US Court Stalls Energy Dept Demand For Cryptocurrency Mining Data (semafor.com) 103
"Crypto mines will have to start reporting their energy use in the U.S.," wrote the Verge in January, saying America's Energy department would "begin collecting data on crypto mines' electricity use, following criticism from environmental advocates over how energy-hungry those operations are."
But then "constitutional freedoms" group New Civil Liberties Alliance (founded with seed money from the Charles Koch Foundation) objected. And "on behalf of its clients" — the Texas Blockchain Council and Colorado bitcoin mining company Riot Platforms — the group said it "looks forward to derailing the Department of Energy's unlawful data collection effort once and for all."
While America's Energy department said the survey would take 30 minutes to complete, the complaint argued it would take 40 hours. According to the judge, the complaint "alleged three main sources of irreparable injury..."
- Nonrecoverable costs of compliance with the Survey
- A credible threat of prosecution if they do not comply with the Survey
- The disclosure of proprietary information requested by the Survey, thus risking disclosure of sensitive business strategy
But more importantly, the survey was implemented under "emergency" provisions, which the judge said is only appropriate when "public harm is reasonably likely to result if normal clearance procedures are followed."
Or, as Semafor.com puts it, the complaint was "seeking to push off the reporting deadline, on the grounds that the survey was rushed through...without a public comment period." The judge, Alan Albright, granted the request late Friday night, blocking the [Department of Energy's Information Administration] from collecting survey data or requiring bitcoin companies to respond to it, at least until a more comprehensive injunction hearing scheduled for Feb. 28. The ruling also concludes that the plaintiffs are "likely to succeed in showing that the facts alleged by the U.S. Energy Information Administration to support an emergency request fall far short of justifying such an action."
The U.S. Department of Energy is now...
But then "constitutional freedoms" group New Civil Liberties Alliance (founded with seed money from the Charles Koch Foundation) objected. And "on behalf of its clients" — the Texas Blockchain Council and Colorado bitcoin mining company Riot Platforms — the group said it "looks forward to derailing the Department of Energy's unlawful data collection effort once and for all."
While America's Energy department said the survey would take 30 minutes to complete, the complaint argued it would take 40 hours. According to the judge, the complaint "alleged three main sources of irreparable injury..."
- Nonrecoverable costs of compliance with the Survey
- A credible threat of prosecution if they do not comply with the Survey
- The disclosure of proprietary information requested by the Survey, thus risking disclosure of sensitive business strategy
But more importantly, the survey was implemented under "emergency" provisions, which the judge said is only appropriate when "public harm is reasonably likely to result if normal clearance procedures are followed."
Or, as Semafor.com puts it, the complaint was "seeking to push off the reporting deadline, on the grounds that the survey was rushed through...without a public comment period." The judge, Alan Albright, granted the request late Friday night, blocking the [Department of Energy's Information Administration] from collecting survey data or requiring bitcoin companies to respond to it, at least until a more comprehensive injunction hearing scheduled for Feb. 28. The ruling also concludes that the plaintiffs are "likely to succeed in showing that the facts alleged by the U.S. Energy Information Administration to support an emergency request fall far short of justifying such an action."
The U.S. Department of Energy is now...
- Restrained from requiring Plaintiffs or their members to respond to the Survey
- Restrained from collecting data required by the Survey
- "...and shall sequester and not share any such data that Defendants have already received from Survey respondents."
Thanks to long-time Slashdot reader schwit1 for sharing the news.
CIVIL liberties. (Score:1, Flamebait)
Freedom of association (Score:5, Insightful)
What do you call an association of civilians organized for a common purpose?
Re:Freedom of association (Score:5, Insightful)
A club or a partnership. A pure association doesn't involve having the government protect you from liability for your actions. None of the corporate types would ever accept that they have full liability for their own actions.
As long as the government is providing liability protection the government has a right, nay, a duty to ensure that they have ways of knowing exactly what's going on inside the corporations.
Re:Freedom of association (Score:5, Funny)
Depends. If the purpose is making money, heroes; otherwise, communists.
Re: (Score:2)
I'll believe corporations are people when Texas executes one.
To get certain privileges (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
> Have to give up certain rights.
You can't give up rights, they are granted to you by a higher authority and Government can't take them away for that reason.
That's the entire basis for the United States you dingo.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: To get certain privileges (Score:2)
You give up rights when driving a car... on PUBLIC roads. In other words, you are utilizing someone else's property. I think a better way to characterize it is that you enter into an automatic contract with the government when you choose to use its property.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Freedom of association (Score:2)
No one in the U.S. government cares how much crypto you've got. They only care about how many dollars you've made.
