makes it even worse. I hope the marine life there is not abundant because that's not an excellent habitat for them. Or maybe they moved because of this or something.

I'm going to wait on the results with their renewal on their permit for the air and see if they will be regulated or demanded of something.

[Macadonian]

1st of this is not credible at all since the news report says that local residents are blaming the mining operation while there has been no studies done to prove that the heating of the lake is responsible. This instantly discredits the entire article and without any real studies being done the warming of the lake could be a placebo effect or even due to natural causes and even if it was determined it was because of the power plant it still is not due to the mining operation the power plant is allowing x to withdraw that amount of power in the first place so they would be responsible not the mining operation. The amount of FUD that is circulated on these news sites is absurd.

I will be adding businessinsider to my ignore list.

[stompix]

Why don't they try to make use of that. The power plant discharges hot water so maybe you could build a swimming pool and a hot spring spa or whatever nearby and make money for free? You could divert some of the water towards residential buildings and heat them up for free.

139m gallons are about 200 Olympic swimming pools so....you would need a little more than that, as for heating homes in this summer heat I doubt you'll find any takers.  You have enough hot water for all the soups and coffee pots in the world from one of those alone!

If New York has a problem with it, they need to assess their regulations regarding the laws they are putting up on their daily water intake. Consuming millions of gallons daily is a lot for sure and returning them even hotter makes it even worse. I hope the marine life there is not abundant because that's not an excellent habitat for them.

The problem is probably with the design of the plant, every plant releases enormous amounts of hot water nothing new, this is a small one and probably was allowed to discourage the water directly unlike other plants that have a secondary circuit for the heated water. Looking at the maps there are a few houses at 200-300 meters from one of the intake pipes so probably the release one is just as close, at that distance, you will definitely feel some heat especially if the intake and outtake flow create a current than runs by the shore.  On the other side, or a mile away, no way! Not with 0.00...lost count of zeros...km3 compared to 15km3 volume that lake has.

[ranochigo]

Meaning what? CO2? All of us do it, planes do it, cars do it, nobody stops cars and planes from operating so what's the big deal?

And why do you think people don't try to stop essential services from operating under the guise of environmental change?

Why don't they try to make use of that. The power plant discharges hot water so maybe you could build a swimming pool and a hot spring spa or whatever nearby and make money for free? You could divert some of the water towards residential buildings and heat them up for free.

Probably wouldn't be feasible.

Anyways, this isn't Bitcoin's problem. Mainstream media is trying to discredit Bitcoin to try to get clicks again. The fundamental problem here is NOT because of Bitcoin mining, it is how the plant operates. Blame the operators for the environmental impact, Bitcoin's demand for electricity isn't the main problem here.

Fun fact, Google also uses seawater for the cooling systems for their data centre but they process it first to an acceptable temperature. It wouldn't be a problem if they did it as well to fit within the regulations.

[crwth]

The problem is probably with the design of the plant, every plant releases enormous amounts of hot water nothing new, this is a small one and probably was allowed to discourage the water directly unlike other plants that have a secondary circuit for the heated water.

I see, I never thought of their plant size as a factor or what its current state is. I only know about wastewater management and I don't think it is considered as waste because it's only used for cooling? Or am I wrong on this one?

Looking at the maps there are a few houses at 200-300 meters from one of the intake pipes so probably the release one is just as close, at that distance, you will definitely feel some heat especially if the intake and outtake flow create a current than runs by the shore.  On the other side, or a mile away, no way! Not with 0.00...lost count of zeros...km3 compared to 15km3 volume that lake has.

Collectively, I don't think it would cause too much trouble unless there are characterization tests and analytical equipment used to test certain parameters for the water and show data that it's unsafe for the environment or anything.

[stompix]

I see, I never thought of their plant size as a factor or what its current state is. I only know about wastewater management and I don't think it is considered as waste because it's only used for cooling? Or am I wrong on this one?

