- The energy consumption of Ethereum is approximately 0.0026 TWh/yr across all the global networks
- Per-transaction data can be misleading for estimating energy expenditure.
Ethereum is poised to be a green blockchain. Ethereum’s PoS (Proof of Stake) consensus mechanism utilizes ETH. The estimate of energy consumption for Ethereum is defined by the CCRI (Crypto Carbon Ratings Institute). The data generated is basically the electricity and energy consumption and the carbon footprint of the Ethereum network.
Energy Consumption in Ethereum
The consumption of different nodes in the blockchain is measured by various hardware and client software configurations. Yearly carbon emissions correspond to annual electric consumption of an estimated 2601 MWh of 870 metric CO2e. Getting exact and precise estimates for energy consumption is very complicated, especially when the respective quantity being measured has a complex supply chain.
Energy consumption may not be necessary to describe the environmental footprint precisely because of discrete projects using different energy resources. The robust Bitcoin network would need to be powered by gas flaring that otherwise would have been lost in transmission and distribution. Ethereum takes a different route altogether as it diverts itself towards sustainability by replacing and superseding the energy-consuming part of the network with a green alternative.
Per-Transaction Estimate and Carbon Debt
“Per-transaction” energy expenditures might be a misleading measure to know the exact state of energy expenditure. Energy, which is demanded in order to propose and validate a block, does not depend on the number of transactions within it. Per-transaction unit refers to the fact that no transaction is directly proportional to the energy expenditure, which is not the case at all. Also, per-transaction estimates might not give the exact date of the blockchain transaction throughout.
The cumulative transactional throughput recorded on the Ethereum blockchain is not only of the base layer but also of the combined sum of all its layer 2 throughput rollups. Generally, Layer 2’s do not contribute to the calculation; however, accounting for the energy consumed additionally by the sequencers in minimal quantity along with the large number of transactions sustained, they will drastically reduce per-transaction estimates.
That is why ‘per-transaction’ energy consumption can be misleading and should not be used as the prominent factor for the calculation. The energy expenditure of Ethereum is very minimal. However, the low energy expenditure scenario came into play with the shift from the consensus mechanism of PoS (proof-of-stakes) to PoW (proof-of-work).
PoW wasn’t sustainable and had a fairly expensive environmental cost compared to the current PoS mechanism. While Ethereum always wanted to implement PoS in its network’s ecosystem, it wasn’t initially possible as Ethereum did not want to compromise on security and decentralization. Thanks to years of concentrated research and rigorous development, the dynamic blockchain Ethereum was finally able to adopt PoS.
Conclusion
The Merge has mitigated the energy consumption of Ethereum to a greater extent. Both electricity consumption and carbon footprint decreased by more than 99%. The environmental cost of securing networks has been drastically reduced because of this innovative change in consensus mechanism.