Case in point: Satoshi. No one is going after him/her/them/it for holding $300B in Bitcoin. No one cares.
Until he/she/they/it sells.
Re: CIVIL liberties. (Score:2)
Civil liberties are about ensuring laws are established for the good of the common community, which includes people, corporations, non-profits, etc.
Re: (Score:2)
Civil liberties are about ensuring laws are established for the good of the common community.
If that's the case then crypto-mining companies using anything other than self generated 100% renewable energy should be shut down.
Re: CIVIL liberties. (Score:1)
And everyone's automobile should be confiscated at the same time. Cars are way worse for the environment.
Also, I don't personally use a car, so I can safely assume there is no utility in cars that is worth keeping them legal.
Re: (Score:2)
Of course (Score:5, Informative)
Wouldn't want people to know how abysmally wastefull crypto mining is, how much it pollutes, how it drives up the cost of electricity.
That said, how difficult can it be to report on how many kilowatts of electricity you use each month and where it comes from? There is no need for a survey to take 40 minutes to complete.
Re: (Score:2)
That said, how difficult can it be to report on how many kilowatts of electricity you use each month and where it comes from? There is no need for a survey to take 40 minutes to complete.
I guess crypto-mining is the perfect front for growing weed illegally then! /s
Re: (Score:2)
Everybody knows this already (Score:2)
I get that actual government agencies need legally enforceable data and that's what this is but we as citizens don't have to pretend that cryptocurrency is a raw deal for us.
Re: (Score:2)
we as citizens don't have to pretend that cryptocurrency is a raw deal for us.
The accused gets to assume it's not until proven otherwise. So yes, you do have to pretend. At least if you want to be able to claim "innocence until proven guilty" is a tenant of your society with any level of credibility.
Re: (Score:2)
My guess is the crypto miners get an energy discount that no one else gets. Slashdot normally can't stand crypto but the opinions here seem different somehow...
Re: (Score:2)
Wouldn't want people to know how abysmally wasteful crypto mining is, how much it pollutes, how it drives up the cost of electricity.
That and what deals/discounts they got from energy companies. But you can't say it like that. You have to obfuscate it like this:
- The disclosure of proprietary information requested by the Survey, thus risking disclosure of sensitive business strategy
Re: Of course (Score:2)
Re: Of course (Score:2)
FUD. Credit card industry has contributed far more waste that cryptocurrency.
So according to the story (Score:3, Informative)
Some gung-ho Green pushed though a clearly non-emergency issue through as an emergency, and now this is getting justifiably slowed down in courts.
It's weird. Writer is really doing his/her best to write this as a "evil bitcoiners destroying the planet, also look they have some money from people you should have genocidal hatred for because they have wrong politics". And it still comes out as obvious regulatory overreach when you read the OP to the end.
>" the complaint was "seeking to push off the reporting deadline, on the grounds that the survey was rushed through...without a public comment period."
The judge, Alan Albright, granted the request late Friday night, blocking the [Department of Energy's Information Administration] from collecting survey data or requiring bitcoin companies to respond to it, at least until a more comprehensive injunction hearing scheduled for Feb. 28. The ruling also concludes that the plaintiffs are "likely to succeed in showing that the facts alleged by the U.S. Energy Information Administration to support an emergency request fall far short of justifying such an action."
Re: (Score:3)
Texas, crypto miners are welcome. We also don't care if you freeze to death during the winter. https://www.texastribune.org/2... [texastribune.org]
Re: (Score:1)
You have Green logic there. That people who come to pay for building up power supply do not contribute to building up power supply.
I've never heard how this is possible. Just this being stated as obvious Truth and any claims otherwise are Malinformation (three letter agency definition: factually correct information that is harmful to prevailing narrative).
Notable, the main reason why Texas grid froze was another Green policy. That since AGW is inevitable and only accelerates, there will never be cold in Tex
Re:So according to the story (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks for posting more details on what I stated above.
But bonus points for digging through the bottom of the barrel and straight into the molten core of the planet to blame average people in Texas instead of policymakers. 11/10, would read again.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So is there a conspiracy theory about the political right in US you don't subscribe to?
There are several States (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Human existence itself is perpetually on the verge of collapse. Most people in the West are so numbed by the utter decadence of their everyday existence, that they are no longer capable of noticing the extreme amount of work that goes into keeping that everyday existence decadent.
You're like the idiot watching the swan glide over the lake, never comprehending the amount of paddling going under the surface. And then are confused when you put a lot of sharp blades just under the surface of the water when swan
And according to their resistance.. (Score:3)
Some gung-ho Green pushed though a clearly non-emergency issue through as an emergency, and now this is getting justifiably slowed down in courts.
