Under Article 66(5) of the MiCA, a crypto-asset service provider must make publicly available in an easily visible place on its website information on the main adverse effects on the climate and other adverse effects on the environment of the consensus mechanism used to issue each crypto-asset for which it provides services. This information may be taken from the crypto-asset's white paper.
The white papers of the crypto assets we offer do not currently have, as a matter of principle, the updated versions required by the MiCA, which show the main adverse climate impacts and other environmental adverse impacts of the crypto-asset consensus mechanism.
Where climate and other environmental indicator data are not readily available, the crypto-asset service provider shall provide estimates and details of best efforts to obtain the data through further research, collaboration with third-party data providers or external experts, or reasonable assumptions.
As the climate and other environmental indicator data for the crypto-assets we provide are not readily available from crypto-asset white papers, we obtain this data from third parties such as the Crypto Carbon Ratings Institute. In addition, the paper describes the factors explaining the climate and environmental impacts of the main consensus mechanisms.
Source: European Securities and Markets Authority (2024) Final Report: Draft Technical Standards specifying certain requirements of the Markets in Crypto Assets Regulation (MiCA) – second package.
Consensus mechanisms used by crypto-assets are designed to secure them and prevent potential attacks. Unlike traditional monetary and banking systems, which rely on a trusted centralized actor, crypto-assets are managed in a decentralized manner. Through a consensus mechanism, the actors involved in maintaining the crypto-asset reach a consensus on the state of the network at any given moment in time.
The energy consumption of consensus mechanisms for crypto-assets is based on the energy consumption of the devices hosting the crypto-asset. Thus, for example, the number of transactions made with a crypto-asset has no direct impact on its energy consumption.
Crypto-assets using the Proof of Work consensus mechanism are responsible for most of the main adverse climate impacts and other environmental impacts of crypto-assets. Proof of Work crypto-assets rely on mining devices that perform up to hundreds of trillions of calculations per second, at their most efficient. High computing power also means significant power consumption. In terms of climate and environmental impact, the production methods used to generate the electricity used by the mining equipment are relevant.
Most of the main adverse climate impacts and other environmental impacts of crypto-assets arise from the mining of Bitcoin, the largest crypto-asset on the market. According to the latest estimates, around 56.75% of the electricity used to mine Bitcoin is produced in an environmentally sustainable way.
Source: Woonomic & dsbatten (2024) Bitcoin Mining: Usage of Sustainable Energy, <https://woocharts.com/esg-bitcoin-mining-sustainability/>, retrieved 15.1.2025.
Data on the electricity consumption and CO₂ emissions of the largest crypto-assets using the Proof of Work consensus mechanism in terms of climate and environmental impact are presented below.
| Electrical power | 18,6 GW |
|---|---|
| Annual electricity consumption | 163,4 TWh |
| Annual CO₂ emissions | 69,4Mt |
Source: Crypto Carbon Ratings Institute (2025) CCRI Crypto Sustainability Metrics, <https://indices.carbon-ratings.com/>, retrieved 15.1.2025.
| Electrical power | 0,9 GW |
|---|---|
| Annual electricity consumption | 7,9TWh |
| Annual CO₂ emissions | 3,4 Mt |
Source: Crypto Carbon Ratings Institute (2025) CCRI Crypto Sustainability Metrics, <https://indices.carbon-ratings.com/>, retrieved 15.1.2025.
| Electrical power | 0,3 GW |
|---|---|
| Annual electricity consumption | 2,6 TWh |
| Annual CO₂ emissions | 1,1 Mt |
Source: Crypto Carbon Ratings Institute (2025) CCRI Crypto Sustainability Metrics, <https://indices.carbon-ratings.com/>, retrieved 15.1.2025.
The main adverse climate impacts and other environmental impacts of crypto-assets using the Proof of Stake consensus mechanism are very small compared to crypto-assets using the Proof of Work consensus mechanism. Unlike crypto-assets using the Proof of Work consensus mechanism, crypto-assets using the Proof of Stake consensus mechanism rely on lockable crypto-assets instead of high computing power. Consequently, the requirements for the hardware required to maintain Proof of Stake crypto-assets are significantly lower in terms of both computing power and electricity consumption compared to the Proof of Work consensus mechanism.
Most of the crypto-assets we offer are issued using the Proof of Stake consensus mechanism platforms. Without figures provided by the individual crypto-asset issuer, providing these figures is very challenging. For this reason, we now present information on the platforms where most crypto-assets are issued. This is also supported by the fact that the impact of a single crypto-asset launched on a platform on the climate and environmental impact of the platform is very small. In principle, for example, the main adverse climate impacts and other environmental impacts of a crypto-asset launched on a platform using the Proof of Stake consensus mechanism are based on the climate and environmental impacts of that platform.
Data on the electricity consumption and CO₂ emissions of the largest crypto-assets using the Proof of Stake consensus mechanism in terms of climate and environmental impact are presented below.
| Electrical power | <682,6 kW |
|---|---|
| Annual electricity consumption | 5 966 224,1kWh |
| Annual CO₂ emissions | 1 913 807,3 kg |
Source: Crypto Carbon Ratings Institute (2025) CCRI Crypto Sustainability Metrics, <https://indices.carbon-ratings.com/>, retrieved 15.1.2025.
| Electrical power | 1 720,6 kW |
|---|---|
| Annual electricity consumption | 15 306 897,3 kWh |
| Annual CO₂ emissions | 4 741 436,1 kg |
Source: Crypto Carbon Ratings Institute (2025) CCRI Crypto Sustainability Metrics, <https://indices.carbon-ratings.com/>, retrieved 15.1.2025.
In addition to the Proof of Work and Proof of Stake consensus mechanisms, there are other, smaller-scale consensus mechanisms. In terms of climate and environmental impact, the most important of these are Proof of Association, Proof of Authority, and various hybrid mechanisms. The main adverse climate impacts and other environmental impacts of crypto-assets using these consensus mechanisms are small compared to crypto-assets using the Proof of Stake consensus mechanism, and thus very small compared to crypto-assets using the Proof of Work consensus mechanism.
Data on the electricity consumption and CO₂ emissions of the cryptocurrency with the largest climate and environmental impact using another consensus mechanism (Proof of Association, XRP Ledger Consensus Protocol) are presented below.
| Electrical power | 52,7 kW |
|---|---|
| Annual electricity consumption | 450 589,5 kWh |
| Annual CO₂ emissions | 185 504,5 kg |
Source: Crypto Carbon Ratings Institute (2025) CCRI Crypto Sustainability Metrics, <https://indices.carbon-ratings.com/>, retrieved 15.1.2025.