Alexander Neumueller.
This report presents an updated assessment of the environmental footprint of Ethereum several years after the network transitioned from Proof-of-Work to Proof-of-Stake. Produced by the Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance (CCAF) at Cambridge Judge Business School, the research advances earlier analyses by executing a bottom-up infrastructural audit. Rather than relying on theoretical assumptions, it maps the physical infrastructure of the network: where the nodes sit, the exact hardware configurations they run on, and the specific carbon intensity of the grids that power them. The result is a highly granular, empirical estimate of the electricity consumption and greenhouse gas emissions of Ethereum. By establishing this definitive baseline, the report provides a transparent foundation for understanding the contemporary environmental profile of the network and how it may evolve.
Highlights from the report
1
Annual electricity consumption of approximately 7.87 GWh
This annual consumption is equivalent to less than half the electricity needs of the British Museum (around 16.18 GWh a year). Expressed as continuous power, Ethereum’s demand now sits at roughly 0.90 MW, keeping the network more than 99.9% below its final pre-Merge baseline of around 2.4 GW – a figure that once rivalled the electricity demand of a small country.
2
A bottom-up infrastructural audit of approximately 8,522 nodes
These physical machines process the data, distinct from the roughly 894,000 validators that secure the network economically. By scaling direct wall-plug measurements of 20 different client combinations against real-world hosting data, the network-weighted average is established at roughly 105 watts per node. This encompasses the full operational spectrum of the network, ranging from lightweight residential setups drawing a median of 18 watts to workstation-class enterprise deployments drawing roughly 152 watts.
3
A concentrated but not monolithic network
The United States (31%), Germany (16%), Finland (8%) and France (6%) together host about 62% of full nodes. Hosting infrastructure is divided: roughly 36% of nodes operate on residential hardware, while the remaining 64% are hosted within cloud or enterprise data centres, where the 3 largest providers – Hetzner, Amazon Web Services and OVH – host roughly 40% of the total node count. Software diversity exhibits similar clustering across both the execution and consensus layers; notably on the execution side, approximately 79% of nodes run either the Geth or Nethermind client.
4
A sustainable electricity mix of 56.4%
Weighted across the specific grids hosting the network, sustainable sources supply approximately 56.4% of the electricity powering Ethereum. Renewables account for 39.4% of this total demand, supported by a 17.0% share from nuclear generation. While natural gas remains the largest single energy source at 27.7% – reflecting the baseload profiles of the dominant host nations – the network’s overall sustainable share sits notably higher than the roughly 43% global average.
5
Annual emissions of about 2.37 ktCO₂e
Traced through the grids that power its nodes, Ethereum’s climate footprint sits around 99.98% below its final pre-Merge level – roughly the combined annual carbon footprint of 900 UK households. Physically sequestering this footprint requires approximately 400 hectares of UK broadleaf woodland, an area roughly the size of Wimbledon Common. Offsetting it entirely through high-quality nature-based removal credits would cost in the region of £25,000 to £55,000 at current prices.
6
The grid, more than the protocol, now shapes the footprint
With electricity no longer the price of security, what remains of Ethereum’s footprint turns largely on the carbon intensity of the grids serving its nodes – an intensity that is falling across most major hosts. Active research on lighter ‘stateless’ verification could lower the hardware bar further, keeping the footprint small while widening who can take part.