The loud hum sparking unrest in Trump's MAGA heartlands
Installations like the one at the power plant near Dresden are appearing across the country, drawn by record-high cryptocurrency prices and cheap and abundant energy to power the computers that do the mining. There are at least 137 Bitcoin mines in the US across 21 states, and reports indicate there are many more planned. According to estimates by the US Energy Information Administration (EIA), Bitcoin mining uses up to 2.3% of the nation's grid.The high energy use and its wider environmental impact is certainly causing some concern in Dresden.But it's the unmistakable hum that is the soundtrack for discontent in many places with Bitcoin mines - produced by the fans used to cool the computers, it can range from a mechanical whirr to a deafening din.
"We can hear a constant buzzing," says another Dresden resident, Lori Fishline. "It's a constant, loud humming noise that you just can't ignore. It was never present before and has definitely affected the peaceful atmosphere of our bay."Such is Ms Campbell's annoyance with Trump's Bitcoin backing, her political allegiance to the Republicans is being tested. "Right now I'm not real happy about that party," she says.
Backlash in Trump's backyard
The conflict in Seneca Lake is being played out nationwide, which could pose problems for a White House intent on pursuing a pro-cryptocurrency agenda.A little over 300 miles west of Dresden, a backlash in the US border town of Niagara Falls prompted the local Mayor Robert Restaino - a Democrat - to issue a moratorium on new mining activity in December 2021, and the following year noise limits of 40 to 50 decibels near residential areas were imposed. He said: "The noise pollution of this industry is like nothing else."Locals described the sound as similar to that of a 747 jet, or as grating as having a toothache 24 hours a day, claiming that the noise drowned out the sound of the nearby waterfalls.And in Granbury, Texas, a 24ft-high sound barrier was erected in 2023 at a mining site after residents complained to public officials that the nonstop roar was keeping them awake and giving them migraines.All these Bitcoin operations opened before Trump's return to the White House. But the opposition they have generated suggests public officials in Republican-voting areas are likely to find themselves coming under continued pressure from local people who oppose further Bitcoin mining expansion.If this happens, could Trump's crypto dreams be derailed in his own backyard?
Trump's crypto U-turn
Less than four years ago, Trump said Bitcoin "just seems like a scam". Yet those reservations have now gone: the Trump family has since started the crypto firm World Liberty Financial, and Trump launched his own cryptocurrency, $TRUMP – 220 of its top buyers were invited to a private gala dinner with the president on Thursday.
Trump's sons Eric and Donald Jr are behind a crypto mining venture called American Bitcoin, which plans to trade on the Nasdaq stock exchange, and aims to build one of the world's largest and most efficient Bitcoin mining platforms, rooted in American soil.Bitcoin mining has boomed in the US partly because of a crackdown in China in 2021, which was due to concerns over its environmental damage. Alexander Neumueller, an expert at the University of Cambridge's Centre for Alternative Finance, says that although it's hard to trace every last mine, it's clear that the US is now the leading Bitcoin producer, mining about 40% of the world's supply.
From village halls to state legal battles
Dresden is in New York's Finger Lakes region – a rural area sliced through with deep glacial lakes, which attracts tourists drawn by its wineries, breweries and outdoor pursuits. In Yates County, home to Dresden and the Greenidge plant, around 60% of voters picked Trump last November.According to the owners of the mine, Greenidge Generation, anywhere from 40 to 120 Bitcoin a month are being produced at the plant, along with some energy that flows back to the grid.
The company – which turned down requests for an interview – has argued that they converted a coal-burning operation into a relatively cleaner gas-fired power installation that complies with state environmental laws.But amid public concern, New York state and Greenidge are currently engaged in a protracted legal battle over the plant's future. With some of the strictest environmental laws in the country, New York officials are challenging whether the gas-fired plant is permitted under the regulations that allowed the old coal plant. Power generation – and Bitcoin mining – has been allowed to continue during appeal proceedings.Abi Buddington, who owns a house in Dresden and has been at the forefront of the fight against the crypto mine, says it has become a big issue locally."The climate changed, both environmentally as well as in our quiet little community," she says, recalling raised voices at contentious town hall meetings.
Ms Buddington is trying to change minds in Dresden and, through her network, elsewhere around the country."There are some who are environmentally concerned, and who may be Republican-leaning," she says. "What we've found nationally is even in red states, once elected officials are educated properly and know the harms, they are very opposed."But not all are convinced. "They've been a good corporate neighbour," says Dresden's recently elected mayor, Brian Flynn, about the mine. "I'm pro-business, whether it be Greenidge or local agriculture… I think it's important to have a mix of both industry and recreation."
