British Columbia Permanently Bans New Crypto Mining Projects

TheCryptoTimesОпубликовано 2025-10-21Обновлено 2025-10-21

British Columbia has taken a decisive step to safeguard its power grid by permanently banning new cryptocurrency mining projects. Canada’s third most populous province introduced new legislation to manage electricity use among emerging industries such as artificial intelligence and data centers. 

Authorities said in a press release that the move ensures the region’s clean energy resources support projects that bring stronger economic benefits and more jobs for residents. Minister of Energy and Climate Solutions Adrian Dix noted that British Columbia (BC) should act with “urgency to leverage our clean-electricity advantage”. 

The government will prioritize electricity connections for industries such as natural gas and mining, which generate more consistent revenue. “Other jurisdictions have been challenged to address electricity demands from emerging sectors,” the energy ministry said Monday, warning that poorly managed growth could lead to higher rates for consumers.

Limiting AI power demand

Besides curbing crypto mining, BC plans to regulate electricity available for AI data centers. BC Hydro, the state-owned utility, will allocate 300 megawatts for AI and 100 megawatts for data centers in a competitive process beginning in early 2026. 

To put things in perspective, Meta’s new data center in Texas could use as much as 1 gigawatt of power on its own. Meanwhile, industries like forestry, hydrogen, and manufacturing in BC won’t face power limits, helping them grow steadily over time.

Infrastructure and indigenous participation

BC also plans to speed up work on the North Coast Transmission Line by skipping some lengthy approval steps, which could save up to 18 months. The government will change how power connection costs are handled so several companies can share the financial load instead of just one. 

In addition, new rules will allow Indigenous communities to own part of future power projects, helping them benefit more directly from local development.

British Columbia’s decision is a big shift in how regions manage power use. It shows the growing struggle between making money and saving energy, and it could inspire other places to rethink crypto mining’s heavy power demands.

Also Read: UK Retail Investors Gain Access to Bitcoin and Ethereum ETPs


Mobile Only Image

Похожее

Retail Investors' 'Lead Brother' Serenity vs. Newly Minted Stock God Leopold: How Are the Two Top Hunters Mining AI's 'Physical Limits'?

The article profiles two prominent figures, Serenity and Leopold Aschenbrenner, who are gaining attention for their unconventional investment strategies focused on the physical constraints of the AI boom, moving beyond mainstream software narratives. Serenity, an anonymous online trader, advocates a "shiso leaf" theory. He targets small-cap companies with monopolies on critical, overlooked components in the AI hardware supply chain, such as specific semiconductor materials. His deep, technical analysis of bottlenecks in areas like co-packaged optics (CPO) has reportedly yielded massive returns, though his anonymity and focus on illiquid micro-cap stocks pose significant risks for followers. Leopold Aschenbrenner, a former OpenAI researcher, founded a multi-billion dollar hedge fund. His macro thesis argues that physical infrastructure—power grids, land, data centers—is the true bottleneck for AI growth, lagging far behind chip production. Consequently, his fund employs an infrastructure arbitrage strategy: heavily investing in storage and compute infrastructure companies while placing massive bearish bets (put options) against major semiconductor stocks, betting their valuations will correct as physical constraints become apparent. While their methods differ—Serenity drills into microscopic supply chain details, while Leopold takes a macroscopic, infrastructure-focused view—both share a core belief: the real power and investment alpha in the AI era lie in controlling scarce physical resources, not just software. The article concludes by noting the inherent risks in both approaches, such as liquidity issues for micro-caps and timing risks for macro bets, but suggests they signal a broader market re-evaluation of AI's foundational assets.

marsbit5 ч. назад

Retail Investors' 'Lead Brother' Serenity vs. Newly Minted Stock God Leopold: How Are the Two Top Hunters Mining AI's 'Physical Limits'?

marsbit5 ч. назад

Who Will Make Money in the Age of Agents?

In the Agents era of blockchain, traditional value capture theories face challenges. The "Fat Protocol" theory, dominant since 2016, suggested protocols capture most value as their tokens are essential for network use. However, the proliferation of interchangeable L1s, L2s, and modular layers has eroded protocol scarcity and pricing power. Conversely, the "Fat App" theory posits that applications capturing user relationships (like wallets and exchanges) become the primary value layer by controlling distribution and transaction flows. This aligns with the current "Great Repricing" cycle. Agents disrupt this logic. As software users, they lack brand loyalty, prioritize cost and efficiency, and switch between platforms seamlessly. This undermines the front-end UX moats that "Fat Apps" rely on. The article explores several potential futures: 1. **Headless Applications:** Current leading apps could strip their front-ends and become backend API infrastructure for Agents, preserving their role. 2. **Protocol Resurgence:** If integration becomes trivial, Agents might bypass aggregators and interact directly with protocols, reviving "Fat Protocol" dynamics. 3. **Pricing Power Collapse:** Agents' rational, frictionless routing could commoditize the entire stack, compressing margins toward cost and leaving little profit for intermediaries. 4. **Unprecedented Activity:** Agents may enable new, high-frequency, machine-to-machine economic activities, expanding the total value pie even if margins are thin. 5. **A New, Unnamed Model:** Historically, major tech shifts (like the internet's attention economy) create unforeseen business models. The Agents era may spawn entirely new ways to capture value. The most likely outcome is a coexistence where "Fat Apps" continue to serve human users valuing UX, while a separate, Agent-driven economy emerges governed by different rules—where loyalty is based on factors like liquidity, latency, and settlement guarantees rather than brand.

marsbit6 ч. назад

Who Will Make Money in the Age of Agents?

marsbit6 ч. назад

Торговля

Спот
Фьючерсы
活动图片