According to PANews, the relationship between Layer 2 (L2) solutions and Layer 1 (L1) Ethereum has sparked discussions about whether L2 is benefiting at the expense of L1. L2 solutions use L1 for settlement while offering users cheaper transaction services, acting as intermediaries and capturing value through fees, including MEV. The question arises whether L2s are paying enough for the valuable block space they use on L1. This article explores the impact of L2 on Ethereum through various metrics.

Firstly, L2 solutions contribute to the Ethereum ecosystem by enhancing its overall value. By adding the market value of the top 10 L2 tokens to ETH, termed as 'effective ETH,' the combined value of the Ethereum ecosystem can be assessed. However, the current impact of the top 10 L2s on the ETHBTC ratio is minimal, indicating that L2s have not significantly boosted the ETH (effective)/BTC ratio.

Value capture in the Ethereum ecosystem can be measured through revenue and market capitalization. Ethereum captures approximately 90% of the total revenue generated within its ecosystem. In the second quarter of 2024, Base led in revenue among L2s, followed by Blast. In terms of market capitalization, ETH still accounts for over 95% of the top 10 L2s' market value.

L2 solutions incur costs for storing data on Ethereum, which is a critical operational expense. The balance of these costs is essential; if too high, L2 operations become challenging, and if too low, Ethereum earns less from providing settlement services. The Ethereum 4844 upgrade, also known as Proto Danksharding, reduced L2 operational costs, decreasing L2's revenue contribution to Ethereum from about 10% to around 2%. While this might seem detrimental, it prepares L2s for more users by lowering transaction costs.

In a week in 2024, Ethereum supported 7.1 million transactions, generating $10.6 million in revenue, with an average cost of $1.5 per transaction. In contrast, five L2s (Arbitrum, Base, Blast, Optimism, and Polygon) supported over 70 million transactions with fees totaling $2.75 million, averaging $0.03 per transaction. Although the quality of these transactions can be debated, Ethereum cannot support such a high volume of transactions alone.

Overall, building L2 solutions and providing cheaper data storage options on L1 benefits users by reducing transaction costs. However, it poses challenges for Ethereum (L1) as more data is pushed to L1, increasing base fees and potentially boosting Ethereum's revenue. Thus, the increased use of L2 solutions could be a win-win for both Ethereum and its users.