Real-world impacts of crypto
Legal battles like the one in Seneca Lake are bringing home the realities of an industry that at first glance might seem contained to banks of data servers, removed from the real world.Bitcoin "miners" – who are not actually extracting anything from the earth – verify transactions by solving extremely difficult cryptographic problems that require powerful computers. In return, they are rewarded with Bitcoin.
As the price of Bitcoin has shot up to its current value of around $100,000 (£75,000), ever-increasing amounts of computing power have been needed to win crypto rewards, shutting out smaller miners in favour of large collectives and companies.As well as the hum, mining's energy use has environmental impacts. A Harvard study published in March in the peer-reviewed science journal Nature Communications found that Bitcoin mining exposes millions of Americans to harmful air pollution each year - and that 34 Bitcoin mines consumed a third more electricity than the city of LA. (There was some pushback from the crypto industry to the study, which was called The environmental burden of the United States' Bitcoin mining boom.)According to the Cambridge Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index, mining globally uses approximately 0.7% of global electricity consumption.
That has a knock-on effect on local energy prices, which is also provoking a backlash in some areas.In 2017, Bitcoin miners flooded into Plattsburgh, New York – a city of about 20,000 people a couple of hours to the north of Dresden – because of cheap hydroelectricity rates. "We were getting Bitcoin applications from operators all around the world," says the city's mayor at the time, Colin Read.Yet they used so much power that electricity rates shot up. Within a year, some residents were paying up to 40% more during winter months, Read says.The following year, he and other local lawmakers passed rules against buildings blasting out hot air."Fortunately we put a stop to it," he says, noting that all but one Bitcoin mining operation left the city.
Opposition in Maga heartlands
Resistance to Bitcoin mines extends to places with the biggest Trump support.Cyndie Roberson was retired and unaware of the crypto industry until a Bitcoin mining operation moved to her small town in North Carolina in 2021. The locals banded together and managed to ban new Bitcoin developments in their area - but the existing one was allowed to stay and the bitterness of the fight made her decide to move south, to Gilmer County in Georgia.There, Ms Roberson has campaigned against crypto mining in a region that is solidly pro-Republican. In the county where she lives, she says that around 1,000 people came to a public meeting to oppose a mine, which then wasn't allowed to operate. Just north of Gilmer, the Fannin County Commission has enacted a ban on crypto mining, while a Georgian commission representing 18 primarily rural counties has published advice on how to restrict the development of Bitcoin mines."When you're in my backyard, when you're in my town, trying to wreck our property and our peace, people will tell you, it's a hard 'no'," says Ms Roberson.Although 80% of local people backed Trump last November, that support doesn't appear to stop people opposing one of his key crypto goals.
'You can build your own power plant'
The Trump administration is not planning to do away with all regulations around crypto mining - but it is ready to actively help companies open power plants next to the mines.In an interview with Bitcoin Magazine in April, commerce secretary Howard Lutnick said: "We're going to make it so that if you want to mine Bitcoin, and you find the right place to do it, you can build your own power plant next to it," going on to argue that such projects would stop "these stories about 'You're taking too much power and now the cost of operating my refrigerator is higher'."
"The next generation of miners in America will be able to control their destiny, control the cost of power, and I think that is going to turbocharge Bitcoin mining in America," Lutnick told the magazine.According to Zack Shapiro, head of policy at the Bitcoin Policy Institute, a US think tank that researches emerging monetary networks, that process has already begun. "There are states that are passing laws specifically prohibiting municipalities from banning Bitcoin mines," he says. "It's a mechanism by which mining companies can fight back."And the nature of Bitcoin mining means that, if it meets resistance, it can quickly move on to somewhere more favourable.When Colin Read tackled the mines in Plattsburgh, he saw how easily they could change location."This industry is really footloose," he said. "When we told these companies they couldn't have more power without going through hoops, they packed up and went to a community where they didn't have such strict requirements."
Offshore mines of the future?
Local opposition is not Trump's only challenge. Could the sea, for example, be a better location for Bitcoin mining?Mr Shapiro believes that, with miners looking for the lowest cost, they could turn to leftover renewable energy that can't be used by other applications. "Wind power in the ocean can't be used to power a city, but you can set up an offshore platform that captures offshore wind and tidal energy, and use that to mine Bitcoin – because there's not another buyer to use that energy, it's probably ultimately where Bitcoin mining operations move."It could also be that in the cryptocurrency race, Bitcoin might not be the best bet. Read - who is an energy economist - is sceptical about the staying power of energy-intensive Bitcoin because he believes other more efficient alternatives are going to emerge.With the White House egging on the industry, fights over Bitcoin mining will inevitably play out in smaller forums, in state and local governments and tiny places like Dresden.But one constant in the short history of Bitcoin has been volatility. It might be boom times now – yet a downturn in the price, shifts in energy sources and changing crypto needs could fundamentally reshape the Bitcoin mining landscape, no matter how much Trump wants to keep it in the US.
