update energy consumption page #8376
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
jmcook1186
requested review from
samajammin,
wackerow,
corwintines,
pettinarip and
minimalsm
as code owners
github-actions
bot
added
content 🖋️
6 tasks
✅ ethereum-org-website-dev deploy preview ready
|
wackerow
reviewed
Oct 27, 2022
wackerow
requested changes
Oct 27, 2022
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@jmcook1186 Nice update! Awesome to see the latest numbers.
Comments/questions/suggestions below =)
minimalsm
reviewed
Oct 31, 2022
minimalsm
reviewed
Oct 31, 2022
minimalsm
reviewed
Oct 31, 2022
minimalsm
reviewed
Oct 31, 2022
Co-authored-by: Paul Wackerow <[email protected]>
minimalsm
reviewed
Oct 31, 2022
minimalsm
reviewed
Oct 31, 2022
| Both proof-of-work and proof-of-stake are just mechanisms to decide who gets to add the next block. Swapping proof-of-work for proof-of-stake, where the real-world value invested comes from ETH staked directly in a smart contract, removes the need for miners to burn energy to add to the blockchain. Therefore, the environmental cost of securing the network is drastically reduced. | ||
|
|
||
| ## Why proof-of-stake is greener than proof-of-work {#why-pos-is-greener-than-pow} | ||
| [CCRI](https://carbon-ratings.com) examined the impact of Ethereum’s merge from proof-of-work to proof-of-stake. The annualized electricity consumption was reduced by more than **99.988 %**. Likewise, Ethereum’s carbon footprint was decreased by approximately **99.992 %** (from 11,016,000 to 870 tonnes CO2e). Depicted metaphorically, this corresponds to a reduction in emissions from the height of the Eiffel Tower to a small plastic toy figure, as shown in the figure above. Therefore, the environmental cost of securing the network is drastically reduced. Simultaneously, the security of the network is thought to have increased. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
CCRI examined the impact of Ethereum’s merge from proof-of-work to proof-of-stake.
Weird phrasing. Some alternatives:
- CCRI examined the impact of Ethereum’s transition from proof-of-work to proof-of-stake.
- CCRI examined the impact of The Merge (Ethereum's transition from proof-of-work to proof-of-stake.)
- CCRI examined the impact of Ethereum’s Merge transition from proof-of-work to proof-of-stake.
minimalsm
reviewed
Oct 31, 2022
minimalsm
reviewed
Oct 31, 2022
minimalsm
reviewed
Oct 31, 2022
minimalsm
reviewed
Oct 31, 2022
|
Thank you
…On Mon, Oct 31, 2022, 3:40 AM Joshua ***@***.***> wrote:
***@***.**** commented on this pull request.
------------------------------
In src/content/energy-consumption/index.md
<#8376 (comment)>
:
> @@ -4,65 +4,66 @@ description: The basic information you need to understand Ethereum's energy cons
lang: en
---
-# Ethereum energy consumption {#introduction}
+## Ethereum's energy expenditure {#proof-of-stake-energy}
Yeah, we discussed this before but didn't take action. The problem is we
have inconsistencies between the title frontmatter and the explicit H1
we're using, so we should probably make those consistent first.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#8376 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/A3UG6SP3SNEWGPE3MTTAYBTWF6HXTANCNFSM6AAAAAARO62NFM>
.
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.Message
ID: ***@***.***>
|
Co-authored-by: Joshua <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Joseph Cook <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Joshua <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Paul Wackerow <[email protected]>
minimalsm
reviewed
Nov 3, 2022
minimalsm
reviewed
Nov 3, 2022
minimalsm
reviewed
Nov 3, 2022
minimalsm
reviewed
Nov 3, 2022
minimalsm
approved these changes
Nov 3, 2022
minimalsm
approved these changes
Nov 3, 2022
jmcook1186
commented
Nov 3, 2022
| Both proof-of-work and proof-of-stake are just mechanisms to decide who gets to add the next block. Swapping proof-of-work for proof-of-stake, where the real-world value invested comes from ETH staked directly in a smart contract, removes the need for miners to burn energy to add to the blockchain. Therefore, the environmental cost of securing the network is drastically reduced. | ||
|
|
||
| ## Why proof-of-stake is greener than proof-of-work {#why-pos-is-greener-than-pow} | ||
| CCRI examined the impact of Ethereum’s merge from proof-of-work to proof-of-stake. The annualized electricity consumption was reduced by more than **99.988 %**. Likewise, Ethereum’s carbon footprint was decreased by approximately **99.992 %** (from 11,016,000 to 870 tonnes CO2e). Depicted metaphorically, this corresponds to a reduction in emissions from the height of the Eiffel Tower to a small plastic toy figure, as shown in the figure above. Therefore, the environmental cost of securing the network is drastically reduced. Simultaneously, the security of the network is thought to have increased. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| CCRI examined the impact of Ethereum’s merge from proof-of-work to proof-of-stake. The annualized electricity consumption was reduced by more than **99.988 %**. Likewise, Ethereum’s carbon footprint was decreased by approximately **99.992 %** (from 11,016,000 to 870 tonnes CO2e). Depicted metaphorically, this corresponds to a reduction in emissions from the height of the Eiffel Tower to a small plastic toy figure, as shown in the figure above. Therefore, the environmental cost of securing the network is drastically reduced. Simultaneously, the security of the network is thought to have increased. | |
| CCRI examined the impact of Ethereum’s transition from proof-of-work to proof-of-stake. The annualized electricity consumption was reduced by more than **99.988 %**. Likewise, Ethereum’s carbon footprint was decreased by approximately **99.992 %** (from 11,016,000 to 870 tonnes CO2e). Depicted metaphorically, this corresponds to a reduction in emissions from the height of the Eiffel Tower to a small plastic toy figure, as shown in the figure above. Therefore, the environmental cost of securing the network is drastically reduced. Simultaneously, the security of the network is thought to have increased. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Oops. Already merged. I've added the change here: #8472
Merged
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description
rewrites energy page with new references and numbers, new table containing comparisons to PoS Ethereum, updated chart, additional external links and refined discussion.
Related Issue
#8292