Bitcoin mining company and zero carbon power plant supplier Greenidge Generation has announced a transition of leadership and a possible loss in Q3.
According to the press release, the CEO, Jeffrey Kirt resigned his position effective October 7 to hand over leadership to David Anderson as the new CEO and Director.
Scott MacKenzie was also appointed as the Chief Strategy Officer for the company, effective from 8th October 2022.
While Jeffrey Kirt has resigned from his position as the CEO of Greenidge, he will now act as a consultant to ensure that the company has a successful transition in this period.
While the financial records are still subject to scrutiny by the US GAAP to guide investors, the press release notes that Greenidge will be reporting approximately $29 million in revenue and a net loss within the range of approximately $22 million to $20 million for the three month period that ended in 30th September.
A total of 866 bitcoin at the hashrate of approximately 2.4 EH/s was produced with 24,500 miners as of the end of September.
Speaking on the transition of leadership, the former CEO and Director of Greenidge Jeffrey Kirt noted that the company has taken several giant strides to now be a “leading vertically integrated cryptocurrency datacenter and environmentally-sound power generation company”.
Having been instrumental in driving growth at various levels in the company as the CEO, he added that he was “pleased to pass the baton now to Dave and Scott, whose extensive experience in successfully running and improving commodities businesses, executing capital projects, and delivering reliable, low-cost power generation”, will now greatly benefit Greenidge.
Greenidge recently secured a filing with the U.S.Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to raise the sum of $22.8 million in partnership with B. Riley Securities and Northland Securities, both investment firms, in a class A common stock proposal.
This comes shortly after the company reported a loss of $107 million in Q2. Making the firm halt its expansion plans to focus on its South Carolina and New York sites as announced earlier in the year.
Greenidge Generation Holdings Inc., a US-based Bitcoin mining company, announced its mining production increased by about 18% in June.
According to its monthly operating update released on Monday, Greenidge said it produced approximately 230 Bitcoins in June, an increase of about 18%, compared to 195 Bitcoins it mined in May.
The miner disclosed that it increased its hashrate capacity to 2.5 exahash per second (“EH/s”) from 27,500 mining machines in June, an increase from 1.7 EH/s of mining capacity from 20,400 mining machines in the previous month.
Greenidge stated that it ordered an additional 200 mining machines, which are in transit, as they will be installed upon their arrival.
The miner said last month it located 24% of the hash rate capacity at its facility in Spartanburg, South Carolina, which was acquired and its operations started in December last year. Greenidge further said it has mined a total of 1,183 Bitcoins for the six months ended June 30.
Meanwhile, at the end of last month, the New York regulator denied the renewal of Greenidge Generation’s air permit.
On June 30, New York’s Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) denied a key permit for a gas-powered cryptocurrency mining facility owned by Greenidge on the shores of Seneca Lake. The regulator said the mining facility produces too much planet-warming pollution that cannot be allowed under the state’s climate law.
However, Greenidge vowed to appeal the decision through the legal process and said it will keep operating as usual. The 106 MW Greenidge gas plant hosts a large-scale Bitcoin mining facility, with about 17,000 mining machines.
Adapting the Bear Market
The current sharp decline in Bitcoin price has made it difficult for several mining operations to generate a profit. While this bear market has caused many facilities to close their shop, experienced miners are becoming creative and capturing greater market share.
Successful mining firms have deployed innovative new strategies to gain competitive advantages through energy efficiencies; minimizing capital expenditures and operating expenditures.
Last month, Argo Blockchain plc, a major global cryptocurrency mining firm, mined 179 Bitcoins in June compared to 124 BTC in May 2022. The firm sold 637 BTC in June to offset operating expenses and outstanding loans.
Early last month, Hut 8, a Canada-based Bitcoin mining company, bought 5,800 mining machines to add higher petahashes per second (PH/s) of hashrate to its Bitcoin mining capacity at its Ontario facility.
To address electricity concerns, Aspen Creek Digital Corporation (“ACDC”), a U.S.-based crypto mining firm, launched a six-megawatts solar-powered facility for its new mining operations in the western part of Colorado.
