Sustainable Blockchain: A New Horizon for Energy-Efficient Consensus Mechanisms

Abstract

The rapid rise of blockchain technology as a fundamental component for digital trust and decentralized ledger systems has also brought attention to the environmental consequences of its underlying consensus processes, specifically Proof of Work (PoW), which is famous for its significant energy usage. This paper examines sustainable and energy-efficient alternatives to PoW, such as Proof of Stake (PoS) and Delegated Proof of Stake (DPoS), in order to combine blockchain\'s revolutionary potential with environmental responsibility. The study examines the efficiency, security, and environmental impact of various alternative systems, revealing the complex trade-offs between energy efficiency and network integrity. Through a set of case studies, they examine the practical consequences and accomplishments of these mechanisms for several real-world implementations of blockchains, which gives a very good idea about difficulties and the creative solutions used. The study brings to light the need for more sustainable consensus mechanisms in the blockchain system. It also tries to bring to the fore the future as far as the development of blockchain towards a more sustainable future is concerned, underlining the role that has to be played by technological innovation in realizing environmental sustainability in the digital age.

Introduction

I. INTRODUCTION

In a context that sustainability and energy efficiency are even related to today's fast-growing blockchain technology area, this is of particular relevance in the discussion about the environmental impact of classical consensus processes like Proof of Work (PoW) [1][2]. The point of convergence between blockchain and sustainable energy systems in an increasingly changing environment is how digital ledger technologies are revolutionizing the financial transaction environment and advancing environmental responsibility [3]. More recent scientific literature focuses on the capacity of blockchain technology to allow, in a secure and sustainable way, the development of human beings. Studies reported that blockchain technology could be effective and contribute to transparency and trust in the energy and supply chain management industries [4,5]. However, this one seems to be quite a challenge, as it is meant to sustain the ecosystem facing a number of challenges on the way to sustainability. Among the many, the most important challenges include the high energy intensity of mining operations, scaling issues, and those of security related to PoS (Proof of Stake) and DPoS (Delegated Proof of Stake) systems, among others [6, 7].

This is a gap that research has found itself addressing by exploring sustainable and energy-efficient consensus techniques that can strike a balance between the full potential of blockchain technology and the necessity of environmental sustainability [8, 9]. Some research proposes new consensus models that could minimize blockchain technology energy consumption without compromising security and decentralization [10,11]. These include: Green-PoW for the PoW consensus algorithm, a way to enhance its energy efficiency by reducing consumption, and other proof-of-stake (PoS) variations of less-energy blockchain consensus [12]-[16]. Moreover, the discussion of blockchain and sustainability transcends that of a technical dimension and includes the socio-economic implications of using this new instrument for renewable sources or the impacts deriving from it on environmental goals [17, 19].

Encouraging the use of blockchain technology together with renewable energy programs encourages yet interconnected issues on the aspect of both energy security and environmental sustainability. Blockchain technology can have a significant impact on the advancement of decentralized energy systems by enabling transparent and secure transactions. It can facilitate peer-to-peer energy trade and improve the efficiency of distributing renewable energy [20][21]. Yet, the progress towards establishing a durable blockchain ecosystem relies on successfully addressing the existing technological, legislative, and societal obstacles that hinder its general acceptance [22][24]. Amidst the ongoing discussion about the environmental effects of blockchain, the implementation of eco-friendly consensus processes and the deliberate combination of blockchain with renewable energy projects are seen as crucial methods to utilize blockchain's capacity for sustainable progress [25][30].

II. BACKGROUND

The 2009 invention of blockchain technology introduced the world to a decentralized ledger, probably the biggest technology in revolutionizing digital transactions and systems of trust. The subsequent paragraph is thus going to discuss a little bit deeper about the role Proof of Work (PoW) played in consensus mechanisms. This is a peculiar way to ensure the transaction's integrity and, at the same time, the agreement of the network through computational labor [1]. In this mechanism, however, matters related to disputes about the level of scalability and energy consumption brought about by Proof of Work (PoW) have become alarming, since this mechanism uses electricity to a considerable extent. This has brought the subject to bear, putting it to recent studies which found that blockchain activities, especially those enabling cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin, bear enormous ecological impact.

