Cambridge University study: Ethereum is more energy efficient than Solana

Cambridge University Research: Ethereum is significantly more energy-efficient than Solana

An exclusive study by the Cambridge Center for Alternative Finance redefines the environmental hierarchy of crypto blockchain. The results show that Ethereum is significantly better than Solana in terms of energy intensity per unit of market value. This is a revolution for the encryption ecosystem! The following are specific data, methodology and complete analysis.

Summary

Ethereum consumes approximately 7.87 gigawatt hours of electricity per year, with persistent power consumption of 0.90 MW.
Its energy intensity ranks second lowest on the Cambridge Research Proof-of-Stake (PoS) panel, behind only BNB Chain.
Solana has the highest absolute consumption (13.48 GWh per year) and its energy intensity is 8.5 times that of Ethereum.
The Merge reduced Ethereum's continued power consumption from 2.4 GW to 0.90 MW, a decrease of more than 99.9%.

Cambridge data shows that Ethereum consumes 7.87 GWh annually.

The report "Merged Ethereum-A Transformation of Power" released by the University of Cambridge's Center for Alternative Finance pointed out that the total annual power consumption of the Ethereum network is currently approximately 7.87 GWh, corresponding to sustained power consumption of only 0.90 MW. This allows the encrypted network to consume more than 99.9% less energy than its original baseline of 2.4 GW.

To obtain these precise data, Cambridge researchers used a bottom-up approach to audit the overall physical structure of the Ethereum network. Specifically, they directly tested the power consumption of 20 client software combinations used by nodes on two types of hardware. The results are as follows:

The median power consumption for a typical home device is 18 watts, and that for professional workstations rises to 153 watts.

After weighting these results according to the actual node distribution, Cambridge concluded that the average power consumption per node was approximately 105 watts. The study listed 8,522 identifiable full nodes: 36% of them were running on home connections and 64% were located in the cloud or enterprise infrastructure. The United States hosts 31% of nodes, followed by Germany (16%), Finland (8%) and France (6%). These four countries concentrate nearly 62% of the node network measured by Cambridge.

Ethereum outperforms Solana in terms of energy intensity

It is true that due to the large size of the validator set, Ethereum uses more electricity than most small PoS networks. However, when electricity consumption is adjusted based on market value, Ethereum's efficiency becomes indisputable. According to a research report by the University of Cambridge, the encryption network consumes only 33 kilowatt hours per million US dollars in market value, ranking among the second most efficient blockchain in the world, second only to BNB Chain.

In comparison, Solana had the highest absolute consumption among the PoS networks studied, at approximately 13.48 GWh per year. Its energy intensity reaches 283 kilowatt-hours per million dollars in market value. This ratio shows that to ensure equal economic value, Solana's energy consumption is approximately 8.5 times that of Ethereum. This is enough to overturn the common view that "Solana's throughput performance ensures that it is more efficient than Ethereum's historical architecture."

All of the encrypted networks involved in the Cambridge Comparison collectively consumed approximately 38 GW hours during the study period. The energy consumption of other blockchains ranges from 3.6 to 5.1 GWh, such as NEAR, Tron and TON. Cardano and BNB Chain remained below 1 GW.

However, Cambridge specifically points out an important point: the study does not claim that Ethereum has the lowest absolute power consumption.

Ethereum's carbon footprint is now tied to the power structure

Ethereum's annual carbon footprint has only risen to 2.37 kilotons of carbon dioxide equivalent. Compared with the proof-of-work era, this number is 99.98%. The network's climate impact is now equivalent to the annual carbon footprint of 900 British families.

According to analysis by Cambridge researchers, 39.4% of the electricity consumed by the Ethereum network comes from renewable energy, 17% comes from nuclear energy, and a total of 56.4% comes from low-carbon sources. The remaining 43.6% comes from fossil fuels, of which natural gas accounts for 27.7% of the power mix.

Alexander Neumuller, head of research at the Cambridge Energy Project, summed up the shift in one sentence: "With proof of stake, electricity is no longer the price of security."

Cambridge also emphasized that the study did not provide estimates of energy consumption for each transaction. The reason is that approximately 92% of transactions in the Ethereum ecosystem have been settled on the Layer 2 network, making calculations incomplete.

Another note: Electricity is no longer a regulating variable for security costs. Therefore, the remaining ecological footprint depends entirely on the decarbonization process of the State Grid hosting the node. As the energy transformation of major hosting countries is advancing, Ethereum's overall environmental footprint will continue to decline structurally in the coming years.

The merged Ethereum: A transformation that is recognized but needs to be viewed objectively

The September 15, 2022 merger is undoubtedly a turning point in this story. By completely abandoning proof of work, the Ethereum Network has accomplished an unprecedented technological feat: transforming its engines while on the fly. Cambridge Research shows that this transformation has compressed Ethereum's power requirements by 3.5 orders of magnitude. Interpretation: If Ethereum's power consumption before the upgrade was comparable to that of the Statue of Liberty, then the merged network is only equivalent to "a golf ball placed on its base." This vivid metaphor visually demonstrates the sharp decline in energy demand!

Not only that, by replacing miners with validators who pledged ether, Ethereum's continued power consumption dropped from 2.4 GW to 0.90 MW, a drop of more than 99.9%. This structural change explains why Ethereum's energy consumption remains a hot topic in comparison with other proof-of-stake networks.

According to researchers at the University of Cambridge, lightweight verification could reduce hardware requirements for future nodes, but broader network participation could offset these benefits. Therefore, the report treats future demand as an unknown rather than an inevitable downward trend.

Regardless, the Cambridge study confirms Ethereum's ecological success after the technology transformation. By surpassing Solana in energy intensity, the crypto network has demonstrated its ability to combine economic strength with environmental responsibility, which is enough to consolidate its dominance among institutional investors.