Texas bitcoin miners just finished another 4CP summer, but the transmission-cost strategy that made summer curtailment so valuable is now under formal state review.
Hashrate Index’s October 9 September lookback says ERCOT’s fourth and final coincident peak landed on September 12, ending the seasonal incentive for miners to stay offline around suspected 4CP intervals until next summer. The same report notes that Texas mining fleets returned after the peak season, helping Bitcoin’s seven-day network hashrate climb from roughly 926 EH/s to 975 EH/s during September.
4CP Rewards Miners for Missing Four Summer Peaks
ERCOT’s Four Coincident Peak calculations use the system’s highest 15-minute demand interval in each of the four summer months: June, July, August and September. For large loads whose transmission charges are tied to those coincident peaks, successfully curtailing during the right intervals can materially reduce the following year’s transmission bill.
Bitcoin miners are unusually good at responding to that signal because ASIC fleets can reduce load quickly. BitcoinVersus covered the practical side of that behavior in 2023, when Texas miners curtailed heavily during extreme heat, and again in September when the network’s hashrate rebounded after the summer curtailment season ended.
Texas Law Requires the 4CP Method to Be Re-Evaluated
The review is happening under Public Utility Commission of Texas Project No. 58484, Evaluation of Transmission Cost Recovery. Senate Bill 6 requires the Commission to evaluate whether the current methodology still assigns transmission costs appropriately and to amend its rules by the end of 2026 if needed.
That review is broader than bitcoin mining. It applies to the way Texas allocates transmission costs across customer classes. But large flexible loads—especially crypto mines and data centers—are central to the debate because they can reduce consumption during 4CP intervals far more easily than residential customers or many traditional industrial loads.
ERCOT told the Commission that 4CP avoidance by larger customers can shift a larger share of transmission costs onto residential and small commercial consumers. ERCOT also said actual consumption during four summer peak intervals does not necessarily determine which transmission upgrades the system needs.
A 100 MW Mine Can Have Millions at Stake
The size of the incentive is why this matters to mining economics. In a filing in the PUCT proceeding, energy trader Vitol estimated that customers on a 4CP tariff can save as much as $40,000 per MW per year by successfully reducing load during the relevant peaks.
That is a stakeholder estimate, not an official PUCT tariff. But the scale is useful. At that estimate, a 100 MW mining site could have as much as $4 million per year tied to 4CP performance. A 500 MW portfolio would put the theoretical exposure near $20 million.
The number helps explain why operators invest in peak forecasting, automated curtailment and energy-trading software. BitcoinVersus has covered tools such as Braiins Price Adapt, which automate machine power targets as economics change.
The State Has Not Chosen a Replacement Yet
No final replacement for 4CP has been adopted. Stakeholders in Project 58484 have proposed or discussed alternatives ranging from average consumption to annual maximum demand, modified coincident-peak structures and special treatment for new large loads that directly drive transmission construction.
Those are proposals, not current rules. Some market participants want 4CP preserved because it encourages demand response during the hottest hours of the year. Others argue that the method lets highly flexible customers avoid costs for infrastructure that was still built to serve their potential full load.
The Texas Public Power Association, for example, has argued that transmission providers increasingly build around customers’ individual peak requirements rather than a single ERCOT system peak. Other stakeholders defend 4CP because reducing large-load consumption during extreme demand can reduce system stress and wholesale prices.
A Change Could Rewrite Texas Mining Economics
The mining implication depends entirely on what replaces—or modifies—4CP. If future transmission charges are based more heavily on average load or maximum demand, shutting miners off for a few strategic summer intervals would no longer reduce transmission costs as effectively.
That would change the value of flexibility. Miners would still curtail when spot electricity becomes more expensive than expected mining revenue, and they could still participate in demand-response programs. But one of the large annual incentives for perfectly timing four peak intervals could shrink.
The timing matters because Texas remains one of the most important mining markets in the world. BitcoinVersus’ ERCOT overview explains why large miners concentrated in the state: deep power markets, large amounts of generation, flexible-load opportunities and fast-growing infrastructure.
4CP Also Helps Explain September’s Hashrate Jump
The policy debate connects directly to network data. Hashrate Index says Bitcoin’s seven-day hashrate average climbed from 926 EH/s to 975 EH/s during September, while ERCOT’s final 4CP interval passed on September 12.
BitcoinVersus recently covered the same 49 EH/s September increase. The entire global increase cannot be attributed to Texas, but the seasonal return of curtailed Texas fleets is one plausible contributor.
Hashrate Index also notes that October has historically produced positive difficulty growth in every year since 2022. If Texas miners remain online more consistently after 4CP season, that seasonal return can contribute to higher network difficulty just as hashprice is trying to recover.
Watch How Bitcoin Mining Works With the Texas Grid
The Texas Blockchain Council video below explains the industry case for bitcoin mining as a flexible ERCOT load. It is useful context for why miners value fast curtailment so highly, even as regulators reconsider how transmission costs should be allocated.
What to Watch Next
- PUCT’s final decision in Project No. 58484.
- Whether the Commission keeps 4CP, modifies it or adopts a different transmission-cost methodology.
- Whether new large loads receive separate treatment from existing industrial customers.
- How Texas miners change curtailment software and power contracts if the annual 4CP incentive shrinks.
- Whether October’s post-4CP hashrate return pushes Bitcoin difficulty materially higher.
The immediate takeaway is simple: 4CP is still the system Texas miners just operated under in summer 2026, but its future is no longer guaranteed. If Texas changes how it allocates transmission costs, one of the most important hidden variables in ERCOT mining profitability could change with it.
Leave a Reply