Topic: Proof of Stake Blockchains and the Global Push Regarding Climate Change (Read 88 times)

Yes, right. because of the large amount of energy expended by miners when mining cryptocurrencies, then using the Proof Of Stake method is the right choice to save energy.

The main advantage of proof-of-stake consensus over proof-of-work is that it costs much less to run a transaction on it, as it doesn't require power of computers. Validators just stake their coins and confirm transactions this way. Actually, Proof-of-Stake is considered to be less secure, but anyway it becomes more and more popular because of its cheapness.

Problems should be Solved without creating more problems. PoS (Proof of Stake) is meant to be the solution to perceived PoW (Proof of Work) problems of excessive and inefficient energy usage, but the one am aware of only creates serious problems that compromised on the decentralization and security of a crypto network. With this PoS,  you are required to have certain amount of money which is typically hugh,  before you can run full node and take part in full network consensus... not everyone can afford huge amounts to be able to run full nodes and take part in consensus, this automatically weakens the needed decentralization for a cryptocurrency network and makes it vulnerable to takeover by anti-decentralization  forces. In a well decentralized network/system, majority of Network participants who have valueable contributions to make on the Network should be able to easily run full nodes and contribute to the network which helps to properly decentralize the network and make it difficult to becentralized.
Besides, PoS that requires people to have huge sums of money before they are allowed to take part in Permissionless Public Network is not a right consensus mechanism for such Decentralized Network, worst still, you are required to Prove you own the required amount of money (Proof of Stake) rather than Prove you did the Works right(Proof of Work) before you earn rewards... It's a flawed crypto consensus mechanism and shouldn't even be called that. It's actually shameful when you think about it.

Deeming multivariate problems of adoption into just oversimplifying as long as it's energy-efficient is absurd. People don't care about any energy efficiencies if they can't use it and if it has no utility. How many times do users lose their funds because they lack proper basic knowledge about how to securely store their funds? And about the utility, are we sure that the current condition of services and applications are easy enough to be able used by a regular Joe?

There's a lot of things that need to be considered in attempt to increase the adoption, but relying it just on the energy problems won't solve any issues.

I thought that if this was already planned by almost all of the new blockchain projects. POS has become the best solution to make energy consumption become more efficient compared with POW. You must also see that if there was also a campaign for the bitcoin miners to use renewable energy for their mining farm. People need the time to make it happen but so many developers in crypto realized how bad the impact from the mining farm to climate change. Some people were arguing that if mining farms were contributing less than another financial system but it will be a wise decision to start replacing it with renewable energy to support the ecosystem. You will always see POS be used in the new platforms that will come to the crypto. I never saw a new project that was using POW because it's consumption a lot of energy. I hope that people can develop more and more consensus that makes energy become more efficient than POS.

Climate change is a pretty polarizing issue, but regardless of where any of us stand it seems like the world is heading towards reducing carbon emissions and energy consumption. The issues regarding energy consumption with blockchain technology is not something widely discussed in this space yet, but I think as this industry gets mainstream adoption it could become a serious topic of interest.. Especially considering the fact that a lot of the world is heading towards figuring out ways to reduce energy consumption and promoting green energy. 

People have mainly been interested in proof of stake networks because they believed that they can provide faster transactions, lower transaction speeds, and enhance the network scalability, but I think another important factor for proof of stake networks should be how energy efficient they are. I think Proof of stake networks like: Cosmos, Persistence, and Terra are a fairly energy efficient way for blockchains to operate and add new blocks into the blockchain. The ability to make very energy efficient proof of stake blockchains might become a really big factor in the upcoming future as the world starts getting more focused on energy efficiency.

 If this industry truly wants to be adopted by the mainstream public and integrated into people’s daily lives then it needs to become a lot more energy efficient.