It makes me sad that someone could run up a $12K monthly electric bill without assigning an environmental cost to where that power was coming from.
Making assumptions is bad.
Before the Bitcoin operation got started, my friend's business was making biodiesel out of local rendered chicken fat and other things. He single-handedly supplied most of the farmers in a 5 mile radius with fuel for their farm operations. Prior to the biodiesel years, he ran the largest privately owned solar grid in the county, providing something like 25 kilowatts back to the grid, for a couple of years solid. He is the most environmentally obsessed person I know, and has certainly contributed far more to the local green economy than he has taken out of it.
The ultimate plan, which did not come to fruition (because of the rising difficulty of mining bitcoin, as I stated earlier), was to completely cover the 40 acre property with an array of solar panels, each panel having a custom GPU mining module installed on the underside -- open air cooling of the machines, solar power for the bitcoins, and it would have qualified as the largest solar array in the United States.
To think that he's some kind of forest-destroying air-blackening capitalist is about the furthest from the truth as you can get. Check your assumptions.