Low fees starve miners. Bitcoin's security budget is the product of block reward and transaction fees. The block reward halves every four years. Without a robust fee market, the total value securing the network collapses.
bitcoins-evolution-defi-ordinals-and-l2s
Blog
Low Bitcoin Fees and Miner Security
Persistently low transaction fees are not a victory for users; they are a slow-burning threat to Bitcoin's foundational security model. This analysis explores the post-halving fee market, the role of Ordinals and L2s, and the precarious economics facing miners.
introduction
THE SECURITY TRADE-OFF
The Dangerous Illusion of 'Cheap' Bitcoin
Artificially low transaction fees directly undermine the economic security model of the Bitcoin network.
Layer-2 solutions like Lightning Network externalize security costs. They batch transactions off-chain, settling periodically on the base layer. This creates a free-rider problem where users enjoy low costs without contributing to the primary security pool.
Compare Bitcoin to Ethereum. Ethereum's fee burn via EIP-1559 creates a deflationary pressure and a sustainable security budget post-merge. Bitcoin lacks this mechanism, making it more vulnerable to fee market stagnation.
Evidence: Post-halving, fees must constitute a majority of miner revenue. Current fee levels (~$1-2) are insufficient. A 51% attack becomes economically viable if the security budget falls below the chain's total value.
key-trends
SECURING THE SUBSIDY CLIFF
The Post-Halving Fee Market Reality
The 2024 halving cut the Bitcoin block reward to 3.125 BTC, forcing the network to confront its long-term security model.
01
The Problem: Security on a Fee-Only Diet
Miners secure the network for profit. With block rewards trending to zero by 2140, transaction fees must replace $10B+ in annual security spend. Current ~$1-2M daily fee revenue is insufficient, creating a multi-decade security subsidy gap.
~90%
Subsidy Share
$10B+
Annual Gap
02
The Solution: Layer 2s as Fee Factories
Scaling solutions like Lightning Network and Bitcoin L2s (e.g., Stacks, Merlin) don't just offload transactions—they create new, high-volume fee markets on the base layer for settlement and data availability.
- Demand Scaling: Millions of micro-txns batch into single, valuable Bitcoin blocks.
- Fee Compression: Enables new use-cases (DeFi, gaming) that were previously cost-prohibitive.
1000x
Tx Capacity
<$0.01
L2 Tx Cost
03
The Solution: Ordinals & The Culture War
NFT-like inscriptions (Ordinals, Runes) proved Bitcoin can generate sustained, organic fee pressure. They create inelastic demand for block space independent of peer-to-peer payments.
- Fee Sustainability: Generated $200M+ in fees in 2023, demonstrating a viable post-subsidy model.
- Security Premium: Treats block space as a scarce digital commodity, aligning miner incentives with cultural value.
$200M+
2023 Fees
Inelastic
Demand
04
The Hedge: Merge Mining & Alt-PoW Chains
Projects like Elastos and Syscoin use merged mining, allowing Bitcoin miners to secure additional chains using the same work, earning extra fees without extra energy cost.
- Revenue Diversification: Adds a secondary income stream from L2/app-chain fees.
- Security Leverage: Bootstraps new chains with Bitcoin's proven hash power, creating a security umbrella.
+100%
Revenue/Energy
Shared Sec
Security Model
05
The Threat: The 51% Attack Cost Equation
Security is measured by the cost to attack. If fee revenue stagnates, the capital required to rent hash power for an attack (~$1M for 1 hour) could fall below the potential profit from double-spending a large exchange transaction, creating a rational attack vector.
~$1M
Attack Cost
Rational
Attack Risk
06
The Verdict: It's an S-Curve, Not a Cliff
The transition isn't binary. Security will follow an S-curve adoption of fee-generating applications. The network survives if L2 adoption + cultural assets (Ordinals) + merge-mined revenue grows faster than the subsidy declines. The next decade is a live stress test of Nakamoto Consensus.
S-Curve
Adoption Path
Live Test
Next Decade
deep-dive
THE SECURITY SUBSIDY
Fee Markets or Failure: The Miner's Dilemma
Bitcoin's post-halving security model is a direct function of its fee market, which currently fails to provide a viable alternative to the block reward.
Post-halving security is fee-dependent. The block reward subsidy halves every four years, transferring the burden of securing the network from inflation to transaction fees. Without a robust fee market, miner revenue collapses, leading to hash rate decline and increased vulnerability to 51% attacks.
Current fee markets are insufficient. Bitcoin's fee revenue is volatile and constitutes a minor fraction of total miner income. This creates a security subsidy cliff where the network relies on future fee demand that does not yet exist at the required scale.
