Ethereum’s Evolution: Overcoming the Blockchain Trilemma by 2030

By imToken

The term “blockchain trilemma” has become ubiquitous, a concept we’ve heard countless times within the crypto space. For the first decade of Ethereum’s existence, this trilemma felt like an immutable law governing blockchain development: you could choose any two of decentralization, security, and scalability, but never all three simultaneously.

However, looking back from the vantage point of early 2026, it appears this “physical law” is gradually transforming into a “design hurdle” that can be overcome through technological evolution. This paradigm shift was eloquently articulated by Vitalik Buterin on January 8th:

Prioritizing bandwidth over latency is more secure and reliable. With the help of PeerDAS and ZKP, Ethereum’s scalability can increase by thousands of times without conflicting with decentralization.

So, can the “blockchain trilemma,” once deemed insurmountable, truly dissipate by 2026 with the maturity of PeerDAS, ZK technology, and account abstraction?

1. Why Has the “Trilemma” Remained Unconquered for So Long?

Let’s first revisit Vitalik Buterin’s concept of the “blockchain trilemma,” specifically crafted to describe the inherent difficulty public blockchains face in achieving security, scalability, and decentralization all at once:

• Decentralization: Implies low node thresholds, broad participation, and freedom from reliance on a single trusted entity.
• Security: Means the system maintains consistency and resilience against malicious actors, censorship, and attacks.
• Scalability: Refers to high transaction throughput, low latency, and a seamless user experience.

The core challenge lies in the fact that these three pillars often conflict under traditional architectures. For instance, increasing throughput typically demands higher hardware requirements or the introduction of centralized coordination. Reducing node burden might weaken security assumptions, while extreme decentralization often necessitates sacrificing performance and user experience.

Over the past 5-10 years, from early projects like EOS to later iterations such as Polkadot and Cosmos, and even performance-focused chains like Solana, Sui, and Aptos, different public blockchains have offered varied solutions. Some sacrificed decentralization for performance, others enhanced efficiency through permissioned nodes or committee mechanisms, while some prioritized censorship resistance and verification freedom over raw performance gains.

The common thread, however, is that almost all scaling solutions could only satisfy two of the three aspects, inevitably sacrificing the third.

Put differently, nearly all solutions operated within the confines of a “monolithic blockchain” paradigm: to run fast, nodes had to be powerful; to have many nodes, it had to run slow. This seemed like an intractable problem.

However, if we temporarily set aside the debate between monolithic and modular blockchains and reflect on Ethereum’s strategic shift in 2020 from a “monolithic chain” to a “Rollup-centric” multi-layered architecture, alongside the recent maturation of complementary technologies like ZK (Zero-Knowledge Proofs), a crucial realization emerges:

The underlying logic of the “trilemma” has been gradually reconstructed over the past five years through Ethereum’s incremental modularization.

Objectively, Ethereum is decoupling its original constraints through a series of engineering practices. At least on the engineering path, this problem is no longer merely a philosophical discussion.

2. The “Divide and Conquer” Engineering Approach

Let’s dissect these engineering details to see how Ethereum, through five years of practical implementation (2020-2025), has been dissolving this triangular constraint by advancing multiple technical lines in parallel.

First, by achieving “decoupling” with data availability through PeerDAS, Ethereum has liberated the inherent ceiling on scalability.

In the trilemma, data availability often acts as the primary bottleneck for scalability. Traditional blockchains require every full node to download and verify all data, which, while ensuring security, limits the extent of expansion. This explains why “heterodox” DA solutions like Celestia saw explosive growth in previous cycles.

Ethereum’s direction isn’t about making nodes more powerful, but about changing how nodes verify data. The core idea here is PeerDAS (Peer Data Availability Sampling):

It no longer requires every node to download all block data. Instead, it verifies data availability through probabilistic sampling—block data is split and encoded, and nodes only need to randomly sample parts of it. If data is withheld, the probability of sampling failure rapidly increases. This significantly boosts data throughput, yet allows ordinary nodes to still participate in verification, meaning it doesn’t compromise decentralization.

Vitalik specifically emphasized that PeerDAS is no longer a mere roadmap concept but a genuinely deployed system component. This signifies a substantial step forward for Ethereum on the “scalability × decentralization” front.

Next is zkEVM, which aims to solve the problem of “whether every node must re-execute all computations” through a Zero-Knowledge Proof-driven verification layer.

The core idea is to empower the Ethereum mainnet with the ability to generate and verify ZK proofs. In other words, after each block is executed, a verifiable mathematical proof can be output, allowing other nodes to confirm the correctness of the result without re-executing the computation. Specifically, zkEVM offers three key advantages:

• Faster Verification: Nodes don’t need to replay transactions; they merely verify the zkProof to confirm block validity.
• Lighter Burden: Significantly reduces the computational and storage pressure on full nodes, making it easier for light nodes and cross-chain validators to participate.
• Stronger Security: Compared to optimistic rollup approaches, ZK state proofs are confirmed instantly on-chain, offering higher tamper resistance and clearer security boundaries.

