The Ethereum network, the world’s second-largest cryptocurrency by market capitalization, is once again at the center of a heated community debate. As of 2025, the long-standing controversy over transaction fees—specifically surrounding the EIP-1559 upgrade proposal—has reignited tensions between core developers and miners. What began as a technical discussion has evolved into a potential existential crisis, raising concerns about network stability, miner incentives, and the possibility of another blockchain fork.
This article explores the roots of the conflict, its implications for Ethereum’s transition to Ethereum 2.0, and what’s at stake for users, developers, and miners alike.
The Surge in Ethereum’s Popularity and Network Strain
Since 2020, Ethereum has experienced explosive growth. As of early 2025, it maintains a market cap exceeding $160 billion, representing approximately 11% of the total cryptocurrency market—rivaling global giants like McDonald’s in valuation. Its year-to-date gains remain robust, reflecting strong investor confidence and increasing institutional adoption.
However, this popularity has come at a cost: network congestion. With the rise of decentralized finance (DeFi), non-fungible tokens (NFTs), and Web3 applications built on Ethereum, transaction volumes have surged. During peak usage, users often face exorbitant gas fees—sometimes equaling or surpassing the value of the transaction itself.
👉 Discover how blockchain networks handle congestion and maintain performance under pressure.
For example, historical data shows gas prices spiking to over 3,800 gwei—nearly 40 times the normal rate—making simple transfers prohibitively expensive. This auction-based fee model forces users to outbid each other for faster confirmation, creating a poor user experience and limiting mainstream accessibility.
Understanding EIP-1559: A Solution with Unintended Consequences
To address these issues, Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin introduced EIP-1559, a protocol upgrade designed to stabilize transaction costs. Unlike the traditional bidding system, EIP-1559 introduces a base fee that adjusts dynamically based on network demand. Crucially, this base fee is burned (permanently removed from circulation), reducing the total supply of ETH over time.
Additionally, users can add a small priority fee (or "tip") to incentivize miners to include their transactions quickly. While this improves predictability and user experience, it significantly reduces the revenue miners earn from transaction fees.
Core developers argue that EIP-1559 enhances usability and paves the way for broader adoption. However, miner groups see it as a direct threat to their income model. Historically, during periods of high congestion, miners could earn up to 80 ETH per block in fees alone—equivalent to hundreds of thousands of dollars. With EIP-1559, much of that revenue would be eliminated.
Growing Divide: Developers vs. Miners
The debate has split the Ethereum community into two camps:
- Supporters: Led by core developers and major DeFi projects like Aave and Dharma, they believe EIP-1559 will make Ethereum more scalable, predictable, and user-friendly. Kleros, a decentralized dispute resolution protocol, also endorsed the upgrade for improving transaction reliability.
- Opponents: Dominated by large mining pools such as Ethermine, 2Miners, Nanopool, and Sparkpool (the largest globally), they accuse the proposal of being a “wealth redistribution” scheme that undermines miner incentives.
In early 2025, Sparkpool went as far as calling EIP-1559 a form of “robbery” against miners. Ethermine launched a poll showing over 60% opposition among its users. Meanwhile, grassroots campaigns emerged on both sides: #supportEIP1559 gained traction online, while websites like stopeip1559.com mobilized resistance.
Only one major mining pool—F2Pool—publicly supported the change. In a notable speech at ETHDenver 2025, F2Pool’s co-founder argued that long-term ETH price appreciation driven by improved user experience would ultimately benefit miners more than short-term fee extraction.
Could Ethereum Split Again?
The most alarming outcome of this standoff is the possibility of a hard fork—a permanent split in the blockchain. Such events are not unprecedented:
- In 2016, following The DAO hack, Ethereum hard-forked to reverse stolen funds, resulting in two chains: Ethereum (ETH) and Ethereum Classic (ETC).
- In 2017, Bitcoin split into Bitcoin (BTC) and Bitcoin Cash (BCH) due to disagreements over block size limits.
Today, similar conditions exist. Opposing mining pools collectively control over 51% of the network’s hashrate. If they refuse to adopt EIP-1559 and instead continue mining the old ruleset, a new chain could emerge—potentially named “Ethereum Legacy” or similar.
Such a split would introduce significant risks:
- Network security threats, including potential 51% attacks
- User confusion and loss of trust
- Fragmented liquidity across exchanges
- Downward pressure on ETH price
While both sides understand the dangers, compromise remains elusive. Miners argue they secure the network and deserve fair compensation. Developers counter that long-term sustainability requires prioritizing users over short-term profits.
Broader Implications for Ethereum 2.0
EIP-1559 is not just about fees—it's a symbolic battle over governance and decentralization. As Ethereum transitions from proof-of-work (PoW) to proof-of-stake (PoS) with Ethereum 2.0, miners will eventually become obsolete. This shift further complicates the debate: why sacrifice current earnings for an upgrade that may render their role unnecessary?
Yet experts suggest miner cooperation remains critical until full PoS activation. Premature forks or attacks could delay or destabilize the transition.
As薄荷 (Bo He), founder of Wonder Capital, noted: "The real issue isn’t developer vs. miner—it’s outdated infrastructure struggling to keep pace with demand." While EIP-1559 doesn’t solve scalability directly, it’s part of a broader roadmap including rollups and sharding.
👉 Learn how next-generation blockchains are solving scalability without sacrificing decentralization.
Frequently Asked Questions
Q: What is EIP-1559?
A: EIP-1559 is an Ethereum improvement proposal that changes how transaction fees work by introducing a burn mechanism and fixed base fees to reduce volatility and improve user experience.
Q: Why do miners oppose EIP-1559?
A: Because it reduces their income by burning most transaction fees instead of giving them to miners, especially during high-demand periods when fees spike.
Q: Can Ethereum really split again?
A: Yes. If a significant portion of miners reject the upgrade and continue operating under old rules, a hard fork could create a new version of Ethereum.
Q: How does EIP-1559 affect regular users?
A: Users benefit from more predictable fees and faster confirmation times without needing to guess optimal gas prices.
Q: Is Ethereum moving away from mining?
A: Yes. With the full rollout of Ethereum 2.0, the network will transition entirely to proof-of-stake, eliminating mining altogether.
Q: Will EIP-1559 be implemented in 2025?
A: While technically feasible, widespread miner resistance may lead to delays or modifications before final deployment.
Despite the tension, many believe unity will prevail. The strength of Ethereum lies not just in its technology but in its community’s ability to adapt. As one miner told reporters: "No matter how loud we argue, mining never stops."
In the end, progress demands compromise—and Ethereum’s future depends on whether its most powerful stakeholders can find common ground before it's too late.
👉 Stay ahead of crypto upgrades and network changes with real-time insights and secure trading tools.