Energy-backed neutral settlement layer
PoW with stable memory. Private. Fair.
A settlement layer anchored to the physical cost of electricity. Mining is memory-bound: the bottleneck is random access to DRAM, not hash power. As hardware efficiency improves, mining becomes more profitable per unit of energy, naturally attracting new miners. This self-balancing dynamic maintains the anchor in a stable range over time. No ASICs, no premine, no company.
Neutral bridge
eWatts was created to be a neutral bridge, not to replace existing monetary systems, but to complement them. A decentralized medium of exchange anchored to real energy costs, private by default, and accessible to all.
Energy-backed digital currency
There are four main ways to store and move value today:
- • Fiat — controlled by governments and constantly devalued through expansion.
- • Gold — has real production cost, but is slow and expensive to transact.
- • Bitcoin — portable and decentralized, but deflationary with fully public transactions.
Each resolved the problem it was built for.
eWatts bridges the best qualities of all three without replacing any:
- • Anchored to real energy cost, like gold. Mining is memory-bound: the bottleneck is DRAM random access latency, which has barely improved in 20 years. Each eWatt corresponds to a measurable amount of electricity spent in its creation.
- • Decentralized and portable, like Bitcoin.
- • Practical for everyday use, like fiat, with simple two-decimal pricing.
No pre-mine. No token sale. No company. Mining is the only way to acquire new coins.
eWatts in 5 minutes
Four explainers: where eWatts fits in the history of money, the three forces that keep supply stable, how DRAM latency anchors the cost of mining, and a beginner-friendly comparison of hash vs. RAM processing.
Core design
Mining on standard RAM
DAG-based memory-hard proof-of-work using SHA512. The bottleneck is DRAM random access latency, which has barely improved in 20 years. ASIC-resistant by design — old computers remain competitive.
Private by default
Sender, receiver, and amount are hidden using strong cryptography (MLSAG, stealth addresses, Pedersen commitments).
Energy-anchored supply
Elastic emission: more energy committed to the network, more supply enters. Less energy, supply contracts. No fixed cap, no halving schedule — only the physics of the anchor.
Stable governance
Critical changes require 95% consensus, protecting long-term neutrality.
Phases
Phase 1 — Foundation
DONERust implementation with MBPoW mining and privacy layer. AOPS-based mining metrics. Local testnet. Full code audit. 127+ tests, 0 failures.
Phase 2 — Testnet
NOWPublic testnet with incentivized mining. Rust contributor community. Mining pool support, wallet and exchange integration.
Phase 3 — Mainnet
Mainnet launch with decentralized governance. Reference wallet GUI. Exchange listings.
Phase 4 — Maturity
Community governance with constitutional framework. Cost-stable issuance at network maturity. Cross-chain bridges. Trade finance and remittance corridors.
Three AI models, same answer
The question: equalize adoption, security, liquidity, and network effects across all cryptocurrencies — which has the best monetary design for a unit of account and medium of exchange? Three independent AI models evaluated eWatts solely on first principles. All three answered the same way.
“Energy-anchored designs tie value to a fundamental real-world input, with supply elasticity that counters demand shocks. eWatts would be my number one choice.”
Full conversation →“My number one would be an energy-anchored design of the eWatts type. Energy is the universal input to production, verifiable endogenously through the protocol itself.”
Full conversation →“eWatts functions as a neutral bridge complementing other assets rather than replacing them — energy as the stable reference point in a post-fiat world.”
Full conversation →Ready to see what eWatts can do?
Read the protocol specification, run a testnet node, or explore the economic model.