Recently, the Ethereum Foundation (EF) officially released the L1 zkEVM instant proof standard, marking the formal inclusion of the ZK roadmap into the mainnet-level technical plan. Within the next year, the Ethereum mainnet will gradually transition to an execution environment that supports zkEVM verification, achieving a structural shift from “heavy execution” to “proof verification.”

Vitalik’s assessment is that zkEVM has preliminarily reached a production-ready stage in terms of performance and feature completeness. The true challenges lie in long-term security and implementation complexity. According to the EF’s technical roadmap, the block proof latency target is within 10 seconds, with individual ZK proof sizes under 300 KB. It also aims for a 128-bit security level, avoids trusted setups, and plans to enable household devices to participate in proof generation, thereby lowering the decentralization barrier.

Finally, beyond the two points above, the Ethereum roadmap leading up to 2030 (such as The Surge, The Verge, etc.) involves multi-dimensional advancements focused on increasing throughput, re-architecting the state model, raising Gas limits, and improving the execution layer.

These represent the trial-and-error and cumulative paths taken to transcend traditional triangular limitations. This is a long-term core trajectory dedicated to achieving higher blob throughput, clearer Rollup specialization, and a more stable execution and settlement rhythm, thereby laying the foundation for future multi-chain collaboration and interoperability.

Crucially, these are not isolated upgrades but are explicitly designed as mutually reinforcing and stacking modules. This precisely reflects Ethereum’s “engineering attitude” towards the trilemma: not seeking a single magic bullet like monolithic blockchains, but rather reallocating costs and risks through multi-layered architectural adjustments.

3. The 2030 Vision: Ethereum’s End-State Form

Even with these advancements, we must maintain a measured perspective. Elements like “decentralization” are not static technical metrics but rather the result of long-term evolution.

Ethereum is, in essence, exploring the constraint boundaries of the trilemma step by step through engineering practices. As verification methods (from re-computation to sampling), data structures (from state bloat to state expiry), and execution models (from monolithic to modular) evolve, the original trade-offs are shifting. We are infinitely approaching that “have our cake and eat it too” endpoint.

In recent discussions, Vitalik also provided a relatively clear timeline:

• 2026: With improvements to the execution layer/block-building mechanisms and the introduction of directions like ePBS, the Gas limit (without relying on zkEVM) can be raised first, simultaneously creating conditions for “more widespread running of zkEVM nodes.”
• 2026–2028: Adjustments around Gas pricing, state structure, and execution load organization to enable the system to operate securely under higher loads.
• 2027–2030: As zkEVM gradually becomes a crucial method for block verification, the Gas limit may increase further. The long-term ideal goal points towards more decentralized block building.

Combining this with recent roadmap updates, we can glimpse three key characteristics of Ethereum before 2030, which collectively form the ultimate answer to the trilemma:

• Minimalist L1: The L1 becomes a robust, neutral foundation solely responsible for providing data availability and settlement proofs. It no longer handles complex application logic, thereby maintaining extremely high security.
• Thriving L2s and Interoperability: Through an Interoperability Layer (EIL) and fast confirmation rules, fragmented L2s are seamlessly stitched together into a cohesive whole. Users will no longer perceive the existence of separate chains, only experiencing hundreds of thousands of transactions per second (TPS).
• Extremely Low Verification Threshold: Due to the maturity of state processing and light client technologies, even mobile phones can participate in verification, ensuring the bedrock of decentralization remains unshakable.

Interestingly, as this article was being written, Vitalik once again emphasized an important testing standard—”The Walkaway Test.” He reiterated that Ethereum must possess the ability to operate autonomously, such that even if all service providers disappear or are attacked, DApps can still run, and user assets remain secure.

This statement effectively shifts the evaluation metric for this “end-state form” from speed/experience back to what Ethereum cares about most: whether the system remains trustworthy and independent of single points of failure even in the worst-case scenario.

Final Thoughts

One must always view problems with a developmental perspective, especially in the rapidly evolving Web3/Crypto industry.

The author believes that many years from now, when people recall the intense debates about the trilemma from 2020-2025, they might view it much like people seriously discussing “how a horse-drawn carriage can simultaneously achieve speed, safety, and carrying capacity” before the invention of the automobile.

Ethereum’s answer is not to make painful choices between three vertices, but to construct a digital infrastructure—one that belongs to everyone, is exceptionally secure, and can support all of humanity’s financial activities—through PeerDAS, ZK proofs, and ingenious economic game theory designs.

Objectively speaking, every step taken in this direction marks the end of the “blockchain trilemma” as a historical constraint.

(The above content is an authorized excerpt and reprint from our partner PANews. Original Link | Source: imToken)