In response, the blockchain community has intensively been working on finding a sustainable alternative to PoW. With the inconsistency in the algorithm of Proof of Work (PoW), there has been a possibility for an alternative called Proof of Stake (PoS), which has been proposed by many people, stating that the computer power of a participant working as a miner would be determined for rewards on how many coins he actually owns rather than how much computer power he holds [13].

The change from the energy-intensive paradigm to the one laying its weight on stake in the network does represent a very big shift in assuring the security of blockchain transactions and reaching consensus. Going further into the territory of consensus methods, Delegated Proof of Stake (DPoS) is democratic as it allows stakeholders to vote on who will be the delegate verifying the transactions. This governance layer of the electoral tries to maximize network efficiency and reduce energy usage by centralizing validation responsibilities to some particular set of nodes. Adoption of new consensus mechanisms in the blockchain community clearly shows a really strong commitment to the solution of scalability and environmental sustainability together.

Furthermore, the blockchain technology with renewable energy sources presents new scopes for environmental sustainability.

This contrasts with projects that use blockchain technology to enable direct electricity sharing between individuals—meaning decentralized technologies present an opportunity and are more likely to gain prominence toward a greener, further-decentralized market for energy [15,16]. Those projects were said to not only prove the practical use of blockchain technology outside the financial sector but also show its potential in supporting the accomplishment of the development goals for sustainable development. That is to say, this focus on the development of energy-efficient consensus mechanisms and the utilization of blockchain technology to incentivize the penetration of renewables represents a larger trend being turned to among the technology community: environmental accountability. This shift from Proof of Work (PoW) to a greener protocol stands as one of the revolutions on the line of blockchain technology. This revolution, much like many others, tries to find that golden middle between the transforming power that technology holds and the necessity for environmental protection [17,18]. The constant effort for developing sustainable energy-efficient blockchain solutions underlines the pliability of technology and commitment from its community toward degrading environmental footprints..

III. SUSTAINABLE CONSENSUS MECHANISMS

A. Proof of Stake (PoS)

The Proof of Stake (PoS) is one of the most revolutionary consensus mechanisms, reversing the processing power with ownership as the most important determinant of who validates transactions and generates new blocks, like the conventional Proof of Work (PoW). For a Proof of Stake (PoS) system, a user with the ability to possess and spend in the form of the cryptocurrency as security has higher chances of being able to validate a block. Conversely, staking shall imply the act of the members depositing a certain amount of their assets on the Blockchain network with the aim to be selected as validators. After the selection, selected validators have the role to proceed with transaction verification, including block creation, in general, to keep the network in a maintained state.

While Proof of Work (PoW) involves competition between miners and solving a complex mathematical puzzle by using vast processing resources and even energy consumption, in the case of Proof of Stake (PoS), it is achieved in an easier and energy-saving way. Thus, with the nullification of large mining activities, this reduces the total energy use by a great amount in a Proof of Stake (PoS) blockchain network. Improved efficiency in energy only helps to improve the sustainability of PoS, which makes it indispensable for the deployment of blockchain technology in various industries with a possibility of larger scalability [16]. Since the risk involved is directly proportionate to the amount of currency at stake, Proof of Stake (PoS) therefore motivates its users to be honest. For instance, entering into fraudulent transactions or confirming them would penalize the investment of the validator and therefore protect the network from possible attacks.

All this culminates in increasing recognition of Proof of Stake (PoS) advantages over Proof of Work (PoW) in the fact that more and more high-standing blockchain systems are adopting it, more so with Ethereum shifting to Ethereum 2.0. The Ethereum 2.0 transit from a PoW to a PoS consensus mechanism is purposed at correcting the problems of energy consumption and scalability characteristic of the former system. This shift represents a noteworthy achievement in the development of the blockchain technology [18]. The feat is not only the first in its kind but also sets a bar for other blockchain networks considering transitioning to a greener and more efficient way of achieving consensus [19]. This will have a significant impact on the future of blockchain technology [20].