The above examples show some of the successful, experienced Bitcoin mining firms that so far have been able to thrive regardless of Bitcoin Price by using flexible, long-term strategies that minimize monthly operating expenses.
The bitcoin miner that yesterday closed a merger to list on the Nasdaq announced buying flagship Bitmain rigs.
Bitcoin miner Greenidge Generation announced on September 15 it had ordered 10,000 S19j Pro bitcoin mining rigs from Bitmain to expand the company’s mining fleet. The new machines, expected to be delivered in the second and third quarters of 2022, could deploy an additional 1,000 petahashes (PH) of hashrate capacity to Greenidge’s anticipated facility in Spartanburg, South Carolina.
“The addition of 10,000 new miners is an important step in our commitment to expand our fully carbon-neutral capacity,” said Greenidge CEO Jeff Kirt. “We expect that these miners will anchor our anticipated facility in Spartanburg, expanding our national footprint by growing our environmentally sustainable mining operations.”
The purchase marks the latest development in the bitcoin miner’s plans to achieve 50 megawatts (MW) power capacity in its mining facilities by 2025. Greenidge has been working on expanding its operations beyond its initial facility in Upstate New York and expects mining operations in Spartanburg to begin in Q4 2021.
Greenidge announced its plans to set up the Spartanburg facility in July and expects it to be the firm’s second carbon-neutral bitcoin mining operation in the U.S. In addition to sourcing clean electricity at the site, Greenidge also intends to fully offset the facility’s carbon emissions. The company has been active in the environmental cause through its operations, and in July also announced the repurpose of an old coal ash landfill into a new solar farm. Additionally, in that same month, Greenidge partnered with Foundry to acquire 8,300 bitcoin mining rigs and join the Foundry USA Pool.
On September 14, the bitcoin miner announced the successful closing of its merger with Support.com to have it’s class A common stock trade on the Nasdaq Global Select Market. Support.com will keep operating its existing business line as a wholly-owned subsidiary of Greenidge, and Kirt will head the combined company. As determined by the exchange ratio for the merger, Support.com shareholders will receive, for each share of common stock they held before the merger, 0.115 shares of Greenidge class A common stock.
Bitcoin miner Greenidge announced today its plans to expedite the closure of an old coal ash landfill and turn it into a solar farm.
Bitcoin mining firm Greenidge Generation announced today its plans to expedite the closure of a forty-year-old coal ash landfill in the Finger Lakes region, New York, and turn it into a new solar farm.
“I am thrilled that the success of our clean bitcoin mining operation is not only creating great high-tech jobs for residents here, and supporting local businesses, but will now also facilitate the development of renewable energy at this old landfill site,” said Dale Irwin, President of Greenidge Generation Holdings Inc.
The company, which in May committed to being carbon neutral by 2021, has since been purchasing carbon offsets from a portfolio of U.S. greenhouse gas reduction projects. The goal was to offset the carbon footprint of its natural gas-powered bitcoin mining plant in Upstate New York by June.
Now, Greenidge will reinvest part of that plant’s profits to repurpose the old Lockwood Hills coal ash landfill into a new solar farm. The company intends to work with the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation to “safely cap and close the landfill and relinquish its existing permit to operate the site,” the announcement said.
Greenidge said it plans to launch a Request for Proposals to evaluate the solar farm project, which it expects to generate up to 5 megawatts of power.
The Lockwood landfill was constructed in 1979 to dispose of coal combustion residuals (CCR) and other wastes produced by the power generation facility prior to Greenidge assuming ownership in 2014.
The landfill remains open and operational today. But according to the announcement, the site will soon stop accepting waste and, once the closure process begins, various steps will be taken to prevent erosion and water infiltration there.
Greenidge Generation Holding Inc. is the parent company of Greenidge Generation LLC, the vertically-integrated bitcoin mining and power generation facility in Upstate New York. The 106-megawatt natural gas plant allows Greenidge to mine bitcoin and meet the power needs of homes and businesses in the Finger Lakes region.