I’d say Bitcoin in particular has done pretty well in managing to avoid any kind of larger audit to really determine what the true impact is of that operation. There is one other organization that comes to mind who dodges scrutiny just as effectively; The United States Federal Reserve.
You want to know the fastest way to tell if that “non” emergency, turns out to be more an emergency? It’ll be measured by the amount of relentless attacks and resistance to an audit.
We’ll see
Re: (Score:2)
Re: And according to their resistance.. (Score:2)
Audit all the crypto miner companies? How would you even identify them all?
The IRS barely has enough money to audit taxpayers. I don't think there's any way the DoE is going to wrangle budgetary necessities to audit a bunch of private companies without cause.
Re: Good. If crypto miners don't use sustainable (Score:2)
There are sunk costs in the mining equipment that need to be recouped. Free electricity is great, but electricity that's cheaper than your Bitcoin is also good. Leaving a good quality miner shut down because the wind stopped is a way to go bankrupt.
Not an emergency (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Not an emergency (Score:4, Insightful)
Without the constant gloom and doom twisted into the most mundane stories, people wouldn't have anything to spend their impulsive emotions on, and would eventually realize that the world is kind of boring and unimportant to most of us
Re:Not an emergency (Score:4, Insightful)
Why does everything have to be an emergency nowadays? Sure, crypto mining is wasteful, but that does not make it an emergency. Lots of things are wasteful, freedom allows that. Deal with it.
It's an emergency if it's sucking up so much power that the local grid is at risk of collapse in summer when everyone turns on the AC.
Re: Not an emergency (Score:1)
Everyone pays for their energy, from the datacenters to the AC at your home. If the government can soak up all that money and levy taxes on my energy bills, they can build out the network. Similarly the FCC has been collecting taxes for rural Internet buildout. Everything the government has been collecting money on has been a failure, how about we stop letting them collect that money in the first place.
Re: Not an emergency (Score:2)
The fact is that crypto mining helps stabilize the grid. So, no emergency.
What you don’t know. (Score:4, Insightful)
Why does everything have to be an emergency nowadays? Sure, crypto mining is wasteful, but that does not make it an emergency. Lots of things are wasteful, freedom allows that. Deal with it.
Oh, another multi-state rolling blackout over the winter forced thousands to find alternate shelter due to extreme weather? One of your elderly loved ones perished from such an disaster, and then you find out later that Greed N. Corruption knew all along their crypto-whoring was a direct contributor to power grid instability?
Deal with it.
After all, nothing is an emergency, power grids never have load issues, electric prices are dirt cheap for everyone all the time due to hardly any demand, and there’s no such thing as a ripple effect. /s
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, another multi-state rolling blackout over the winter forced thousands to find alternate shelter due to extreme weather? One of your elderly loved ones perished from such an disaster, and then you find out later that Greed N. Corruption knew all along their crypto-whoring was a direct contributor to power grid instability?
So taking that idea further, should I feel personally responsible for running my home theater on hot (or cold) days? And not only am I killing the planet with my ICE, I'd still be killing people charging an EV during peak hours as well? All the potential blood on my hands is depressing. Good thing I have a smaller house unlike the mass murderers with bigger ones.
Government has a place in ensuring a reliable electric grid, not picking and choosing when and how it is used.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: What you don’t know. (Score:2)
Then there's the other 98% of the Bitcoin economy, which is completely legal and above board. Pretty much identical to cash in terms of crime.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Not an emergency (Score:2)
Then bring on the crypto mining! Since it helps stabilize the grid, the only responsible thing to do is build out more mining capacity in areas with efficient (cheap), but unstable grids.
Re: (Score:2)
That's easy - because declaring it an emergency allows you to run roughshod over any sort of restraints or restrictions.
Re: (Score:2)
Why does everything have to be an emergency nowadays?
Because the US is so busy dividing and conquering itself through partisan politics that the only way to get anything done is through emergency powers. Anything else gets stalled indefinitely because one side automatically opposes whatever the other side does.
Re: (Score:2)
Procedural, not substantive (Score:3)
When reading a legal opinion, it's important to distinguish when a decision is based on procedural or substantive grounds. Most of the time, procedural issues are handled first, so when a court rules that way, it means they are taking no position on the substance of the case.
And so in this case, it was entirely procedural -- the judge said that under the Administrative Procedure Act, the agency has to go through a formal rule making process rather than using an emergency request. That's entirely a defect of the process used to pass the rule and not a judgment about the content of the rule in any way. From the opinion:
I would expect that the DOE goes back and does things with the right process and it will all be fine. Or at the very least, the judgment today doesn't say anything whatsoever about whether a challenge to the substance of the rule has any merit.