B. Delegated Proof of Stake (DPoS)

With the basic Proof of Stake (PoS) mechanism, the Delegated Proof of Stake (DPoS) is an innovative consensus process to improve efficiency and scalability in the blockchain network. Unlike Proof of Stake (PoS)—where any stakeholder can validate the block transactions in an amount proportional to his stake—Delegated Proof of Stake (DPoS) delegates the validation of new records to a limited number of people. These are chosen by stakeholders through a certain procedure of voting, in which the vote of each stakeholder has a value equal in direct proportion to his investment in the network. The DPoS seems to make the process of validation very easy in the blockchain system, at the same time trying to have some element of ensuring that the elected persons to do validation and create new blocks are in line with the objectives of the network. If they fail to fulfill their duties, they can be promptly removed [20]. The primary benefit of DPoS is its high level of efficiency and scalability. Therefore, it would have more use possibilities at the large scale, with the fewer validating nodes and fewer block-generating nodes, implying that the DPoS system could forge new blocks more frequently and process the transactions faster. Very high-level security is there, but without the compromise of efficiency in the election process in this design. It is designed specifically so that only candidates representing a high level of reputation, reliability, and capability get elected to maintain the network's integrity. Finally, the delegates are also pushed to act in the best interest of the network since, by the threat of getting voted out, further increases the security against attackers [21].

DPoS also tackles a significant drawback of blockchain technology, which is its high energy consumption. A less number of nodes participating in the process of consensus would result in a time-transaction confirmation speed increase. It would essentially drop the requirement of computational power and further result in an energy usage much lower than for the PoW network and less than that of an average PoS network. It will thereby help with environmentally friendly alternatives and align with growing needs towards sustainable digital solutions. The algorithm showed that it is able to sustain speed, efficiency, and sustainability in both high volumes of transactions within the blockchain, for instance, the one provided through EOS and Tron platforms.

???????C. Additional Sustainable Mechanisms

In the blockchain space, new types of consensus mechanisms are always coming up, which are intended to ease the limitations set by existing algorithms, such as Proof of Work (PoW) and Proof of Stake (PoS). Proof of Authority (PoA) and Proof of Space and Time (PoST) have been given prominence in this crop of new entrants due to their great approach and value addition to efficiency in the use of blockchain technology. [23]

This is a much better approach, especially in proofed blockchain networks like PoA, where there is a group of chosen, trusted validators. The PoA consensus algorithm defines validators who have an accepted identity to propagate and mine new blocks, much like PoW. The way to find validators is collateral, on the grounds that they should carry out network operations in an honest and truthful manner. This approach would, in turn, dramatically reduce the energy consumption related to mining in PoW since it shall not be demanding validators solving complex mathematical problems. Attention to identity and reputation as stakeholders provides a much more efficient and secure alternative to PoW.

In PoA, the consensus is reached by a collective agreement from the set of well-known validators, which seems suitable for organizations and consortiums where members represent recognized and trusted entities [24].

Proof of Space and Time (PoST) changes course to the consensus with an idea of a different nature, wherein the consensus technique considers the disk space available on a miner's computer. A participant in a PoST-based blockchain network shows his or her commitment to the network to invest in disk space. This further gets support from the concept of time, whereby, in addition, the network verifies the period of time for which the space has been allocated. It increases integrity in the second degree security and commitment on the blockchain. Very different from Proof of Work (PoW) requiring constant computing power, and Proof of Stake (PoS) requiring a sufficient amount of coin's ownership, Proof of Space-Time (PoST) allows all and sundry by the fact that masses can enter the network by simply putting up contributions out of the available disk space. This method ensures that not only is the threshold of participation kept low, but at the same time, energy consumption likely to be caused due to traditional mining processes is reduced dramatically. This calls increasingly for more eco-friendly solutions to the blockchain [25].

