Why Ethereum\'s PoS Transition WON\'T Fix Its Biggest Shortcomings (Even After 2025)

While Ethereum\'s Proof-of-Stake (PoS) transition, often referred to as "The Merge," has brought significant changes, claiming it solves all of Ethereum\'s pre-existing problems is a vast oversimplification. This article delves into why, even with the improvements implemented by 2025, fundamental shortcomings persist.

The move to PoS, implemented on 26 de mar. de 2025, undeniably boasts advantages. As the snippet highlights, Ethereum’s transition to Proof-of-Stake (PoS) has improved energy efficiency, security, and scalability while lowering transaction fees. This shift promotes sustainability. This addresses environmental concerns, a significant victory in the eyes of many.

However, reduced energy consumption isn\'t a silver bullet. High transaction fees, although potentially lowered, remain a concern, especially during periods of high network congestion. Layer-2 solutions are still necessary to achieve truly scalable and affordable transactions, indicating that PoS alone doesn\'t solve this fundamental issue.

Moreover, as noted on 8 de sept. de 2025, Ethereum\'s PoS transition impacts blockchain banking with improved energy efficiency, security, but faces challenges in decentralization, inflationary supply. This raises crucial questions about the long-term implications for decentralization. The concentration of staking power amongst a relatively small number of validators is a growing concern, potentially making the network more susceptible to censorship and manipulation. This concentration also relates to the original intent of a decentralized global computing system, a cornerstone of Ethereum\'s initial promise.

The ambition, as stated on 21 de mar. de 2025, that Ethereum’s shift to PoS was supposed to make it deflationary, positioning ETH as a better store of value than Bitcoin. After The Merge in 2025, Ethereum achieved “zero net issuance on some days. However, the actual deflationary pressure has been dependent on network activity. Periods of low activity may not generate enough fee burn to offset issuance, failing to consistently solidify ETH as a superior store of value.

Furthermore, the transition has ignited controversy and scrutiny. As mentioned on 27 de jul. de 2025, Ethereum [ETH], on the other hand, has been garnering backlash ahead of its shift to Proof-of-Stake [PoS] from Proof-of-Work [PoW]. Appearing in a recent interview, Nicholas Calls to reconsider Ethereum’s PoS model resurface. Following the SEC’s clarification on PoW mining, critics of Ethereum’s PoS transition are once again amplifying their calls for a return to the original Proof-of-Work system. This resistance highlights the ongoing debate about the trade-offs between energy efficiency, security, and decentralization.

In conclusion, while Ethereum\'s PoS transition marks a significant advancement, it doesn\'t automatically resolve all of Ethereum\'s inherent challenges. Scalability, decentralization concerns, and the realization of deflationary pressure require continuous development and careful consideration. The success of Ethereum ultimately hinges on its ability to address these persistent shortcomings, even with the advancements introduced by the PoS mechanism.