In early July, Greenidge announced its plans to establish a second bitcoin mining operation in South Carolina. A couple of weeks after that, the firm shared it had partnered with Foundry Digital to buy 2,300 bitcoin miners and finance another 6,000. Greenidge also joined the Foundry USA Pool as part of the collaboration.
Bitcoin miner Greenidge has partnered with Foundry Digital to buy 2,300 WhatsMiners and finance 6,000 Antminers, plus join Foundry USA Pool.
According to a press release sent to Bitcoin Magazine, bitcoin mining company Greenidge Generation has announced a purchase of 2,300 WhatsMiner M30S mining rigs and a financing deal to acquire 6,000 Antminer S19 machines, both via Foundry Digital. Additionally, the mining firm shared that it will join the Foundry USA bitcoin mining pool.
“Foundry has been a longtime hosting customer of Greenidge and this partnership expands our existing relationship as Greenidge grows outside of New York,” said Jeffrey Kirt, CEO of Greenidge, in the announcement.
The bitcoin mining company plans to increase its hash rate capacity with the new rigs, and some of them are already operational, the company said. Foundry has sold 1,800 of the WhatsMiner machines to Greenidge and expects to deliver the remaining rigs in Q4 2021. Of the financed Antminer units, around 5,000 units are deployed, and the other 1,000 are scheduled to arrive in Q3 2021.
Greenidge also shared that it will add approximately 800 petahashes per second (PH/s) of hash power to the Foundry USA Pool upon joining. According to the release, other bitcoin miners who are already part of the pool include Blockcap, Hut 8, Bitfarms, Hive, BitDeer, Bit Digital and Foundry itself.
“Greenidge has pioneered the integration of a clean power plant operation and carbon-neutral cryptocurrency mining in North America with its operation in Upstate New York,” said Mike Colyer, CEO of Foundry, in the release. “We look forward to providing Greenidge with our best-in-class services that are tailor-made for institutional companies in the cryptocurrency mining industry.”
Bitcoin mining company HIVE also recently joined the Foundry USA Pool. Some of the services Foundry provides for its pool members include treasury management services, bitcoin collateralized lending and yield earnings on BTC holdings — likely facilitating a HODL mentality among interested bitcoin miners.
Greenidge, which in May committed to fully offsetting its operational carbon emissions, also announced the development of a new carbon-neutral facility last week. Greenidge’s second farm is planned to be built in South Carolina, leveraging a site previously used by a printing plant.
It is with no hyperbole that I say the media industry has it out for Bitcoin. Whether it be for the massive engagement to be extracted from the buzzing digital asset keyword or a legitimate opinion on bitcoin mining, it appears that media outlets cannot help but exaggerate and hyperbolize comments on bitcoin.
One recent example of this was the piece put out in regards to Greenidge Generation’s operations on Seneca Lake in New York.
Bitcoin Magazine’s Level 39 contributed an excellent piece that addressed the issues with this NBC article, and there were many.
Essentially, the NBC piece utilized a quote from a concerned citizen that was hyperbole.
What is particularly interesting is that there is no mention of Bitcoin in the infamous quote — almost as if the lake was simply being described as warm.
Of course, citizens have the right to be concerned about whatever they want, and there are indeed channels for voicing and acting on these concerns. However, as Level 39’s piece details, the actual warming of the lake as a result of the plant is quite literally nonexistent and there are multiple, complex factors the NBC article plainly ignores.
So, why would a media company publish a comment meant entirely as hyperbole in an attempt to frame a bitcoin mining plant in a negative light?
They Don’t Like Bitcoin Because They Don’t Understand It
Any amount of carbon or environmental impact generated as a result of bitcoin is too much if you don’t believe it is a worthy utilization of energy.
But in order to develop an opinion of whether or not bitcoin is a worthy utilization of energy, one must understand bitcoin, while many media companies clearly do not.