This is, again, another attempt from the blockchain community in the direction to look at and implement more sustainable and effective consensus algorithms, which the community is looking at in the form of these supplementary sustainable PoA and PoST. This, therefore, inspires the development of an environment-friendly or less energy-consuming, encouraging technology in blockchain. This goes together with areas of requirements in identification, building of reputation, and effective resources distribution in the world. These systems should also develop more scalable, secure, and inclusive systems of blockchain and, in that way, broaden the base for sectors in which this technology can be applied. As the blockchain ecosystem develops, newer and more innovative consensus methods have to be elaborated that should ensure sustainable growth and mass uses of blockchain technology. [26]

IV. CHALLENGES AND CONSIDERATIONS

In addition, given the steep rise in use and adoption of blockchain technologies, several other challenges have to be considered when implementing more eco-friendly and efficient consensus mechanisms like Proof of Stake (PoS), Delegated Proof of Stake (DPoS), Proof of Authority (PoA), or Proof of Space and Time (PoST). These challenges present new paradigms that have security, decentralization, governance, and migration from the legacy systems among the major factors of concern [1, 2, 3].An important obstacle lies in guaranteeing strong security in these more recent consensus models. Where Proof of Work (PoW) secures the system with great security, as transactions demand intensive tasks to be conducted with resources, new techniques have been developed to decrease the required energy. On the other hand, the mechanisms these change the dynamics of security. For example, proof of stake (PoS) and its many derivatives can expose the entire blockchain to certain kinds of attacks. The former is one of the biggest problems facing blockchain technology because the validators are motivated by financial gains to put their weight behind a number of blockchain forks, which can potentially lead to security holes. Where similarly, the security is dependent strongly on the integrity and honesty of the validators in PoA. Incomplete transparency in the selection of authority nodes and a small number of validators will lead to centralization. This is a great threat to network security, as an easy attack on this network could be from collusion or targeted assaults [4,5].

Another issue to consider is the level of decentralization. What really has people attached to it is its decentralized nature, a redefinition from a completely different school of thought from centralized financial institutions. The implementation of Proof of Stake (PoS), however, contains a possibility of wealth concentration where the rich men become even more rich and hence make the network less decentralized. While effective, the delegated proof of stake enhances the strengthening of power among few delegated validators, thereby giving rise to apprehensions about the emergence of oligarchic governance systems within supposedly decentralized networks. It is very important to have these delicate balances among efficiency, security, and true decentralization in place, and those need to be done through sophisticated protocol designs and governance frameworks [6].

The issue of governance is also a significant barrier in these consensus mechanisms. Assuming that each node on the network is equally competent, and with the ever-increasing number of transactions, blockchain networks—especially those based on PoS, DPoS, and PoA—require proper governance. Therefore, in such networks, decisions about who should be a validator, stake sizes, and protocol changes are, for the most part, based on stakeholder agreement. The governance processes should be developed with an aspect of being fair, transparent, and all-inclusive in order to avoid, in the long run, the concentration of power among the rich and actually rather promote the all-inclusive active involvement and engagement of all stakeholders. This is vital for maintaining the well-being and confidence in these networks [8][9].

Besides, the transition from PoW to other energy-conservative consensus algorithms would be more or less a high changeover for existing networks of blockchains. It would also take massive technical, economic, and social transitions. Technically, these could vary from the new system ensuring that none of the former applications or smart contracts are tampered with.

Economically, in migrating issues, it may arise with the value of the native network currency and that of the stakeholders. From the social point of view, getting consensus across the society for such a huge change might be difficult and usually requires effective communication of incentives and perhaps overcoming opposition from parties benefiting under current positions. This will involve the bringing together of technology-driven innovations with sound economic models and governance frameworks. This can only be realized with an understanding of the details of blockchain technology that can make the community realize the wide potential these mechanisms have in offering sustainable and efficient solutions [12, 13].

V. CASE STUDIES AND IMPLEMENTATION

This proves that real-world evidence from the case studies of systems using blockchain proves out its viability and usefulness. Examples of this are Ethereum 2.0, which changes to Proof of Stake (PoS); Algorand's blockchain; the other being the Chia Network, doing far better than Proof of Work (PoW) in sustainability, all of course without losing a lot in the way of performance.