Layer-2 solutions like Lightning Network and sidechains (e.g., Liquid Network) divert fee revenue away from the base layer. While they scale transactions, they externalize security costs, creating a long-term misalignment between network usage and miner incentives.
Evidence: Post-April 2024 halving, block reward fell to 3.125 BTC. For fees to match this, the average fee per block must exceed ~$200,000 at current prices—a 10x increase from typical 2023 levels. This gap defines the security crisis.
MINER REVENUE & NETWORK SECURITY
Bitcoin Security Budget Analysis (Post-2024 Halving)
Compares primary mechanisms for sustaining Bitcoin's security budget as block subsidy declines, analyzing their viability and trade-offs.
| Security Revenue Source | Current State (Subsidy-Dominant) | Post-Halving Trajectory (Fee-Dominant) | Long-Term Viability (Post-2140) |
|---|---|---|---|
Primary Revenue Source | Block Subsidy (6.25 BTC) | Transaction Fees + Subsidy (3.125 BTC) | Transaction Fees (100%) |
Avg. Fee % of Total Revenue (2024) | 5-15% | Projected 30-50% | 100% |
Required Avg. Fee per Block (USD) | $50k - $150k | $150k - $250k | $500k+ (at $100k/BTC) |
Security Budget (Annual, USD) | $20B (est.) | $10B - $15B (est.) | TBD - Fee Market Dependent |
Hash Price (USD/TH/day) | $0.06 | $0.03 - $0.045 (est.) | Volatile, Fee-Driven |
Critical Risk | Concentration in Mining Pools | Fee Volatility & Revenue Shock | Inelastic Security Demand |
Mitigation / Solution | N/A | Ordinals/Runes, Layer 2 Settlements | Block Space Auctions, Drivechain |
counter-argument
THE SECURITY PARADOX
The Bull Case for 'Fee Compression': A Steelman
Low transaction fees, often seen as a threat to Bitcoin's security, are a feature of its mature economic model and a catalyst for protocol evolution.
Fee compression is inevitable for a base layer. As Bitcoin's block reward subsidy declines, transaction fees must become the primary security budget. This transition requires scaling solutions like the Lightning Network and sidechains to handle volume, freeing the base chain for high-value settlements.
Miners are rational profit-seekers, not charity. The security budget is the total value of block rewards plus fees. If fees drop, hash rate follows, but the cost to attack the chain drops proportionally. The security equilibrium resets at a lower, sustainable cost, not zero.
The real risk is fee volatility, not low mean fees. Projects like Stacks and Rootstock demonstrate that L2s can drive predictable, batched fee demand to the base chain. This creates a more stable fee market than sporadic, high-fee events.
Evidence: Bitcoin's hash rate remains near all-time highs despite the 2024 halving. This proves capital is committed for the long term, betting on future fee growth from scaling solutions and institutional adoption, not just today's fee market.
risk-analysis
LOW BITCOIN FEES AND MINER SECURITY
The Bear Case: Security Failure Modes
As block rewards diminish, transaction fees are the only sustainable security budget. Here's what happens when they're too low.
01
The 51% Attack Becomes Economically Viable
When daily fees are negligible, the cost to rent hashpower for an attack plummets. A malicious actor could temporarily rewrite the chain for a fraction of the cost to double-spend or censor transactions.\n- Attack Cost: Can fall to low tens of millions for a 1-hour attack.\n- Defense Cost: Requires permanent, non-recoverable expenditure on hardware and energy.
<$50M
Attack Cost
1-2 blocks
Finality Risk
02
Miner Capitulation & Hashrate Exodus
Miners operate on thin margins. A sustained period of sub-economic fees triggers a death spiral: unprofitable miners shut down, reducing hashrate, which lowers security and increases the probability of the next miner going offline.\n- Hashrate Drop: Can exceed 30-50% in a sharp fee drought.\n- Network Effect: Lower security scares off institutional capital, further reducing fee demand.
30-50%
Hashrate Drop
>100 days
Recovery Time
03
Fee Market Collapse Undermines Layer 2s
Bitcoin L2s (Lightning, rollups) depend on a secure, predictable base layer for settlement. If miners are insecure or exit, L2 security guarantees evaporate. Users face increased counterparty risk and frozen funds.\n- Settlement Risk: L2 checkpointing becomes unreliable.\n- Domino Effect: Undermines trust in Lightning Network, Stacks, and future Bitcoin rollups.
High
Counterparty Risk
$1B+
L2 TVL at Risk
04
The Fee Subsidy Cliff (Post-2140)
After the last Bitcoin is mined ~2140, security relies 100% on fees. If fee revenue is insufficient at that point, there is no safety net. This creates a long-term discount on BTC's present value, as rational investors price in future security decay.\n- Hard Deadline: Block reward hits zero in ~116 years.\n- Valuation Impact: Discounts today's price based on future security assumptions.