Top picture credit: Getty Images
BBC InDepth is the new home on the website and app for the best analysis and expertise from our top journalists. Under a distinctive new brand, we'll bring you fresh perspectives that challenge assumptions, and deep reporting on the biggest issues to help you make sense of a complex world. And we'll be showcasing thought-provoking content from across BBC Sounds and iPlayer too. We're starting small but thinking big, and we want to know what you think - you can send us your feedback by clicking on the button below.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
25 minutes ago
- The Independent
Some workers would be excluded from student loan forgiveness program for 'illegal' activity
Teachers, social workers, nurses and other public workers would be cut off from a popular student loan cancellation program if the Trump administration finds their employer engaged in activities with a 'substantial illegal purpose,' under a new federal proposal released on Friday. The Education Department took aim at nonprofits or government bodies that work with immigrants and transgender youth, releasing plans to overhaul the Public Service Loan Forgiveness program. Opponents fear the new policy would turn the loan forgiveness benefit into a tool of political retribution. The proposal would give the education secretary the final say in deciding whether a group or government entity should be excluded from the program, which was created by Congress in 2007 to encourage more college graduates to enter lower-paying public service fields. The proposal says illegal activity includes the trafficking or 'chemical castration' of children, illegal immigration and supporting foreign terrorist organizations. 'Chemical castration' is defined as using hormone therapy or drugs that delay puberty — gender-affirming care common for transgender children or teens. President Donald Trump ordered the changes in March, saying the loan forgiveness program was steering taxpayer money to 'activist organizations' that pose a threat to national security and do not serve the public. The public will be given 30 days to weigh in on the proposal before it can be finalized. Any changes would take effect in July 2026. Under current rules, government employees and many nonprofit workers can get their federal student loans canceled after they've made 10 years of payments. The program is open to government workers, including teachers, firefighters and employees of public hospitals, along with nonprofits that focus on certain areas. The new proposal would exclude employees of any organization tied to an activity deemed illegal. The Education Department predicts that fewer than 10 organizations would be deemed ineligible per year. It doesn't expect a 'significant reduction' in the percentage of borrowers who would be granted forgiveness under the program, according to the proposal. Yet the agency acknowledges that not all industries would be affected evenly. Schools, universities, health care providers, social workers and legal services organizations are among those most likely to have their eligibility jeopardized, the department wrote. It did not give more specifics about what 'illegal' actions those groups were taking that could bar them from the program. But the proposal suggests that performing gender-affirming care in the 27 states that outlaw it would be enough. If a state or federal court rules against an employer, that could lead to its expulsion from the program, or if the employer is involved in a legal settlement that includes an admission of wrongdoing. Even without a legal finding, however, the education secretary could determine independently that an organization should be ejected. The secretary could judge whether an organization participated in illegal activity by using a legal standard known as the 'preponderance of the evidence' — meaning it's more likely than not that an accusation is true. Once an organization is barred from the program, its workers' future loan payments would no longer count toward cancellation. They would have to find work at another eligible employer to keep making progress toward forgiveness. A ban from the Education Department would last 10 years or until the employer completed a 'corrective action plan' approved by the secretary. Critics blasted the proposal as an illegal attempt to weaponize student loan cancellation. Kristin McGuire, CEO of the nonprofit Young Invincibles, which advocates for loan forgiveness, called it a political stunt designed to confuse borrowers. 'By using a distorted and overly broad definition of 'illegal activities,' the Trump administration is exploiting the student loan system to attack political opponents,' McGuire said in a statement. The Education Department sketched out its plans for the overhaul during a federal rulemaking process that began in June. The agency gathered a panel of experts to help hash out the details — a process known as negotiated rulemaking. But the panel failed to reach a consensus, which freed the department to move forward with a proposal of its own design. The proposal released on Friday included some changes meant to ease concerns raised by the expert panel. Some had worried the department would ban organizations merely for supporting transgender rights, even if they have no direct involvement in gender-affirming care. The new proposal clarifies that the secretary would not expel organizations for exercising their First Amendment rights. ___ The Associated Press' education coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP's standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at
The Independent
25 minutes ago
- The Independent
Duke Energy seeks to merge Carolina utilities, projecting more than $1B in customer savings