Transition from Ethereum 2.0 to a Proof of Stake (PoS) System. Ethereum will transit from its current Proof of Work (PoW) mechanism into another mechanism based on the Proof of Stake (PoS) system. The main reason for such an overwhelming change is to reduce energy use and increase the capacity of transactions. According to metrics presented by the Ethereum Foundation, Proof of Stake (PoS) consensus mechanism of Ethereum 2.0 could bring the network's energy use down by more than 99%, considering that Proof of Stake (PoS) has less thirst for energy compared to its predecessor, Proof of Work (PoW).

Ethereum 2.0 has been simulated to handle hundreds of thousands of transactions per second (TPS) as opposed to the current capability of 15-30 TPS. This clearly shows the benefits of the scale that the Proof of Stake (PoS) consensus mechanism offers without losing out on the security and decentralization.

VI. FUTURE DIRECTIONS

This progress towards more sustainability in blockchain technology emphasizes massive changes in the perceptions and tendencies of digital ledger utilization systems. If we look forward to what might be, then integrating the operations of blockchain will be into renewable sources of energy. It seeks to decrease both the environmental impact of current consensus processes and improves the general sustainability of the blockchain infrastructure. Hybrid consensus models—taking the best from Proof of Stake (PoS), Delegated Proof of Stake (DPoS), and other energy-consensual processes—can really turn out to be very promising round solutions that consider both security and decentralization duly while paying particular attention to energy efficiency.

New blockchain networks, fundamentally constructed from the ground up to be open while environmentally friendly, pave a new route for unleashing creative innovations. It would also provide an opportunity for these networks to take advantage of modern technology in energy storage and distribution, like smart grids, which further facilitates them to reduce their impacts on the environment. The use of artificial intelligence and machine learning in managing and improving blockchain activities will lead to enormous energy use reductions, without compromising on performance and security associated with it.

The intersection of such blockchain technologies with other forefront technologies thus increasingly suggests being the basis of truly sustainable ecosystems that will result from the technology. Industries active in the minimization of environmental impact expect sustainability to drive regulatory support and adoption. The growing awareness and public demand associated with ecologically friendly technologies, through such ideologies emerging from the youngest and most vibrant minds across the world via educational efforts, forums, and movements, could expedite the same. The fate of the future, after all, in the long run, would rest in the merging of the revolutionary potentials of this technology with a very much-needed requisite of environmental responsibility, which would then pave the way toward a more sustainable and technologically advanced tomorrow.

Conclusion

The consensus mechanisms, as proposed in this paper, to study and ensure sustainability in blockchain technology, really do point to a very phenomenal leap toward concretely connecting the capacities of transformation that blockchain harbors with the urgent need for environmental sustainability. From highly energy-intensive PoW to more energy-saving models such as PoS, DPoS, and the newer approaches like PoA, and finally PoST, this means that it shows the community understands the pragmatic need to reduce carbon emissions associated with the technology. This is further evidenced by the shift of Ethereum to Proof of Stake (PoS) with substantial results in reduced power use, a reality proved for other blockchain networks that practical implementation in this regard is possible. Introducing PoS and similar to many blockchain projects outlines a viable direction that still respects the basic concepts of decentralization, security, and scalability in every way possible. With these sustainable consensus processes, the wider opportunities of the implementation of blockchain technology go to companies that are keen on reducing their environmental footprints. Nevertheless, the path towards achieving a completely sustainable blockchain environment is not devoid of obstacles. The issues that are found such as configuration of networks, decentralization, and administration of these blooming systems are open subjects that have to be given to continuous research and development. These challenges, therefore, can be met in a way only, as paraphrased by the authors of this article, with a combination of technical progress and collective strategy that takes into alliance all the stakeholders concerned, including the developers, users, legislators, and environmentalists. However, the shift in durable consensus mechanisms is, in a way, the most pivotal paradigm shift with which to judge progress in blockchain technology. This more ecological shift, fueled by the consideration of more efficient and scalable systems, sets a new trend for the era of blockchain applications. As such, this study finds that although a few problems remain, the constant sustainable research of consensus mechanisms is sunny, giving a view of the future with blockchain technology in line with our environmental goals. Such realization of the maximum potential of sustainable blockchain technology requires the translation of efforts from the technological group, regulatory group, and user group.