Here the release cooling water must meet some norms and those are quite different by where the water is discharged, lake, river, capacity or replenishing for the lakes, debit for the rivers, so yeah I think you can call it "waste" at this point, although it's pretty normal to have fish and fishing done in artificial lakes, made exactly for those power plants. So waste as in be careful how much you dump but not as in treatment necessary before discharge. No idea what those norms are in the US and certainly not in that state in particular or if they have them in the first place.

As for the size, it matters a lot, and so does the water temperature, it's one thing getting water from a river in Canada in winter for a 200 MW plant and something else trying to cool 4 nuclear reactors, you can look at the pictures from satellite for that powerplant and how large facilities look like, these two for example, also lake-based a and b. It's not just a pipe and a basin like the other  

LE
Fixed typo, damn this auto correct!

[wxa7115]

Local residents say a power plant is heating Seneca Lake and emitting huge amounts of greenhouse gases.
The gas-fired plant is used to power at least 8,000 computers that are mining bitcoin.

They used to say that burning natural gas is good for environment when compared to gasoline or coal, so we could call this power plant green, yet some people are so into attacking bitcoin that now even this green operation is bad because it suddenly emits greenhouse gases. Meaning what? CO2? All of us do it, planes do it, cars do it, nobody stops cars and planes from operating so what's the big deal?

Why don't they try to make use of that. The power plant discharges hot water so maybe you could build a swimming pool and a hot spring spa or whatever nearby and make money for free? You could divert some of the water towards residential buildings and heat them up for free.

I'd pay to take a bath in a warm lake in winter and I'm sure I'm not the only one.

This is just propaganda, they are using the old tactic of repeating a lie enough times so it becomes true in the minds of the people, and since the majority of those people believe whatever they are told then they will believe that bitcoin is bad for the environment.

I will say that I am surprised by their ingenuity, this is a great way to attack bitcoin and to try to discredit it on the minds of many people, it is not true of course, but the truth has never stopped them to do anything like this.

[avikz]

Hmm! It seems someone or some groups are creating false propaganda awareness against bitcoin mining. Let's look at some facts,

Seneca lake's water capacity is estimated at 4.2 trillion gallons as it is deepest finger lakes compared to others. 4.2 trillion gallons is equal to 42,000,00 million gallons.

How much water the minin operation is releasing - 135 million gallons.

So the mining farm is using roughly 0.004% of water that the lake can hold.

The allegation hardly makes sense!

[dothebeats]

What's up with bad plant design being connected to bitcoin mining anyway? News outlets always make it look like the problem of one exists on all other entities in the crypto mining scene, which is untrue as it generalizes an industry wherein each entity has their own way of handling things. Greenidge already stated that they will make the necessary adjustments, and that they are still operating within their environmental permits, so I don't know how one report attributes the heating of the lake to a cryptocurrency mining farm without any substantial findings.

[crwth]

Here the release cooling water must meet some norms and those are quite different by where the water is discharged, lake, river, capacity or replenishing for the lakes, debit for the rivers, so yeah I think you can call it "waste" at this point, although it's pretty normal to have fish and fishing done in artificial lakes, made exactly for those power plants.

I guess they are safe on that one but I'm not sure about how the "news" will be interpreted in September once their permit in the air is contested or something.

So waste as in be careful how much you dump but not as in treatment necessary before discharge. No idea what those norms are in the US and certainly not in that state in particular or if they have them in the first place.

New york is modernized, I think they have the necessary tools for that if they happen to have the correct equipment.

As for the size, it matters a lot, and so does the water temperature, it's one thing getting water from a river in Canada in winter for a 200 MW plant and something else trying to cool 4 nuclear reactors, you can look at the pictures from satellite for that powerplant and how large facilities look like, these two for female, also lake-based a and b. It's not just a pipe and a basin like the other 

Definitely very different from the simple mining operation compared to the Nuclear reactors that power thousands of houses. It's a great energy source though. Thanks for sharing the maps. It's fun to look at.

[NotATether]

In sheer irony, the same article placed a bitcoin trading advertisement placed prominently (and inconveniently) across the whole screen when I visited it:



Talk about putting money where your mouth is.

[Slow death]

sorry but how bitcoin would be responsible for this whole problem?