Re: (Score:2)
Correct, but two issues here from the DOE's perspective:
1) Doing the rulemaking process takes a lot of time, time they don't feel they have with a significant election coming up. The political appointees are worrying about having zero impact during their time in office.
2) The Chevron decision is in the offing, which would impact this process as well as other administrative law processes.
I can see why they swung for the fences here. I would have too.
Re: (Score:2)
To expand on that a bit more, the judge hasn't even (yet) decided that the DOE is incorrect, although he's indicated he's leaning that way. So all we have here is a 3 work-day moratorium on the survey and using any data collected so far, until the Feb 28 hearing that actually decides whether the DOE's process was flawed.
In the meantime, the judge has done what judges often do, and put in a temporary measure to try and minimize any potential harm until the real decision is made. In this case, the crypo mi
Equal under the law (Score:3)
In spite of other valid issues raised, if it is important to have public disclosure of energy usage by bitcoin miners, then they should require it of all business and industries. If a regulation is specific to an industry and within scope of federal regulators, then applying to a single industry is reasonable. But Energy usage exists for every business and every industry and only imposing reporting requirements on one is clearly targeted and discriminatory.
Re: (Score:3)
then they should require it of all business and industries.
Businesses already record how much it costs them for utilities [corporatef...titute.com] on their financial statements. It may or may not be specifically broken out, but the cost is listed, though not necessarily how much. However, for the steel industry, we know their energy usage, not costs, have been declining for the past decade [eia.gov]. The only way to get that information is for either the companies to report their usage or, based on their expenses, estimate how much they
Re: Equal under the law (Score:1)
Energy usage (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: Energy usage (Score:1)
Or perhaps it is none of the governmentâ(TM)s business.
Re: (Score:2)
Or perhaps it is none of the governmentâ(TM)s business.
Except that info is needed for grid stability and demand planning; although I suspect they will be ale to get current numbers from the ISOs/Utilities and share that.
Re: Energy usage (Score:2)
If I use 10 trillion watts-hours of electricity, and I report it, it's likely my company will be regulated out of existence.
It doesn't matter that I'm pulling it from solar and wind. The number alone will be used as a talking point to commence a witch hunt.
There's no good reason for the government to need any special information about crypto mining electricity use. You wanna track all companies? Fine. You wanna start painting targets to choose winners and losers? Fuck off.
Re: (Score:2)
If I use 10 trillion watts-hours of electricity, and I report it, it's likely my company will be regulated out of existence.
It doesn't matter that I'm pulling it from solar and wind. The number alone will be used as a talking point to commence a witch hunt.
Except most isn't coming from renewables, it's good old coal or nuclear. They don't want people to realize they're trying to greenwash their usage.
There's no good reason for the government to need any special information about crypto mining electricity use. You wanna track all companies? Fine. You wanna start painting targets to choose winners and losers? Fuck off.
There is a valid reason to collect this data, and from all users as you state - grid stability and demand projections. The ISOs/FERC/Utilities need to know load profiles to plan what plants to have on line as well as predict what needs to be built to meet future demand. Of course, they already have a good idea about current demand and can use tat to forecast as
Power companies are local monopolies and they know (Score:3)
who their customers are and how much they're using. Why don't they just ask them?
Crypto is a scam that does nothing useful and objectively, actively, hurts everyone.
Re: Power companies are local monopolies and they (Score:2)
I've used it. Ipso facto, your statement is wrong.
Why only crypto? (Score:2)
Why not also gather data on the power use for AI training? These are both high power operations and both for the benefit of private companies. But only one of these is a dirty problem? It is easy to argue that both crypto and AI have brought technological advances that can be used by almost anyone.
Re: (Score:2)
Why not also gather data on the power use for AI training? These are both high power operations and both for the benefit of private companies. But only one of these is a dirty problem? It is easy to argue that both crypto and AI have brought technological advances that can be used by almost anyone.
You're right, both kinds of industry should report.
Second lawsuit in progress (Score:3)
This same Koch-backed group has a second lawsuit pending [marketwatch.com], this time with the SEC. They are trying to claim cryptocurrency is not a security [investopedia.com]:
The term "security" refers to a fungible, negotiable financial instrument that holds some type of monetary value.
Or, for a more detailed explanation [seclaw.com].
Considering all cryptos are tied to the U.S. dollar to ascertain their value, and they can be used (in extremely limited cases) to purchase goods and services, it's difficult to see how they're not a security. If anything, they are a derivative because their prices are based on the price of an underlying asset, i.e. the U.S. dollar, and a derivative is a security.
