what will happen after 21 million bitcoins are mined? (in layman's terms)

[keepsearching]

I've been asked this questions many times, but it feels to me like I know answer it in the right way. I would like to know what do you think, and how you explain it in the most simple way, a way that people that are not technical can also understand

[1714642523]

1714642523

[1714642523]

1714642523

[1714642523]

1714642523

[AGD]

Earning by fees will be the motivation to run miners long before the last few Bitcoins are mined. The last block reward will be 1 Satoshi for about 4 years.

[odolvlobo]

This question has literally been asked millions of times.

A google search of your question returns

About 2,360,000 results (0.53 seconds)

The answer is that nothing will happen. Nothing will change except that there will no longer be any new bitcoins.

[Maus0728]

Miners will earn from the transaction fees as the block reward goes 0 somewhere near 2140.

When Bitcoin reaches its maximum supply cap, will miners stop operating? Most probably NO, since the system is designed so that the miners stay in the game. When there are more miners, the profit drops, driving more people away. And when there are less miners, profit increases, luring more miners again, repeating the same cycle.

- How will Bitcoin survive after all 21M coins have been mined?
- What happens when all bitcoins are mined?

[Sandra_hakeem]

...so maybe OP should simply browse the forum history to get a profound response?

21 million bitcoin is mined. Miner won't just go away cus there'd be alot to adjust so some psycho-code enthusiast (hackers)won't keep on the grind till they finally got the blockchain compromised.
Nothing much will happen.

Sandra_

[Darker45]

If all the 21 million Bitcoin are already mined, it means there's no more new Bitcoin to release. Which means that miners won't anymore receive block rewards. Bitcoin mining could continue but since there's no more Bitcoin left to mine, what they will receive in return will only be transaction fees. Today, miners receive block rewards and transaction fees. The moment the maximum supply is reached, only transaction fees remain.

The rest, whether it would still be profitable to mine, whether Bitcoin's security would remain intact, whether Bitcoin would finally face its end, and so on we could only speculate. After all, the last Satoshi wouldn't be mined until around the year 2140, long after we're all gone.

[Asiska02]

I believe that not much will actually happen. The only difference is that following that, there won't be any more bitcoin to mine.
1. The bitcoin that miners earn for their effort after successfully mining a block into the blockchain will probably be kept by them for trading.
2. Bitcoin will continue to exist and their prices will fluctuate as long as people continue to own them, use them for transactions, and save money in them.
3. There won't be any more halvings where there is a constant spike in bitcoin's price prior to the halving.
4. As long as bitcoin is still in existence, miners can continue to support themselves by earning transaction fees after a transaction is included in a block.
5. Since blocks in the blockchain cannot be altered or attacked by hacktivists, the security of the bitcoin blockchain is already secured for now.

[Leviathan.007]

I do not think it will be possible to mine all the 21 million bitcoins completely, but regarding what is going to happen after all 21 million bitcoins have been mined, all I have to say is what can be found online if you search for it and get it. When the price of bitcoin rises, this will lead to a greater value on the market. On the other hand, there will be fewer rewards for miners and they will only be able to make money through transaction fees, which is going to motivate miners to continue mining bitcoin.

[o_e_l_e_o]

After all, the last Satoshi wouldn't be mined until around the year 2140, long after we're all gone.

Sure, but this question will be become pertinent long before then. Average fees earned per block is somewhere in the region of 0.1 - 0.2 BTC at the moment. By the 9th halving, the block subsidy will be 0.09765625 BTC, which will mean it will be less than the average fees. This will happen around 2044, so only 20 years away. Another few halvings after that and the block subsidy will be ~10% of the total fees. If fees aren't enough to maintain the security of the network alone (as will be the case in 2140), then it is very unlikely that fees +10% will be enough to maintain the security of the network, which is scenario which will be reached in the lifetime of many (or even most) current bitcoin users.

I think the combination of the increasing value of bitcoin coupled with most smaller transactions moving to layer two, resulting in the base layer being used predominantly for larger transactions and channel opening/closing and therefore larger fees being acceptable, will be enough for fees alone to maintain the security of the network.

There is some very interesting discussion about this in the following forum thread and on the dev mailing list:
"Surprisingly, Tail Emission Is Not Inflationary" -- A post by Peter Todd
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2022-July/020665.html

[348Judah]

I've been asked this questions many times, but it feels to me like I know answer it in the right way. I would like to know what do you think, and how you explain it in the most simple way, a way that people that are not technical can also understand

Just as the answers were received by you that miners will depend on transaction charges to make thier income and that settles it all, but now about you OP, you just registered your account, don't you think tou need to engage some forum search in other to take survey on aspects like this related to your question maybe it had been talked about? If i were you, i will engage doing much of learning and research than talking just to build myself, finally, let me drop you with this Newbies - Read before posting

[Upgrade00]

Average fees earned per block is somewhere in the region of 0.1 - 0.2 BTC at the moment. By the 9th halving, the block subsidy will be 0.09765625 BTC, which will mean it will be less than the average fees. This will happen around 2044, so only 20 years away. Another few halvings after that and the block subsidy will be ~10% of the total fees.