Duke Energy Corp. says its move to combine electric utility subsidiaries in North and South Carolina into one entity could save customers more than $1 billion over a decade. The Charlotte-based utility said it formally asked federal and state regulators on Thursday for permission to join together Duke Energy Carolinas and Duke Energy Progress, which have several million customers. The savings would come in part from streamlining operations and spreading out infrastructure expenses. The two entities have operated separately since the 2012 merger of Duke Energy and Raleigh-based Progress Energy. Duke Energy, which likens the request to moving two company divisions into one, said in a news release that it wants the change to be effective Jan. 1, 2027. The two entities combined own 34,600 megawatts of energy capacity, producing electricity for 4.7 million residential, commercial and industrial customers in service areas covering 52,000 square miles (134,680 square kilometers). Duke Energy is the dominant electric utility in North Carolina. Under the current setup, Duke Energy must maintain four different retail-rate structures — two for each subsidiary in each state — and produce four annual filings for state regulators who approve rates — creating confusion for the public. If the combination is approved, the company said, rates would blend gradually between the sets of customers. The company says a combination means fewer resources would be needed to meet electric demands compared to if the two entities remained separate. They could run fewer energy production units, using less fuel and spending less on maintenance, the release said. The two entities already work together on managing electricity demand and other efficiencies. 'Combining our two utilities reduces customer costs, simplifies operations, supports economic growth and promotes regulatory efficiencies, all of which will create value for customers in both states,' said Kodwo Ghartey-Tagoe, executive vice president and CEO at Duke Energy Carolinas. 'There will be no immediate changes to retail customer rates or services.' Duke Energy, one of the nation's largest electric holding companies, said it projects retail customer savings from the combination to reach more than $1 billion through 2038. That's after any expenses, with additional savings expected after that. Duke Energy Carolinas' coverage area spans much of central and western North and South Carolina, including Charlotte and Durham in North Carolina, and Greenville and Spartanburg in South Carolina. Duke Energy Progress generally covers eastern and central North and South Carolina -- including Raleigh, Fayetteville and Wilmington in North Carolina and Florence and Sumter in South Carolina. But its coverage area also includes Asheville, North Carolina, in the west. The combination needs approval from North Carolina Utilities Commission, the Public Service Commission of South Carolina and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. They would all continue to regulate the combined utility.
Reuters
25 minutes ago
- Reuters
Las Vegas resorts defeat hotel rate price-fixing class action in US appeal
Aug 15 (Reuters) - Wynn Resorts (WYNN.O), opens new tab, Caesars and Treasure Island convinced a U.S. appeals court on Friday to turn back a consumer class action lawsuit accusing them of using shared computer software algorithms to illegally coordinate on Las Vegas hotel room prices. Affirming, opens new tab a lower court decision, a three-judge panel of the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said it wasn't enough for the consumers to show that the rival resorts used the same revenue-management service provider amid an alleged rise in room rental rates. The plaintiffs had accused the resort companies of colluding to overcharge guests by feeding sensitive internal information to a shared software platform operated by Cendyn that offered pricing recommendations. They appealed after a judge in Nevada dismissed the lawsuit in May. The 9th Circuit panel said the consumers had not shown there was any agreement among the hotels to follow Cendyn's pricing recommendations. The court also said that hotels' independent use of the same software did not restrain their abilities to rent hotel rooms. 'Rather than eliminating competition, pricing one's hotel rooms in a manner calculated to maximize profits is how one competes,' wrote Circuit Judge Carlos Bea, joined by Circuit Judge Ana de Alba and U.S. District Court Judge Jeffrey Brown. A lead attorney for the consumers did not immediately respond to a request for comment, and neither did the lawyer who argued for the defendants. Cendyn said it welcomed the court's order. Wynn declined to comment. Caesars and Treasure Island did not immediately respond to requests for comment. The hotels and software provider Cendyn have denied any wrongdoing. U.S. courts are facing an increasing number of lawsuits claiming hotels and other industries unlawfully use revenue maximization platforms to fix prices. Last October, a group of major casino-hotel operators in Atlantic City defeated a proposed consumer class action accusing them and a revenue management platform of overcharging for room rentals. In dismissing the lawsuit in Las Vegas, Chief U.S. District Judge Miranda Du said the system generated pricing recommendations that hotels were not bound to follow. The consumers in their appeal countered that even non-binding guidelines such as price recommendations can be considered an 'unreasonable' restraint within a competitive market. The case is Richard Gibson et al v. Cendyn Group et al, 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, No. 24-3576. For plaintiffs: Steve Berman of Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro For defendants: Melissa Sherry of Latham & Watkins Read more: US proposes settlement with Greystar to end alleged rental price collusion US Justice Dept backs consumers in Las Vegas hotel pricing case Consumers seek second chance in Las Vegas hotel price-fixing lawsuit
