Can lawmakers fix the crypto problem?

Back in September, we opined in this space that, what with the effort locally to bring in a crypto mining operation, perhaps state lawmakers should weigh in, given that they would be better positioned and better informed and could lead the way in protecting the state from the excesses of the cryptocurrency mining industry. Pardon us as we laugh at ourselves.

Wait, we’re not done.

What naivete.

Not only did they not protect the state, they opened wide the door to crypto mining excesses by barring local entities — cities and counties — from standing in the way of such operations by passing legislation to limit what these noisy, electricity leaching outfits can do. (And in exchange for all that noise pollution and excessive use of electricity, which can cause brownouts in communities, crypto mining produces almost no jobs.)

Apparently, as the state’s lawmakers were hitting the exits at the end of the legislative session in 2023, this bill popped up and because lawmakers were eager to get gone from Little Rock, the bill quickly passed. Now, there is much hand wringing about what the bill said and how bad it is for the state.

That makes Larry Reynolds, executive director of Southeast Arkansas Regional Planning, the Pine Bluff Planning Commission and perhaps the members of Trinity Episcopal Church and surrounding neighbors smarter collectively than the entire state legislature and Gov. Sarah Sanders to boot.

As you may recall, a real estate investor from California bought the old Pine Bluff Commercial building with the intent of putting in a crypto mining operation.

The building has a big supply of electricity to it — back when that was needed for the printing press — which made it perfect for such an operation because of the hundreds if not thousands of computers that have to be operated in addition to the humongous fans that have to run 24-7 to keep said computers cool.

But there was a small problem. That building was not zoned for such an operation so the investor had to come before the Planning Commission to ask for special permission.

That brought Reynolds into action. He said he had gotten no information from the new owner about the operation. So he went digging on his own, easily finding online that in many instances, these mining operations are excruciatingly loud and they suck so much electricity out of the grid that there isn’t enough left for normal life, to say nothing of the greatly reduced property values of anything in the vicinity.

At the same time, Trinity parishioners were objecting because they didn’t want to have to put up with the above, as did some of the neighbors in the area.

In the end, the owner didn’t put much effort into his plea before the Planning Commission and his request was denied.

We shudder to think what would have happened had that building been OK for such an operation. But because the state barred local entities from objecting to crypto mining operations, not surprisingly, some have already popped up.

Now the legislature is back at it, trying to fix what it supremely messed up last year. We do hope that measures are put in place that protect the public from these nuisances — and by nuisances, we mean operations that should go in industrial parks or that are limited in how much noise they make.

And whatever is passed should not leave private citizens in the position of having to go to court to protect their peace and tranquility. These crypto outfits are well-heeled and fully capable of hiring highpriced lawyers to get their way, unlike most folks who don’t have a well of money for fighting such battles in court.