An excellent piece by Croesus_BTC details why educated people commonly not only misunderstand bitcoin but decide to actively dislike it. Allen Farrington adds onto this idea, stating, “But the gist of it is that people whose profession or primary intellectual pursuits consist of ‘wordsmithery’, as Nozick calls it — competitively putting forward essentially verbal arguments in the hope of enacting influence — seem inclined to find unfair and unjust a dynamic in which this gets you nowhere.”
When reading this, the media immediately came to mind. The media utilizes words and phrases in a verbal argument format in the hopes of enacting influence, this time on your opinion of bitcoin and its environmental impact.
Upon reckoning with the idea that this is futile in regards to bitcoin, the media is left with utilizing hyperbole and quotations from people who do not understand bitcoin.
Indeed, one example of an environmental activist who doesn’t understand bitcoin who is often cited in the media, Yvonne Taylor, stated, “We simply cannot allow this ludicrous scheme of burning fossil fuels to make fake money in the midst of climate change.”
Such a disrespectful characterization of a global monetary network designed to empower unbanked people should have been illuminated as such; instead, it became national media coverage of bitcoin.
This same activist is now referenced in the Greenidge Seneca piece, where she states, “These crypto operations are looking for anywhere that has relatively cheap power in a relatively cool climate … It’s a horrible business model for all of New York state, the United States and for the planet.”
In a separate piece, Taylor reiterates, “We’re talking about burning more fossil fuels to make fake money in the middle of climate change, which we view as insane.”
Insane their view of Bitcoin may be, but infringing upon the freedom to execute computer code in order to solve mathematical problems that reward you with bitcoin is far more insane.
Bitcoin utilizes energy in the process of mining; but this energy usage is justified through its abilities to protect, store and transfer the wealth of an entire civilization. Indeed, in Hass McCook’s “A Comparison of Bitcoin’s Environmental Impact With That of Gold and Banking,” the reality of bitcoin’s environmental impact is unveiled to be far less than that of both industries. It’s understandable to want to minimize environmental impact. The single most important way we can do this is to adopt a monetary standard which incentivizes long-term planning, coordination and saving.
The environmental impact of bitcoin has been proven to be negligible in comparison to global greenhouse gas emissions. So, regardless of how many times critics refer to bitcoin as “fake money,” the core of their view that it impacts climate change is categorically false and, “the equivalent of removing 2.25 drops from a one gallon jug, warming those drops by about 7 degrees Fahrenheit, adding them back to the jug each day and then claiming that they are causing the jug to feel too warm.”
We can characterize the media’s representation of Bitcoin as a misunderstanding, in the same way that telling a police officer you didn’t know it was against the law to drink and drive is a misunderstanding.
The media deliberately misleads people in regards to the environmental impacts of bitcoin because of their lack of understanding. Bitcoin Magazine never reports on ideas or topics we don’t understand fully — these media outlets cannot say the same.
Recently, an overdramatized story by Gretchen Morgenson of NBC News, about the Greenidge power plant and cryptocurrency mining hybrid on Seneca Lake, New York, went viral. The story blames bitcoin mining for “ruining” the 12,000-year-old glacial Seneca Lake.
The story focused on a quote by Abi Buddington of Dresden, whose house is near the plant and who was quoted as saying, “The lake is so warm you feel like you’re in a hot tub.” The story went on to blame the economics of bitcoin for bringing the plant online and effectively boiling the entire lake. There’s just one problem: The account and story are both largely false and embellished.
Before debunking the claims, it’s worth pointing out that the locals have legitimate concerns with how the Greenidge plant’s outflow pipe is discharging water into a canal that flows into Keuka Lake Outlet. Local environmental groups are monitoring the canal and water near the outlet. Greenidge and the local residents should, and will, deal with those concerns appropriately. However, activist journalists using overexaggeration and deceit on a global scale to increase clicks is not a decent way to bring attention to local activism.
It’s important to clarify that the plant’s activities are all within the limits set by its permits from the DEC and EPA, which determine how much water the plant can withdraw and discharge and at what temperatures, as well as the plant’s emissions limits. If there are any disputes about this, they are best handled through the appropriate channels.