This opens up a new perspective in the discussion, which I had not thought of before now.
At the current block reward of 6.25BTC, miners averagely earn $122k - $125. Using the current average rate of one Bitcoin. If you include the tx fee, that's an extra ~$3k.

For the reward of mining to remain commensurate with the current value (in USD), i.e, 0.15BTC giving miners about the same amount they are earning now, which is ~$125k, then the value of 1 Bitcoin needs to rise to above $800k. That's a huge leap from the current price levels.
Would we likely be seeing $1 million to 1BTC within the next 25-30 years?

OP, you just registered your account, don't you think tou need to engage some forum search in other to take survey on aspects like this related to your question maybe it had been talked about? If i were you, i will engage doing much of learning and research than talking just to build myself,

Firstly, not everyone is savvy in using the forum search option, or is aware of it.
Asking questions is also a form of learning and research, if the said user follows up on answers and discussions bordered around their questions.

[o_e_l_e_o]

For the reward of mining to remain commensurate with the current value (in USD), i.e, 0.15BTC giving miners about the same amount they are earning now, which is ~$125k, then the value of 1 Bitcoin needs to rise to above $800k. That's a huge leap from the current price levels.

This is based on the assumption that total fees per block will remain static, which as I mentioned above, I don't think they necessarily will.

We already know that block space is too limited as it stands to scale bitcoin to global usage, which is why second layer solutions are being developed. Currently, almost all of my transactions pay a fee of <5 sats/vbyte. If I'm paying for a coffee, fast food, or some other small transaction, then a fee much higher than that starts to become a significant amount of the transaction and therefore unacceptable to me. Let's say, however, that I move all my coffee buying on to Lightning. Now I can pay a fee of 50 sats/vbyte to open a channel, and then buy 100 coffees through that channel before I need to close it. In this scenario I have saved money on fees by paying 0.5 sats/vbyte per each of my 100 transactions, but at the same time I have paid 10x what I would usually pay for the block space.

So provided there is enough demand for block space to support things like opening/closing Lightning channels at a higher fee rate (which is still economical for the end user), as well as very large transactions which will pay a higher fee for the added security of being on the base layer, then the fees paid could increase by an order of magnitude or more, while individual users still pay less by moving most of their transactions on to Lightning.

In this scenario then fees per block could total 1-2 BTC, rather than 0.1-0.2 BTC (example numbers), meaning a price of $80k rather than $800k in your example.

[PrimeNumber7]

The answer is that nothing will happen. Nothing will change except that there will no longer be any new bitcoins.

The change will be that all mining revenue will come from transaction fees, as opposed to a percentage of revenue under the status quo. As oeleo discusses above, it is likely that the majority of mining revenue will come from transaction fees in the next several halvings, and nearly all revenue will come from fees well before the block subsidy goes to zero.

I suspect that transaction fees on a per block basis will likely rise over time (up until a point at which the market will no longer support higher tx fees) as adoption of bitcoin increases. The specific timing when transaction fees will make up the majority of revenue can be debated, but I think most would agree that this will happen sometime in the next few decades.

[Upgrade00]

In this scenario then fees per block could total 1-2 BTC, rather than 0.1-0.2 BTC (example numbers), meaning a price of $80k rather than $800k in your example.

That's just a little less than the last ATH, so it's definitely a feasible amount per Bitcoin. There would also still be a percentage coming from block rewards, at least for the next 30-90 years. And the significance of that could get much higher with increasing value. Maybe even to the last coinbase reward being claimed.

I've always had the perspective that the rewards to mining requirements ratio, is a system that can regulate itself, especially as there are so many years between now and the finite supply and many gradual decrements between now and then.

[witcher_sense]

I've been asked this questions many times, but it feels to me like I know answer it in the right way. I would like to know what do you think, and how you explain it in the most simple way, a way that people that are not technical can also understand

No one is able to predict what will happen next year, let alone time frames like decades or centuries. So, no one knows, and no one can tell you if bitcoin will even exist after miners stop getting paid via freshly-mined bitcoins. Staunch bitcoiners like myself expect that transaction fees will be enough to incentivize miners to continue providing security to the network, but for that, the price of bitcoin in fiat terms needs to go up considerably so that transactions fees would also be a sufficient amount to replace bitcoin block subsidy. However, the problem with high transaction fees (in fiat terms, not in bitcoin units terms) is that the base layer will become almost unusable for people wanting to transfer tiny sums, forcing them to switch to something more economically reliable, for example, sidechains, layer 2 solutions like Lightning Network or even alternative blockchains. So, in the future people will conduct most, if not all, of their transactions outside the base layer (the Bitcoin blockchain), which naturally will result in such undesirable outcomes as a decrease in security, privacy, censorship-resistance, and decentralization. The Bitcoin network will remain robust and decentralized and will be used for settlements of large transactions, but these transactions will no longer be a representation of individuals exchanging with other individuals.

