That's your problem right there. You either need floating prices or strict regulation to prevent misallocation of resources.
I mean, that is the definition of forever.
This method doesn't sit too well with me but I don't have any other better suggestions.
> The problem reportedly persists in the Svaneti region where electricity is free due to harsh living conditions. Free electricity has drawn quite a lot of enterprises and the area has developed into a Bitcoin mining economy that is also “patronised by high-ranking officials” according to locals quoted by Kommersant daily. The locals face frequent power outages.
"What can be done" is: sell electricity at market rate, and rebate the proceeds to the residents in the area. The economic situation will be effectively the same, but bitcoin miners won't be able to freeload electricity.
In fact most larger cities not only have tier pricing but also peak pricing inside tier levels.
Commercial and industrial is its own game, they have tiers and on/off peak charges along with load shedding requirements. Often it’s billed not just kWh but also peak amperage draw.
Edit: by load shedding I mean commercial/industrial end users often have to be able to accept incoming excess power from the grid that residential use isn’t consuming due to weather/events grid failures etc. Power grids are immensely complex and very interesting beasts.
I suppose having a particularly steep increase over an amount only cryptominers will hit would be good.
You can do something about this: support Proof of Stake crypto-currencies and denounce Proof of Work ones.
Incidentally, this overcapacity is why some estimate that half the global Bitcoin mining capacity is located in Sichuan and Yunan. Despite that, they just make a tiny dent in the wasted hydropower...
(And guess what - intermittency isn't a big deal for cryptomining / SETI/Folding@Home either!)
And btw; the skiing was awesome!
Does anyone know what the AP standard is for referencing the country VS the state of Georgia? Is this discouraged?
You know, there exists a world outside the US. And yet, when "Georgia" and "nation" is mentioned in the same sentence, you feel misled because it doesn't refer to the US state of Georgia? The problem is with you, not with the headline.
Also the GDP of the state of Georgia is 30x larger than the country of Georgia and it has 300% of the population. The state is a drastically more important world player than the country (IE it would be drastically bigger news if this was true of the state than the country). There is nothing US centric about this.
It's a headline, not a summary.
> I also read it to be referring to the state of Georgia in the the US Nation.
It's okay to misunderstand the headline – if I were a resident of the US, I would have probably interpreted "Georgia" as the US state as well. But it is not justified to blame this on the headline, or to feel "misled" by it.