Greenidge was built in 1937 as a coal plant. It was dormant from 2011 until May 2017, when Atlas Holdings converted it to natural gas. In 2019, the plant began pilot testing for bitcoin mining and launched mining services in January 2020. The new facility has a capacity of 22 megawatts (MW) in its first phase and up to 106 MW after completion of all phases. The plant sells electricity to the regional grid when it’s profitable to do so and uses bitcoin mining as a buyer of last resort when it’s not.
Whether the plant’s energy is used to host porn or power online gaming — which also happens to use considerable amounts of energy — would not normally make a bit of difference. Nevermind that the cloud data centers everyone used to read and share the article in question uses plenty of dirty coal, which is considerably worse. Yet, creating a neutral and open settlement layer for the world seems to enrage people. These kinds of subjective value-based judgments are misguided. Vilifying a particular business’s energy usage — if one finds it distasteful or wasteful — is Malthusianism, which is counterproductive to free societies.
As of June 1, 2021, Greenidge has purchased voluntary carbon credits to become 100% carbon neutral. Now that the plant is carbon neutral, its critics have resorted to falsely claiming that the plant is destroying the entire lake.
The fact of the matter is that it is not physically possible for the Greenidge plant to change the lake’s temperature as was reported by the media. This is easily proven with public data and simple math. The permit allows Greenidge to discharge 135 million gallons of water per day into the Keuka Outlet as hot as 108 degrees Fahrenheit in the summer and 86 degrees Fahrenheit in the winter. Let’s put that into context.
Seneca Lake is 38 miles long and contains 3.81 cubic miles of water, which is 4.2 trillion gallons, so 135 million gallons of discharge per day is 0.003% of the total lake’s volume. On that daily 0.003% of total volume, Greenidge has released data of “just a 6.8 degrees average difference between intake and outflow” between March and April in 2021. For context, this is the equivalent of removing 2.25 drops from a one gallon jug, warming those drops by about 7 degrees Fahrenheit, adding them back to the jug each day and then claiming that they are causing the jug to feel too warm.
This is the best that journalists can come up with these days to attack bitcoin. Literally convincing people to worry about a few drops in a bucket. The math shows that it simply isn’t possible for Greenidge to have a meaningful impact on the lake’s temperature. This is another case of careless reporting by the media when public data is widely available. It’s pure fear, uncertainty and doubt (FUD).
It has also been pointed out that state-of-the-art bitcoin miners use 3 kilowatts (KW). If the facility has 8,000 miners that’s equal to 24 MW of capacity. If all of that energy was somehow pumped into Seneca Lake for a year, with no loss, the temperature would only be raised by 1/300th of a degree.
Furthermore, Seneca’s two main inlets are Catharine Creek at the southern end and the Keuka Lake Outlet, where Greenidge is located. Seneca Lake discharges into the Seneca River/Cayuga-Seneca Canal. Seneca is also fed by underground cold springs and replenished at a rate of 328,000 gallons (1,240 m³) per minute. In other words, more cold water enters the lake in seven hours than the plant is permitted to discharge all day. These springs keep the water moving in a circular motion, giving it little chance to freeze over. “Because of Seneca Lake’s great depth its temperature remains a near-constant 39° F (4°C). In summer the top 10 to 15 feet (3.0 to 4.6 m) warms to 70–80 °F (21–27°C).”
What about independent hard data? First, it’s important to realize that Seneca Lake’s surface temperatures have been warming since the 1990s. Hobart and William Smith Colleges have a research buoy in the lake, which is approximately 9 miles north of Greenidge. The data is publicly available for anyone to peruse. Neither NBC News nor Ars Technica made any effort to source this data, but we can easily review it ourselves.
Here’s what 2021 looks like so far:
2021 Seneca Lake Air Temperature
2021 Seneca Lake Water Temperature
The average water temperature of the lake over the last 30 days is 67 degrees Fahrenheit. It is no hot tub.
