On one hand there is a customer who is always willing to buy electricity you can generate in extremely predictable volumes and they will stop when you ask them

On one hand there is a customer who is always willing to buy electricity you can generate in extremely predictable volumes and they will stop when you ask them to. A grid operator should be able to figure out a way to ensure that they always have a profitable arrangement on net with this customer. TFA doesn't have a single data point that the deal is a loser for ERCOT or other rate payers - just knee jerk reactions based on the underlying assumption that something must be wrong. It is perfectly plausible that ERCOT, Riot and other rate payers are all benefiting from the agreement and perhaps there's only an argument about how to distribute that benefit fairly. Given ERCOT's public responsibilities to transparency and the clicks a reporter could generate if they could materially show that either ERCOT or the other rate payers were losing with this deal (to evil crypto of all things) I am inclined to say the whole thing is a nothingburger. On the other hand we have proposals to increase the upfront costs, consume more valuable land (real estate prices too low for anyone's taste?), and utilize it in environmentally unfriendly ways (who wants to live next to a rock crusher operation or an aluminum factory). Relying on Bitcoin miners as a flexible consumer is extremely compelling.