Dolomite (DOLO) sustainability report

Dolomite is present on the following networks: Berachain, Ethereum.

Berachain employs a distinct consensus mechanism known as Proof-of-Liquidity (PoL), designed to enhance network security and align participant incentives. Under PoL, network validators are responsible for securing the chain by staking a quantity of the native gas token, $BERA. The probability of a particular validator being chosen to propose a new block is directly correlated with the total amount of $BERA they have actively staked. This means that validators with larger stakes have a proportionally higher chance of being selected for block production. When a validator successfully proposes a block and it is added to the blockchain, they receive rewards. These rewards are distributed in the form of $BGT, which stands for Bera Governance Token. The volume of $BGT awarded to a validator is not solely based on their staked $BERA but is also significantly influenced by the level of $BGT delegation they have garnered from other network participants. This delegation mechanism allows individuals who hold $BGT but may not wish to operate a validator to contribute to the network's security and governance by delegating their tokens to validators they trust. The overall design of PoL aims to create a symbiotic relationship where validators, various protocols operating on Berachain, and individual users are all motivated to contribute to the long-term health and stability of the network. This comprehensive approach ensures that all key stakeholders have a vested interest in the chain's performance and security, fostering a robust and sustainable ecosystem. The system encourages active participation and capitalizes on the liquidity provided by users, differentiating it from traditional Proof-of-Stake models.

The Ethereum blockchain network, following "The Merge" in 2022, operates on a Proof-of-Stake (PoS) consensus mechanism, a significant departure from its previous Proof of Work system. This transition replaced energy-intensive mining with validator staking, aiming to enhance energy efficiency, security, and scalability. In this model, participants willing to secure the network act as validators by staking a minimum of 32 units of the network's native asset (Ether). The network organizes its operations around a precise slot and epoch system. Every 12 seconds, a validator is randomly selected to propose a new block. Following this proposal, other validators on the network verify the integrity and validity of the block. Finalization of transactions, meaning they become irreversible, occurs after approximately two epochs, which translates to about 12.8 minutes, utilizing the Casper-FFG (Friendly Finality Gadget) protocol. The Beacon Chain plays a central role in coordinating the activities of these validators, while the LMD-GHOST (Latest Message Driven-Greedy Heaviest Observed SubTree) fork-choice rule is employed to ensure all network participants agree on the canonical chain, following the branch with the heaviest accumulated validator votes. Validators are economically incentivized for their honest participation in proposing and verifying blocks, but they also face severe penalties, known as slashing, for malicious actions or prolonged inactivity. This PoS framework is designed not only to reduce the network's environmental footprint but also to lay the groundwork for future upgrades, such as Proto-Danksharding, which are intended to further improve transaction efficiency and overall network throughput. The core components like validator selection, block production, and transaction finality are intrinsically tied to the amount of Ether staked, ensuring that participants have a vested interest in the network's security and stability.

Dolomite is present on the following networks: Berachain, Ethereum.

The economic framework of the Berachain network is meticulously structured to provide robust incentive mechanisms for all participants, including validators and delegators, while also establishing clear transaction fee protocols. Participants are primarily incentivized through a combination of staking rewards and supplementary protocol-provided incentives. Validators, who are crucial for block production and network security, earn rewards in $BGT (Bera Governance Token) for their successful contributions. The magnitude of these $BGT rewards is dynamically determined by a factor referred to as their "boost." This boost is calculated as a percentage derived from the validator's specific $BGT boost relative to the cumulative $BGT boosted across all validators within the network. A higher boost translates to a greater share of the overall $BGT emissions. Furthermore, validators possess the ability to direct their earned $BGT emissions to pre-approved "Reward Vaults" of their choice. In return for this redirection, they receive additional protocol-provided incentives from these designated Reward Vaults, creating a diversified income stream and fostering integration with various ecosystem protocols. Delegators, on the other hand, play a vital role by staking their own $BGT with selected validators. By doing so, they not only strengthen the validator's boost, thereby increasing the validator's potential $BGT rewards, but they also partake in a share of the resulting rewards. This delegation system allows for broader participation in network governance and economic benefits. Regarding transactional costs, all fees for operations on the Berachain network are denominated and paid using the native gas token, $BERA. Crucially, these collected $BERA transaction fees are systematically burned, meaning they are permanently removed from the circulating supply. This deflationary mechanism contributes to the scarcity and long-term value proposition of the $BERA token while ensuring that all participants are continuously motivated to contribute to the network's security, efficiency, and overall sustainability.

The Ethereum network's Proof-of-Stake (PoS) system is underpinned by a robust framework of incentive mechanisms and applicable fees, meticulously designed to secure transactions and encourage active, honest participation from validators. Validators, who are essential for the network's operation, commit at least 32 units of the network's native asset (Ether) to secure their role. Their primary incentives include rewards for successfully proposing new blocks, attesting to the validity of other blocks, and participating in sync committees, all of which contribute to the network's integrity and consensus. These rewards are distributed in newly issued Ether, alongside a portion of the transaction fees generated on the network. A key feature of Ethereum's fee structure is the implementation of EIP-1559, which divides transaction fees into two main components. The first is a base fee, which is automatically burned, effectively reducing the overall supply of Ether over time and potentially introducing a deflationary aspect, especially during periods of high network activity. The second is an optional priority fee, also known as a "tip," which users can choose to pay directly to validators to incentivize faster inclusion of their transactions into a block. This dual-fee structure aims to make transaction costs more predictable for users. To enforce honest behavior and prevent malicious activities, the network employs a strict system of economic penalties, including slashing. Validators who engage in dishonest acts or demonstrate extended periods of inactivity risk losing a portion of their staked Ether, providing a powerful deterrent against misconduct and ensuring the long-term security and reliability of the network. This comprehensive system aligns the economic interests of validators with the overall health and security of the Ethereum blockchain.