Could it be that before they had these mining companies they didn't have gas-fired electricity supplying electricity to residents?

what I want to understand:

is it bitcoin mining alone that is using water from the lake to cool its mining equipment and as a consequence the lake water becomes hot or is it the gas plant that is using the lake water to cool its equipment and as a consequence the water of the lake is too hot?

[acroman08]

what I want to understand:

is it bitcoin mining alone that is using water from the lake to cool its mining equipment and as a consequence the lake water becomes hot or is it the gas plant that is using the lake water to cool its equipment and as a consequence the water of the lake is too hot?

No, but they blame bitcoin mining for the increase of temperature in the water. they are basically saying that if Greenridge didn't start using the power plant to power bitcoin mining the water temperature in the lake would not have increased.

[NotFuzzyWarm]

what I want to understand:

is it bitcoin mining alone that is using water from the lake to cool its mining equipment and as a consequence the lake water becomes hot or is it the gas plant that is using the lake water to cool its equipment and as a consequence the water of the lake is too hot?

The water is used to cool the power plant equipment and regardless of what the load is (miners or grid), for the same power output the resulting temperatures would be the same. Nowhere is anything said about mining changing the average temperature of the lake and of course water temps near the plants outflow will be fairly warm. That is a rather important point as the article says "nearby residents are reporting the water is like a hot tub" and nothing about the overall temp. In short: water temps are within licensed norms.

Do keep in mind that the plant was built to be used for load leveling when power demand on the grid is high - think of it as a reserve generating station - and normally is running at reduced power, ready for output to be increased when a large demand is predicted. Thing is, power plants cannot just be throttled up and down willy-nilly, they need to be kept operating within fairly narrow margins with large changes happening over several hours

So, the plant operators had a choice: Accept the costs of normal slow response and wildly varying power plant efficiencies due to it not operating near full power (as has been the only historical choice prior to crypto mining) OR use (their) miners to provide a solid baseline load so the plant can operate near full power keeping the equipment happy and yet allowing the power plant to very quickly supply reserve power to the grid simply by throttling back on the number of miners running. Once grid demands drop off the miners are restarted and the plants boilers or turbines continue operating in a steady state. Increased plant performance aside, mining of course has the bonus of providing a new direct source of income to the plant operators. In my book it's a win-win for all.

The only down side is that the thermal output into the lake is more constant vs fluctuating up & down as it did prior to crypto mining at the site.

[yhiaali3]

Bitcoin seems to be the only one heating up this green planet!!! This is what the media are trying to say!!! They do not stop accusing Bitcoin of heating the planet even though I am sure that there is no comparison between the amounts of carbon dioxide produced by mining and those produced by factories, cars and planes!!! Despite that, they do not stop the factories, nor do they stop the production of cars and planes.
Atomic power plants produce nuclear waste that is so bad for the environment that it's hard to believe and they keep quiet about it all while opening their mouths against bitcoin. You can read what nuclear power plants cause here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_impact_of_nuclear_power
This is really ridiculous. They want to blame Bitcoin in any way because they simply don't like it!!!

[ranochigo]

Despite that, they do not stop the factories, nor do they stop the production of cars and planes.

Read it again. I'm sure you know the reason why. Try living without taking a car or without plastic for a month.

Atomic power plants produce nuclear waste that is so bad for the environment that it's hard to believe and they keep quiet about it all while opening their mouths against bitcoin. You can read what nuclear power plants cause here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_impact_of_nuclear_power

Right. Yet, advocates for Bitcoin mining (and Elon Musk) almost always turns to green energy as a solution for the *environmental impact* of Bitcoin mining. Surprise Surprise, your green power isn't always very clean. Saying Bitcoin mining isn't environmentally friendly, and reversing afterwards by talking about "green" energy is ironic. People tend to tackle this problem from the wrong direction (POS is wrong too).

They want to blame Bitcoin in any way because they simply don't like it!!!

That is what generates the click. The Bitcoin circlejerk by the media can get quite annoying.

Fair disclaimer, I'm not against Bitcoin mining or anything. In case some of you think that I've got something against Bitcoin. It's just that some arguments just doesn't make sense.