Vitalik Buterin Advocates for Scaling L1 Gas to Improve Ethereum’s Value
2025-02-15
Category: None

In a blog post published on Friday, Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin outlined why scaling Layer 1 (L1) gas fees by approximately ten times could provide significant long-term value, even as Layer 2 (L2) solutions continue gaining traction.
Reasons to have higher L1 gas limits even in an L2-heavy Ethereum— vitalik.eth (@VitalikButerin) 
Buterin that scaling L1 gas in the next one to two years is a justified move, as it enhances Ethereum’s performance, security, and cost efficiency.
He details multiple use cases that necessitate increased L1 capacity, such as enhanced censorship resistance for L2, efficient cross-L2 asset transfers, smoother L2 mass exits, issuing ERC-20 tokens on L1, keystore wallet operations, and L2 proof submissions. 
According to Buterin, these functions require additional L1 capacity to ensure seamless operation, reduced costs, and greater security.The Case for Scaling L1 Gas
The Ethereum network recently increased its L1 gas limit from 30 million to 36 million—a 20% capacity boost. 
Buterin attributes this expansion to technological advancements, including Ethereum client efficiency improvements, the , and upcoming plans for stateless clients.
Buterin cautions that raising gas limits is straightforward, but reversing the change could impact decentralization over the long term. 
He emphasizes that while the benefits of increased gas limits are evident, weighing them against potential centralization risks is crucial.Why L1 Scaling Matters for Ethereum’s Future
Buterin argues that scaling L1 by approximately ten times provides long-term value, even in a rollup-centric roadmap where most applications reside on L2. 
One of the primary advantages is improved censorship resistance.
Ethereum’s L1 benefits from a highly decentralized staker set, making transaction censorship more difficult than on L2s, which depend on fewer, more centralized block producers or sequencers. 
In high-pressure situations—such as volatile DeFi trades where delays could lead to liquidations—having a robust L1 ensures transactions are confirmed quickly and reliably.
L1 scaling is also essential for handling mass exits from L2s. 
If an L2, such as Sony’s Soneium with millions of users, were to fail, Ethereum’s current L1 capacity might not support a large-scale withdrawal event.
To mitigate this risk, Buterin suggests scaling L1 gas by approximately nine times, which would provide sufficient capacity for users to exit without requiring overly complex protocols.Buterin’s Vision for Ethereum
Buterin’s vision for Ethereum’s future emphasizes the need for strategic L1 scaling, despite the growing importance of L2 solutions. 
By increasing L1 gas limits by approximately ten times, Ethereum can also enhance censorship resistance, ensure secure L2 mass exits, and improve the overall user experience.
He highlights this approach balances the short-term need for scalability with long-term decentralization and security goals, positioning Ethereum as a more robust and versatile blockchain platform.Buterin Unveils Leadership Overhaul at Ethereum Foundation
Beyond scaling discussions, Buterin has also addressed governance within the Ethereum ecosystem. 
In January, he announced leadership changes at the Ethereum Foundation to enhance technical expertise and improve collaboration with developers.
👑 has announced significant leadership changes at the Ethereum Foundation, aiming to prioritize technical expertise. — Cryptonews.com (@cryptonews) 
In a January 18 X post, Buterin outlined a vision to support decentralized application developers while upholding Ethereum’s core principles of decentralization, censorship resistance, and privacy.
He reaffirmed that the Ethereum Foundation will steer clear of political lobbying or ideological shifts, preserving its commitment to decentralization.The Long-Term Stakes of L1 Scaling
Buterin’s push for higher L1 gas limits presents Ethereum with a fundamental question: Should scalability take priority over decentralization, or is there a middle ground? 
While L2 solutions reduce transaction costs and increase throughput, they rely on an L1 that remains secure, censorship-resistant, and capable of absorbing systemic shocks. 
If Ethereum expands L1 capacity too aggressively, it risks making full nodes more expensive to operate, which could subtly shift control away from individual validators toward more centralized entities. 
Yet, if L1 capacity remains stagnant, it may fail to support a growing network of rollups and cross-layer activity. 
Striking this balance will be one of Ethereum’s defining challenges in the coming years.