And even if it's true, an expansion of generation capacity is only useful if it's eventually freed up for non-crypto uses, right? Otherwise it's just a wash.
Depending on where you live, the State likely requires the utility to spend some portion of its revenue on efficiency. Valois a prime example, overall the state uses far less electricity per person, which is at least partially because of decades of efficiency initiatives.
And secondly, if utilities can get their customers to be efficient at the right time of day, the utility will make more money overall even if the total demand decreases.
Lastly, most publicly regulated utilities make very little on selling electricity, they instead make a guaranteed profit on capital investment. So total kWh sold is less important overall.
That's what I thought too. Building new capacity is expensive and time-consuming; utilities would rather run their existing capacity at full blast and reduce demand.
Which means these cryto miners haven't financed 2.3% additional generation capacity in any meaningful sense. Unless they have special contracts with utilities to specifically fund new power plants and transmission.
Because that kind of marketing works on a lot of people.
I personally pick my power company, if I have a choice at all, based on their rates and proportion of renewable energy generated. Most people probably only care about the rate.
Power companies aren't brands. People don't make choices based on which one is more "woke" or whatever.
In the UK you have the choice of loads of energy companies, and certainly some of the marketing is around their green credentials.