ALGORITHM THAT PREDICTS

For Critics

It is a new digital tool that provides cutting-edge insights into the environmental footprint of blockchain networks other than Bitcoin, beginning with an in-depth

Proof of Stake related models uses significantly less energy when compared to their Proof of Work counterparts. Proponents

For critics, Bitcoin’s thirst for energy is self-evidently badthe equivalent of pouring gasoline in a hole and setting it on fire. But for Bitcoin advocates, the network’s energy

Blockchain energy consumption: Debunking the misperceptions of

Ethereum's Lifetime Energy Use Before the Merge Equaled

A comprehensive research framework for Bitcoin’s energy use

Is Bitcoin More Energy Intensive Than Mainstream Finance?

Bitcoin’s Energy Use is a ‘Skyscraper’, Ethereum a ‘Raspberry’:

Bitcoin’s Energy Use is a ‘Skyscraper’, Ethereum a ‘Raspberry

In The Main Body Of

If Bitcoin’s energy consumption can be thought of as a skyscraper, Ethereum’s energy use post-Merge, would be the size of a raspberry, according to Universit

Figure 2Bitcoin and Ethereum PoW energy consumption compared to Ethereum PoS (from Digiconomist). This comparison is not to impose any value judgment on

In the main body of the paper, I discuss various components of Bitcoin’s energy use, including the amount, composition, and geographical distribution of the energy, as

In Fact

New tool estimates environmental impact of blockchain networks

In fact, the network consumed 1,738 kWh of electrical energy on average for every transaction processed on the blockchain. To contextualize, the same amount of electricity could power an average U.S. household for two months. According to the CCAF, Ethereum’s

If Bitcoin’s energy consumption can be thought of as a skyscraper, Ethereum’s energy use post-Merge, would be the size of a raspberry, according to University