References

[1] Yli-Huumo, J., Ko, D., Choi, S., Park, S., & Smolander, K. (2016). Where is current research on blockchain technology?—a systematic review. PloS one, 11(10), e0163477. [2] Andoni, M., Robu, V., Flynn, D., Abram, S., Geach, D., Jenkins, D., ... & Peacock, A. (2019). Blockchain technology in the energy sector: A systematic review of challenges and opportunities. Renewable and sustainable energy reviews, 100, 143-174. [3] Wu, J., & Tran, N. K. (2018). Application of blockchain technology in sustainable energy systems: An overview. Sustainability, 10(9), 3067. [4] Shoker, A. (2021). Blockchain technology as a means of sustainable development. One Earth, 4(6), 795-800. [5] Kouhizadeh, M., Saberi, S., & Sarkis, J. (2021). Blockchain technology and the sustainable supply chain: Theoretically exploring adoption barriers. International journal of production economics, 231, 107831. [6] Jayawardhana, A., & Colombage, S. (2020). Does blockchain technology drive sustainability? An exploratory review. Governance and Sustainability, 17-42. [7] Rana, R., Giungato, P., Tarabella, A., & Tricase, C. (2019). Blockchain applications and sustainability issues. Amfiteatru Economic, 21(13), 669-870. [8] Sasikumar, A., Ravi, L., Kotecha, K., Saini, J. R., Varadarajan, V., & Subramaniyaswamy, V. (2022). Sustainable smart industry: a secure and energy efficient consensus mechanism for artificial intelligence enabled industrial internet of things. Computational intelligence and neuroscience, 2022. [9] Wadhwa, S., Rani, S., Verma, S., Shafi, J., & Wozniak, M. (2022). Energy efficient consensus approach of blockchain for IoT networks with edge computing. Sensors, 22(10), 3733. [10] Bada, A. O., Damianou, A., Angelopoulos, C. M., & Katos, V. (2021, July). Towards a green blockchain: A review of consensus mechanisms and their energy consumption. In 2021 17th international conference on distributed computing in sensor systems (DCOSS) (pp. 503-511). IEEE. [11] Lasla, N., Al-Sahan, L., Abdallah, M., & Younis, M. (2022). Green-PoW: An energy-efficient blockchain Proof-of-Work consensus algorithm. Computer Networks, 214, 109118. [12] Platt, M., Sedlmeir, J., Platt, D., Xu, J., Tasca, P., Vadgama, N., & Ibañez, J. I. (2021, December). The energy footprint of blockchain consensus mechanisms beyond proof-of-work. In 2021 IEEE 21st International Conference on Software Quality, Reliability and Security Companion (QRS-C) (pp. 1135-1144). IEEE. [13] Gervais, A., Karame, G. O., Wüst, K., Glykantzis, V., Ritzdorf, H., & Capkun, S. (2016, October). On the security and performance of proof of work blockchains. In Proceedings of the 2016 ACM SIGSAC conference on computer and communications security (pp. 3-16)002E [14] Kiayias, A., & Zindros, D. (2020). Proof-of-work sidechains. In Financial Cryptography and Data Security: FC 2019 International Workshops, VOTING and WTSC, St. Kitts, St. Kitts and Nevis, February 18–22, 2019, Revised Selected Papers 23 (pp. 21-34). Springer International Publishing. [15] Nguyen, C. T., Hoang, D. T., Nguyen, D. N., Niyato, D., Nguyen, H. T., & Dutkiewicz, E. (2019). Proof-of-stake consensus mechanisms for future blockchain networks: fundamentals, applications and opportunities. IEEE access, 7, 85727-85745. [16] Vashchuk, O., & Shuwar, R. (2018). Pros and cons of consensus algorithm proof of stake. Difference in the network safety in proof of work and proof of stake. Electronics