100%
Fee Reliance
2140
Cliff Year
future-outlook
THE INCENTIVE MISMATCH
The Path Forward: Building the Fee Firewall
Sustaining Bitcoin's security as block rewards diminish requires a new fee market paradigm that prioritizes high-value, security-critical transactions.
The security subsidy is ending. Bitcoin's block reward halves every four years, shifting the entire security budget to transaction fees. The current fee market, dominated by low-value Ordinals inscriptions and memecoins, fails to provide sufficient economic security for the network's trillion-dollar settlement layer.
A fee firewall is necessary. The solution is a fee market fork or a soft-fork upgrade that creates a priority lane. This lane would be reserved for high-value, security-critical transactions like large Lightning Network channel settlements or interchain asset transfers via Babylon or Botanix Labs, ensuring miners are paid to secure high-stakes value.
Proof-of-Work must be redefined. The current model treats all hashes as equal. A new model must tie miner rewards to secured value, not just computational work. This aligns miner incentives with the network's primary function: securing irreversible, high-value settlements, not ephemeral JPEG data.
Evidence: Post-halving, a block with only 1 BTC in fees securing a $1B Bitcoin-backed stablecoin transfer is a systemic risk. The fee firewall ensures that transaction pays a fee commensurate with the value it demands to secure, creating a sustainable security budget.
takeaways
THE SECURITY-FEE TRADEOFF
TL;DR for Protocol Architects
Bitcoin's security model is a direct function of miner revenue, creating a fundamental tension between low fees and network safety.
01
The Post-Halving Security Crisis
With block rewards halving every 4 years, fees must eventually replace them to secure the ~$1.3T network. Current ~$2 average fees are insufficient. This is a long-term structural risk, not a short-term bug.
- Problem: Security budget declines if fees don't scale with adoption.
- Implication: A 51% attack becomes cheaper as the subsidy dwindles.
-88%
Subsidies by 2040
$1.3T
Secured Value
02
Ordinals & Inscriptions: The Fee Market Savior?
The 2023/24 Ordinals frenzy created a sustainable, high-fee environment by competing for block space with financial data. This proved demand for non-monetary utility can fund security.
- Benefit: Fee revenue spiked to ~$240M in Q1 2024, rivaling Ethereum.
- Risk: Reliance on speculative NFT-like assets creates volatile, unreliable income.
~$240M
Q1 '24 Fees
>75%
Fee Dominance
03
Layer-2s: The Security Parasite Dilemma
Lightning Network, Stacks, Rootstock push transactions off-chain, reducing mainnet fee pressure. This improves UX but cannibalizes the security budget.
- Problem: L2s extract value from L1 without proportionally contributing to its security.
- Solution Needed: Mechanisms like fee-sharing or proof-of-stake sidechains that recycle fees to Bitcoin miners.
~1M
LN Capacity (BTC)
~$0.00
Typical LN Fee
04
Drivechains & Soft Chain Merge
Proposals like BIP-300/301 (Drivechains) and Soft Chain Merge allow sidechains to lease Bitcoin's security, creating a fee auction for block space. This turns L2s from parasites into primary fee-paying clients.
- Mechanism: Sidechains bid for inclusion in Bitcoin blocks, creating a predictable fee market.
- Outcome: Decouples Bitcoin's security from its native transaction throughput.
BIP-300
Key Proposal
Auction-Based
Fee Model
05
The Long-Term Equilibrium: Fee-Based Security
The end state is a Bitcoin secured solely by fees for data inclusion, not just monetary transfers. This requires massive demand for block space from diverse use cases.
- Requirement: Ordinals, rollup data, timestamping, and asset protocols must become permanent fixtures.
- Architect's Mandate: Build applications that generate high-value, inelastic demand for Bitcoin block space.
100%
Fee-Funded
Multi-Market
Demand Source
06
The Verdict: Architect for Fee Pressure
Stop optimizing for "low fees" as an absolute good. Sustainable Bitcoin scaling requires architectures that generate and channel fees back to miners.
- Design Principle: Treat block space as a premium commodity, not a cheap resource.
- Action: Evaluate your protocol's net contribution to the Bitcoin security budget.
Net Positive
Security Impact
Premium
Block Space Mindset
ENQUIRY
Get In Touch
today.
Our experts will offer a free quote and a 30min call to discuss your project.
NDA Protected
Confidentiality24h Response
Time to ValueDirectly to Engineering Team
No Sales Fluff10+
Protocols Shipped
$20M+
TVL Overall