The buoy was not operational in 2020, but here is the 2019 data:
2019 Seneca Lake Air Temperature
2019 Seneca Lake Water Temperature
Similar to 2019, 2018 was cooler than 2021, so far:
2018 Seneca Lake Air Temperature
2018 Seneca Lake Water Temperature
However, 2017 was so hot, it was off the charts:
2017 Seneca Lake Air Temperature
2017 Seneca Lake Water Temperature
And 2016 was also off the charts. This was while Greenidge was still dormant:
2016 Seneca Lake Air Temperature
2016 Seneca Lake Water Temperature
It’s not surprising to see that surface temperatures are correlated to air temperature. As we can see, 2016 and 2017 were significantly warmer years while 2018 and 2019 were cooler years. The lake surface was warmer half a decade ago and then cooled for at least two years while the plant was purportedly operational.
Some journalists have suggested that the plant is perhaps responsible for declining Seneca Lake trout populations — loosely evidenced by the dwindling catch during the National Lake Trout Derby held annually at the lake. In reality, nobody seriously believes the entire lake’s trout declines are due to the plant. The truth is that it is a complex problem that mainly involves invasive species.
Finally, here’s a thermal image of the lake. If the mining were actually a major factor in its warming, we’d expect to see red by the discharge area. Yet, there’s no evidence it’s a major source of heat.
By now, it should be evident that the mainstream media pulled a fast one on everyone for clicks and to promote outrage — like some Orwellian propaganda machine. The story was also sensationalized by Tim De Chant of Ars Technica, which also went viral and was later corrected after the sensationalism was called out.
Speaking of persuading the masses to worry about drops in a bucket, the media has convinced people that bitcoin is terrible for the environment. However, on a global scale, bitcoin mining emissions are a drop in the bucket. As Cambridge University explains, at ~0.1% of annual global emissions, there’s virtually no evidence that bitcoin contributes to climate change, even under the worst-case scenarios.
To be clear, there are legitimate concerns by residents who live in the village of Dresden, New York. And local environmental groups are doing their best to hold Greenidge accountable, as they should. But, for the moment, they only have concerns. More research and observation is needed to see if those concerns are warranted.
Embellishing those concerns to spark outrage on a global scale is nothing more than a distraction from actual macro-environmental issues that need to be solved. Bitcoin’s carbon footprint is too insignificant and infinitesimal to warrant the attention it receives. The effects are intentionally overstated to provoke outrage. It would be just as pointless to enrage oneself over the impact of YouTube videos or gaming and believe something worthwhile is being solved.
If one truly cares about the environment, agonizing over 0.1% of annual global emissions, or a single outflow pipe in a tiny village, is both a diversion and a colossal waste of everyone’s time.
This is a guest post by Level 39. Opinions expressed are entirely their own and do not necessarily reflect those of BTC, Inc. or Bitcoin Magazine.
The bitcoin mining company will introduce a second facility located in South Carolina, a report outlines.
According to a press release, Greenidge Generations Holdings, Inc. intends to establish a second bitcoin mining operation in South Carolina. The facility will be entirely carbon neutral.
“The site, a retired printing plant, previously drew approximately 80MW of power and has expansion potential beyond that capacity,” states the release.
The move contributes to a growing trend of increasing investment in renewable energy, a positive in terms of the public perception of bitcoin mining.
“Approximately two-thirds of the electricity at the site is sourced from zero-carbon sources such as nuclear power, making it an attractive location for Greenidge,” according to the release. It goes on to state, “Greenidge has committed to offsetting the operation’s remaining carbon footprint, building on its record in New York State of operating a fully carbon neutral mining business.”
Such innovation also comes on the heels of a mass migration of hashrate from China, a notoriously “dirty” bitcoin mining center.
Coupling such industry orientation with geopolitics that supports the increasing use of renewables in bitcoin mining creates great potential for clean energy usage in the industry.
“This is an important step in Greenidge’s strategy to build upon our unique expertise in environmentally sound bitcoin mining at additional locations across the country,” CEO of Greenidge Jeff Kirt said on the development.
Such actions stand to rectify the perspective of environmental critics in regards to the mining of bitcoin.