For what? Other than heating a home (which is fine…I agree with…but people are already doing.)

I’m a process engineer. Large, petrochemical industrial processes. Anything that benefits from “miner heat” would benefit much more from “industrial heat”. 

anything that would benefit from “miner heat” that is decentralized enough to not benefit from industrial centralization is probably paying retail electricity rates and therefore is challenged for profitability. 

Greenhouses? Not enough profitability in either the base business nor the contribution of the heat.

The difficulty adjustment of the bitcoin protocol is a real nag on not efficient processes. 

Also, why would large groups of people buy miners that could be competitively deployed constantly at other locations to pay retail electricity rates and only heat their homes 3-9 months a year? Those miners would be more competitive running 100% of the time…. 

And if large numbers of retail electricity participants emerge, the difficulty adjustment will compete them out. 

 Anytime electric heat is used in a home, it is more "profitable" if that heat is provided by a Bitcoin miner. The same amount of energy is used to do the work but an additional yeild in the form of sats is generated in addition to the work of the heat. The rate of electricity is irrelevant because that electricity is already being used. #doublespendenergy 

 If EVERYONE uses this logic, the difficulty adjustment will ensure the “profit” from operating a rig(s) won’t cover the capital cost of the rig(s). 

 That is dependent on the operational lifetime of the miner, the transaction fees at the time of operation, and the dollar price of Bitcoin (assuming the energy usage is priced in dollars).  

 Additionally, the dehydrator I built is a fraction of the cost of a dehydrator of comparable power one could but from the store. 

 Too cool