and information technologies, 9(9), 106-112. [17] Saad, S. M. S., & Radzi, R. Z. R. M. (2020). Comparative review of the blockchain consensus algorithm between proof of stake (pos) and delegated proof of stake (dpos). International Journal of Innovative Computing, 10(2). [18] Hu, Q., Yan, B., Han, Y., & Yu, J. (2021). An improved delegated proof of stake consensus algorithm. Procedia Computer Science, 187, 341-346. [19] Tosh, D., Shetty, S., Foytik, P., Kamhoua, C., & Njilla, L. (2018, July). CloudPoS: A proof-of-stake consensus design for blockchain integrated cloud. In 2018 IEEE 11Th international conference on cloud computing (CLOUD) (pp. 302-309). IEEE. [20] Sliwinski, J., & Wattenhofer, R. (2019). Abc: Proof-of-stake without consensus. arXiv preprint arXiv:1909.10926. [21] Sheikh, H., Azmathullah, R. M., & Rizwan, F. (2018). Proof-of-work vs proof-of-stake: a comparative analysis and an approach to blockchain consensus mechanism. International Journal for Research in Applied Science & Engineering Technology, 6(12), 786-791. [22] Li, A., Wei, X., & He, Z. (2020). Robust proof of stake: A new consensus protocol for sustainable blockchain systems. Sustainability, 12(7), 2824. [23] Saleh, F. (2021). Blockchain without waste: Proof-of-stake. The Review of financial studies, 34(3), 1156-1190. [24] Giungato, P., Rana, R., Tarabella, A., & Tricase, C. (2017). Current trends in sustainability of bitcoins and related blockchain technology. Sustainability, 9(12), 2214. [25] Erdogan, S., Ahmed, M. Y., & Sarkodie, S. A. (2022). Analyzing asymmetric effects of cryptocurrency demand on environmental sustainability. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29(21), 31723-31733. [26] Náñez Alonso, S. L., Jorge-Vázquez, J., Echarte Fernández, M. Á., & Reier Forradellas, R. F. (2021). Cryptocurrency mining from an economic and environmental perspective. Analysis of the most and least sustainable countries. Energies, 14(14), 4254. [27] Bitir-Istrate, I., Gheorghiu, C., & Gheorghiu, M. (2021). The transition towards an environmental sustainability for Cryptocurrency mining. In E3S Web of Conferences (Vol. 294, p. 03004). EDP Sciences. [28] Corbet, S., & Yarovaya, L. (2020). The environmental effects of cryptocurrencies. Cryptocurrency and Blockchain Technology, 1(149). [29] Gawusu, S., Zhang, X., Ahmed, A., Jamatutu, S. A., Miensah, E. D., Amadu, A. A., & Osei, F. A. J. (2022). Renewable energy sources from the perspective of blockchain integration: From theory to application. Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments, 52, 102108. [30] Sedlmeir, J., Buhl, H.U., Fridgen, G. et al. The Energy Consumption of Blockchain Technology: Beyond Myth. Bus Inf Syst Eng 62, 599–608 (2020). [31] Tammy Paola, “The Ethereum Energy Consumption Was Reduced by 99.9% – Here’s Why”, https://zerocap.com/insights/articles/ethereum-energy-consumption-reduced/ (accessed Mar 22, 2024) [32] “Chia is the solution to the \"Proof of Work\" energy problem.”, https://chiapower.org/ (accessed Mar 24, 2024) [33] “Avalanche blockchain most energy-efficient crypto network”, https://www.cnbctv18.com/cryptocurrency/avalanche-blockchain-most-energy-efficient-crypto-network-report-12515142.htm (accessed Mar 26, 2024)

Copyright

Copyright © 2024 Venkata Vaishnavi Balpunuri, Akash Gundapuneni, Vishnu Chiluveri, ChandraKiran Reddy, Kunta Saitheja. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.