Energy-Efficient Blockchain Models for Green Smart Contracts
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.63345/sjaibt.v2.i4.103Keywords:
Blockchain, Green Smart Contracts, Energy Efficiency, Proof of Stake, Sustainable Computing, Consensus Algorithms, Eco-Friendly Blockchain, DecentralizationAbstract
Blockchain technology has become one of the most disruptive innovations of the 21st century, reshaping industries such as finance, supply chain management, healthcare, and governance. However, the conventional blockchain ecosystem—particularly models based on Proof of Work (PoW)—has been widely criticized for its excessive energy consumption and ecological footprint. As societies move toward sustainability and carbon-neutral goals, the exploration of energy-efficient blockchain models becomes not just an academic pursuit but also an ethical imperative. This manuscript investigates the evolution of energy-efficient consensus mechanisms and their integration into “green smart contracts,” which enable automated, verifiable, and sustainable digital agreements. It highlights consensus algorithms such as Proof of Stake (PoS), Delegated Proof of Stake (DPoS), Proof of Authority (PoA), Proof of Space-Time (PoST), Practical Byzantine Fault Tolerance (PBFT), and emerging hybrid mechanisms. The manuscript offers a comprehensive literature review, outlines statistical insights comparing energy and performance trade-offs, and proposes methodologies for integrating eco-friendly smart contract architectures. The results emphasize that while PoW-based systems consume up to 99% more energy than PoS-based models, hybrid approaches demonstrate a promising balance between security, decentralization, and efficiency. The study concludes that energy-efficient blockchain models, when strategically aligned with sustainability frameworks, can redefine smart contract ecosystems to meet global climate commitments while maintaining reliability, transparency, and scalability.
Downloads
References
• AI-Powered Cyberattacks: A Comprehensive Study on Defending Against Evolving Threats , IJCSPUB - INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CURRENT SCIENCE (www.IJCSPUB.org), ISSN:2250-1770, Vol.13, Issue 4, page no.644-661, December-2023, Available :https://rjpn.org/IJCSPUB/papers/IJCSP23D1183.pdf
• https://www.zigya.com/application/zrc/images/topic_summary/TSSS104024539_0.png
• Alharby, M., & van Moorsel, A. (2017). Blockchain-based smart contracts: A systematic mapping study. arXiv preprint arXiv:1710.06372. https://arxiv.org/abs/1710.06372
• Androulaki, E., Barger, A., Bortnikov, V., Cachin, C., Christidis, K., De Caro, A., … Yellick, J. (2018). Hyperledger Fabric: A distributed operating system for permissioned blockchains. EuroSys ’18. Preprint: https://arxiv.org/abs/1801.10228
• Baird, L. (2016). The Swirlds Hashgraph consensus algorithm: Fair, fast, Byzantine fault tolerance (Tech. Rep. SWIRLDS-TR-2016-01). https://www.swirlds.com/downloads/SWIRLDS-TR-2016-01.pdf
• Sandeep Dommari. (2023). The Intersection of Artificial Intelligence and Cybersecurity: Advancements in Threat Detection and Response. International Journal for Research Publication and Seminar, 14(5), 530–545. https://doi.org/10.36676/jrps.v14.i5.1639
• Benet, J. (2017). Filecoin: A decentralized storage network. https://filecoin.io/filecoin.pdf
• Buterin, V., & Griffith, V. (2017). Casper the friendly finality gadget. arXiv:1710.09437. https://arxiv.org/pdf/1710.09437
• Castro, M., & Liskov, B. (1999). Practical Byzantine fault tolerance. Proceedings of the 3rd USENIX Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation (OSDI). https://pmg.csail.mit.edu/papers/osdi99.pdf
• Cohen, B., & Pietrzak, K. (2019). The Chia Network blockchain. https://cdn.bitturk.com/whitepaper/xch.pdf
• Crypto Carbon Ratings Institute (CCRI). (2022). The Merge: Implications on the electricity consumption and carbon footprint of the Ethereum network. https://carbon-ratings.com/dl/eth-report-2022
• Ishu Anand Jaiswal, Dr. Saurabh Solanki, Data Modeling and Database Design for High-Performance Applications , International Journal of Creative Research Thoughts (IJCRT), ISSN:2320-2882, Volume.13, Issue 3, pp.m557-m566, March 2025, Available at :http://www.ijcrt.org/papers/IJCRT25A3446.pdf
• Yadav, Nagender, Smita Raghavendra Bhat, Hrishikesh Rajesh Mane, Dr. Priya Pandey, Dr. S. P. Singh, and Prof. (Dr.) Punit Goel. 2024. Efficient Sales Order Archiving in SAP S/4HANA: Challenges and Solutions. International Journal of Computer Science and Engineering (IJCSE), Vol. 13, Issue 2, 199-238.