[o_e_l_e_o]

And the significance of that could get much higher with increasing value. Maybe even to the last coinbase reward being claimed.

Agree with the first sentence, but not as far as the last coinbase reward. For the last 10 halvings (or ~40 years), the block subsidy will be under 1000 sats. For 1000 sats to even be worth $100, then a single bitcoin would have to be worth $10 million. The coinbase reward will be irrelevant in the grander scheme of things long before the last coinbase reward.

So, in the future people will conduct most, if not all, of their transactions outside the base layer (the Bitcoin blockchain), which naturally will result in such undesirable outcomes as a decrease in security, privacy, censorship-resistance, and decentralization.

Not necessarily. Lightning is currently both more private and more censorship resistant (against the likes of centralized exchanges and wallets enforcing taint and blacklists) than the base layer.

The Bitcoin network will remain robust and decentralized and will be used for settlements of large transactions, but these transactions will no longer be a representation of individuals exchanging with other individuals.

Which is fine. If I'm paying for a coffee, there is no need for me to use the base layer, and Lightning brings advantages in terms of both speed and fees.

[Alisha-k]

Miner will just get compensated with transaction fee and the total amount of Bitcoin will then become fixed excluding those that has been lost in real time, those whose private keys can't be retrieved. This 21million Bitcoin which is highly divisible into sats and will be so much enough to meet the millions of souls in exsistence

[Agbe]

I've been asked this questions many times, but it feels to me like I know answer it in the right way. I would like to know what do you think, and how you explain it in the most simple way, a way that people that are not technical can also understand

OP you said, you have asked this question many times, and you create this thread on September 17, 2022, 08:00:54 AM and the account was opened on September 17, 2022, 07:46:34 AM that means indirectly, this your alt-acct. By the way this not the first this kind thread has been created and different answers have been given to the question. In my own way of answering the questions is that the 21m BTC can not be exhausted because it is circulating everyday that is, transaction is moving around 24hrs. If you are not selling, another person is selling and if you are not buying another person is buying so the circulation of bitcoin is 24 hours. And nobody can buy and keep bitcoin in his wallet for years. You must buy something so exchange is always there. And another thing again. As far as people are mining bitcoin, it will never exhausted. And people must mine. One thing people need to understand is that bitcoin is not a goods that you pay but it is an asset.

[stompix]

This opens up a new perspective in the discussion, which I had not thought of before now.
At the current block reward of 6.25BTC, miners averagely earn $122k - $125. Using the current average rate of one Bitcoin. If you include the tx fee, that's an extra ~$3k.

For the reward of mining to remain commensurate with the current value (in USD), i.e, 0.15BTC giving miners about the same amount they are earning now, which is ~$125k, then the value of 1 Bitcoin needs to rise to above $800k. That's a huge leap from the current price levels.
Would we likely be seeing $1 million to 1BTC within the next 25-30 years?s.

Before thinking of the price that would be required, think of the first part mentioned, transactions cost would have to be ~$125k, if we take the last full block, 754925 has 1,492 transactions, so that would be around 83$ per tx, who do you think is going to pay that amount? People who move millions, yea, but nobody is going to pay even a $500 yearly subscription at these levels.

It's the opposite way, it's not like fees will have! to compensate for the reward, it will be how much people will want to pay in fees and from this, we will find out how much of the block reward will be replaced by those fees.  For a brief period in 2021 the average fee went to 60 with the network clogged completely, this won't last for more than a month simply nobody is going to pay those forevers, there won't be any constant pressure to pay that much, they will simply abandon transacting alltoghehter.

Now I can pay a fee of 50 sats/vbyte to open a channel, and then buy 100 coffees through that channel before I need to close it. In this scenario I have saved money on fees by paying 0.5 sats/vbyte per each of my 100 transactions, but at the same time I have paid 10x what I would usually pay for the block space.

But you will still need to pay on average 1$ for each coffee purchase to conitribute enough to the network.
So you either lock in 1000 coffee purchases or we, hmm, how do I say this, we increase the number of possible transactions in a block, by increasing something... something.. not width, not length, but , maybe size? 

[o_e_l_e_o]

But you will still need to pay on average 1$ for each coffee purchase to conitribute enough to the network.

Not sure where you are getting this number from? Even if we say that bitcoin goes to $1 million, and you can open a Lightning channel in a transaction of a few hundred vbytes in size, then with a fee rate of 1 sat/vbyte you are looking at $2-3 to open a channel. Even if we go up an entire order of magnitude say it's going to cost you $30 to open a channel, if I then use that channel to make a few hundred transactions over a period of months, then it is overall it is still cheaper than had I made all the transactions individually.

You can always rebalance channels, and there are new developments such as channel factories and Eltoo which allow multi-user channels. With enough global adoption of bitcoin, there will be enough volume on the base layer simply from opening and closing Lightning channels (or some other layer two mechanism) to maintain the security of the network.

It may be that a further block size increase is needed in the future, but we are nowhere near that stage yet.