Dolomite is present on the following networks: Berachain, Ethereum.

For evaluating the energy consumption of the Berachain network, a meticulous "bottom-up" methodological approach is rigorously applied. This methodology posits that the individual nodes operating within the network constitute the primary determinants of its overall energy footprint. The underlying assumptions supporting these calculations are derived from a combination of empirical observations and data gathered through various sources, including publicly available information websites, open-source crawling tools, and specialized crawlers developed in-house for proprietary data collection. A critical aspect of estimating energy consumption involves accurately identifying and quantifying the hardware utilized across the network. The main factor guiding these estimations is the hardware specifications required to effectively run the client software for the Berachain network. Once the hardware components are identified, their respective energy consumption values are sourced from measurements conducted in certified test laboratories, ensuring a high degree of accuracy and reliability for the power consumption figures. In the process of calculating total energy consumption, if applicable and available, the Functionally Fungible Group Digital Token Identifier (FFG DTI) is employed. This identifier helps in scoping all relevant implementations of the crypto-asset in question, with mappings regularly updated based on data from the Digital Token Identifier Foundation. It is important to note that information concerning the specific hardware deployed and the precise number of participants active within the network is often based on estimations. These estimations are, however, subjected to best-effort verification using empirical data. A general underlying assumption is that network participants predominantly act with economic rationality. Furthermore, as a precautionary principle, in situations of uncertainty or doubt, assumptions are consistently made on the conservative side. This means that higher estimates for potential adverse impacts, such as energy consumption, are favored to ensure a robust and cautious assessment of the network's environmental footprint. The document does not provide specific external URLs for these sources or methodologies.

The methodology for calculating the Ethereum network's energy consumption primarily employs a "bottom-up" approach, which focuses on the energy demands of individual nodes that are central to the network's operation. These nodes are considered the fundamental factor driving the network's overall energy use. The assumptions underpinning these calculations are derived from empirical data gathered through a variety of sources, including public information sites, open-source crawlers, and proprietary in-house crawlers developed for this purpose. A critical step in this methodology involves determining the hardware used within the network, primarily by assessing the computational and other requirements necessary to run the client software. The energy consumption characteristics of these identified hardware devices are then rigorously measured in certified test laboratories to ensure accuracy. When quantifying the energy consumption for the network, the Functionally Fungible Group Digital Token Identifier (FFG DTI) is utilized, when available, to identify all implementations of the asset in scope, with mappings regularly updated based on data from the Digital Token Identifier Foundation. The information regarding the specific hardware deployed and the total number of participants in the network relies on assumptions that are diligently verified using empirical data whenever possible. Generally, participants are presumed to act in an economically rational manner. Furthermore, adhering to a precautionary principle, if there is any doubt in estimations, conservative assumptions are made, meaning higher estimates are used for potential adverse impacts to ensure a comprehensive and cautious assessment of energy consumption.

Dolomite is present on the following networks: Ethereum.

To ascertain the proportion of renewable energy utilized by the Ethereum network, a specific set of methodologies is applied. The initial step involves pinpointing the geographical locations of the network's nodes. This crucial geo-information is gathered through various means, including publicly available information sites, as well as both open-source and internally developed crawlers designed to scan the network. In instances where comprehensive geographical data for nodes is not directly accessible, the analysis resorts to leveraging "reference networks." These are comparable networks chosen for their similar incentivization structures and consensus mechanisms, providing a proxy for node distribution. Once the geo-information is established, it is then integrated and cross-referenced with public data obtained from "Our World in Data." This comprehensive dataset offers insights into the energy mixes and renewable energy penetration across different regions globally. The final calculation of energy intensity is defined as the marginal energy cost incurred for processing one additional transaction on the network. This approach allows for an estimation of the energy footprint associated with scaling the network's transactional volume. For detailed information and the underlying data sources on the share of electricity generated by renewables, relevant information can be found through sources such as Ember (2025) and the Energy Institute - Statistical Review of World Energy (2024), with further processing by Our World in Data, accessible via Share of electricity generated by renewables – Ember and Energy Institute.

Dolomite is present on the following networks: Ethereum.

The methodology for determining the Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions of the Ethereum network closely mirrors the approach used for energy consumption, focusing on identifying emission sources and their quantification. The initial and fundamental step involves precisely identifying the geographical locations of the network's operational nodes. This data collection is facilitated through a combination of publicly available information, as well as specialized open-source and proprietary crawlers designed to actively discover and map node distributions across the globe. Should there be an absence of specific geographic information for the nodes, the analysis intelligently defaults to utilizing "reference networks." These are carefully selected networks that exhibit comparable characteristics in terms of their incentivization structures and consensus mechanisms, providing a basis for estimating the geographic spread when direct data is unavailable. This collected geo-information is then meticulously integrated with publicly accessible data from "Our World in Data." This integration allows for the application of regional carbon intensity factors to the estimated energy consumption, thereby enabling the calculation of associated GHG emissions. The overall GHG intensity is quantified as the marginal emission generated per additional transaction processed on the network, offering a metric for the environmental impact of increased network activity. For detailed information and original data regarding the carbon intensity of electricity generation, sources include Ember (2025) and the Energy Institute - Statistical Review of World Energy (2024), processed by Our World in Data, available at Carbon intensity of electricity generation – Ember and Energy Institute. This resource is licensed under CC BY 4.0.