• de Vries, A. (2018). Bitcoin’s growing energy problem. Joule, 2(5), 801–805. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2542435118301776
• Dziembowski, S., Faust, S., Kolmogorov, V., & Pietrzak, K. (2015). Proofs of space. Advances in Cryptology—CRYPTO 2015 (LNCS 9216), 585–605. https://www.iacr.org/archive/crypto2015/92160192/92160192.pdf
• Ethereum Foundation. (2023). Ethereum energy consumption. https://ethereum.org/en/energy-consumption/
• Ethereum Improvement Proposal (EIP) 225. (2017). Clique proof-of-authority consensus protocol. https://eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-225
• Gilad, Y., Hemo, R., Micali, S., Vlachos, G., & Zeldovich, N. (2017). Algorand: Scaling Byzantine agreements for cryptocurrencies. Proceedings of SOSP 2017. (Author copy) https://people.csail.mit.edu/nickolai/papers/gilad-algorand-eprint.pdf
• Kalodner, H., Goldfeder, S., Chen, X., Weinberg, S. M., & Felten, E. W. (2018). Arbitrum: Scalable, private smart contracts. USENIX Security 2018. https://www.usenix.org/system/files/conference/usenixsecurity18/sec18-kalodner.pdf
• Kiayias, A., Russell, A., David, B., & Oliynykov, R. (2017). Ouroboros: A provably secure proof-of-stake blockchain protocol. CRYPTO 2017. https://www.iacr.org/archive/crypto2017/10401425/10401425.pdf
• Robotic Process Automation (RPA) in Onboarding and Offboarding: Impact on Payroll Accuracy , IJCSPUB - INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CURRENT SCIENCE (www.IJCSPUB.org), ISSN:2250-1770, Vol.13, Issue 2, page no.237-256, May 2023, Available :https://rjpn.org/IJCSPUB/papers/IJCSP23B1502.pdf
• Nakamoto, S. (2008). Bitcoin: A peer-to-peer electronic cash system. https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf
• Poon, J., & Buterin, V. (2017). Plasma: Scalable autonomous smart contracts. https://www.plasma.io/plasma.pdf
• Saltini, R., & Hyland-Wood, D. (2019). IBFT 2.0: A safe and live variation of the IBFT blockchain consensus protocol for eventually synchronous networks. arXiv:1909.10194. https://arxiv.org/pdf/1909.10194
• Stoll, C., Klaaßen, L., & Gallersdörfer, U. (2019). The carbon footprint of Bitcoin. Joule, 3(7), 1647–1661. https://www.cell.com/joule/pdf/S2542-4351(19)30255-7.pdf
• Wood, G. (2014). Ethereum: A secure decentralised generalised transaction ledger (Yellow Paper). https://ethereum.github.io/yellowpaper/paper.pdf
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Scientific Journal of Artificial Intelligence and Blockchain Technologies
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
The license allows re-users to share and adapt the work, as long as credit is given to the author and don't use it for commercial purposes.