Re:Second lawsuit in progress (Score:4, Insightful)
By that logic, a gumball from the machine in front of a supermarket is a security. After all, it's tied to the US dollar to ascertain it's value, and it can be used in limited cases to purchase goods and services. I've traded one for chocolate.
Re: Second lawsuit in progress (Score:1)
Yes, the SEC has basically expanded the definition declaring everything a security in order to regulate what is basically a foreign currency. The problem for the US is that across the world, people are abandoning the US dollar, which would leave the government on the hook for the massive debt they have been able to run up being the reserve currency.
Re: (Score:2)
Bingo. And that's exactly the problem now. Overuse of the dollar weapon in sanctions is to blame for this.
Roman Empire analogies are dime a dozen, but rarely do they begin with Caracalla. He (in 212) made essentially every resident of the Roman Empire a citizen, previously a limited honor. Not for any kind reason, either. But so they could be all taxed equally. In other words, all about revenue. The centuries after him, until the Western Empire ceased to be, were more and more authoritarian and for m
When a security, isn’t. (Score:2)
Speaking of logic, it is literally printed on the physical US Dollar “FOR ALL DEBTS, PUBLIC AND PRIVATE”
Now explain to me why there is nothing but ever-growing momentum behind more and more businesses not accepting that form of payment. Literally and physically.
Let’s not jump the shark to fucking gumballs just yet when the literal underlying “security”, ain’t even.
Re: (Score:2)
Reading the expanded definition, while your gumball does have value and can be used in trade, it isn't a "financial instrument" in the sense that it has a use for things other than trade. You can always pop it into your mouth and eat it.
Re: (Score:3)
I own a lawn-mower. I'd use the U.S. dollar to ascertain the current value of the mower, and the mower could be used (traded) to buy other good
Re: (Score:2)
No, because it's a physical object that, assuming it's in working order, you can go out and mow lawns with.
It also fails the "fungible" test, in that anybody looking to buy it is going to want to know the condition before sale. "Fungible" basically means whether or not any given example can be substituted for any other without making any other changes in valuation and such. For the most part, one reasonably intact dollar is the same value as any other dollar. Two toasters of the same make and model still
Re: Second lawsuit in progress (Score:1)
Re: Second lawsuit in progress (Score:2)
No one in the U.S. government thinks Bitcoin is a security as far as I can tell. Most notably, the SEC.
Ethereum is on the edge, but most seem to think it's not a security either.
Most other cryptocurrencies likely ARE securities, but absolutely none of them are worth anything with the possible exceptions of XRP and SOL.
I don't know why anyone would put resources into lobbying for alt coins, so it seems like a waste of money to me.
Seems reasonable (Score:2)
Re: Seems reasonable (Score:2)
I don't think many people say "it's wasteful, so what?" I think much more common is the sentiment "what waste? that electricity was used to secure my retirement account from thieves; security is not a waste"
Texas... (Score:2)
Re: Texas... (Score:2)
Interesting point. Many of the federal governments powers are rooted in the interstate commerce clause. In many cases, federal regulations simply don't apply if you never transact across state lines.
I don't think it applies here, but it would be interesting if Texas's isolated grid could actually insulate them
A dangerous road (Score:1)
Re: A dangerous road (Score:2)
Ban cars. It's the sanest thing to do.
100% invasion of privacy and deincitiving USD comp (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Because, Greater Good Taxes (Score:2)
Perhaps it’s justified under a “greater good” argument from Government when they’re the ones filling disaster relief coffers. You pay for X number of kilowatt hours used. States wired together have had issues keeping that stable, especially during disasters, so the main reason Government wants to know is so they can tax it, tax it, and tax it. After that, they’ll make sure to tax it, just in case someone forgot to tax it.
Then they’ll send it for fee review..
Kosh (Score:2)
Kosh foundation, say no more...
The same inquiries will be made on AI companies and the real electricity cost of putting a lot of people out of work.
Does that mean (Score:2)
The Koch-Streisand Effect (Score:2)
The least of his crimes.
Really? Don’t look now but a Koch is quite hell bent on you not being able to actually prove that.
Ironically this is having an effect most of us see..
Just the beginning (Score:1)
Electrons are fungible (Score:2)
Pretty much all electricity use contributes to fossil fuel consumption. Waste of resources to try to tag all the electrons and tax them at different rates.
The complaint is BS (Score:2)
"Threat of prosecution"? So, the "threat" of complying with the law? You don't like that, Sovereign Citizen? Then leave the US.