<p>there are indeed several ways of burning bitcoin:</p>
<p>comment on 1: you dont have to rely on trust, you can send bitcoin to 1111111111111111111114oLvT2. This address is spendable with if you have a keypair with <code>RIPEMD160(SHA256(publicKey)) == 0</code> which nobody has (yet)</p>
<p>comment on 2: you can't send amounts under the dust limit (transactions doing that are not relayed) and those coins will not be burnt if the owner of the address spends them and thereby paying more fees than the UTXO is worth. Note that the fees are going to the miner and are thus not burnt</p>
<p>comment on 3: i think you meant scriptPubKey not address. it creates a provably unspendable transaction output</p>
<p>number 4: a miner can claim less bitcoins in his coinbase output. consensus rules only disallow claiming <em>more</em>, and coins cant go to fee in a coinbase transaction</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-02-26T13:57:37.977Z
Thank you that makes sense (and I realise that my (2) was based on a misunderstanding). I can't upvote but I would if I could
andrewr
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-02-20T18:43:44.693Z
2022-02-20T18:43:44.693Z
Antoni
<p>As already mentioned in other answers, you can burn funds by sending them to an address with an unknown or provable non-existent private key, or by allocating them to an <code>OP_RETURN</code> output, which can never be spent.</p>
<p>I want to talk about the second suggestion from your question:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Send a de minimis amount (e.g. 1 SAT) to an address which already holds coins. These will get 'overwritten' and thence lost</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Imagine if someone held ₿100,000 in a single address. Don't you think that someone would just send a single satoshi to destroy it for giggles? Clearly, this mechanic would be completely unsafe, and luckily, it doesn't exist. Whenever you send a transaction, new <em>Unspent Transaction Outputs (UTXOs)</em> are created. These &quot;pieces of bitcoin&quot; are tracked via their <em>outpoint</em> which is the combination of the transaction that created them and their position in the output list: <code>txid:vout</code>. Addresses are merely a shorthand to encode output scripts that define the spending conditions for funds. There is no issue with multiple outputs sharing the same spending conditions, except the obvious privacy implications.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-02-26T13:58:41.433Z
Thank you. My (2) is clearly based on a misunderstanding. I would upvote if I could
andrewr
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-02-21T13:18:46.667Z
2022-02-21T13:18:46.667Z
Murch
<ol>
<li>Works</li>
<li>&amp; 3. Don't work</li>
</ol>
<p>You could also destroy your private keys to addresses you control. Then you know the coins are lost, but others do not know.</p>
<p>If you send to a known burner address, everyone knows the coins are burned. Popular addresses are <a href="https://www.blockchain.com/btc/address/1BitcoinEaterAddressDontSendf59kuE" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><code>1BitcoinEater..</code></a>, <a href="https://www.blockchain.com/btc/address/1CounterpartyXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXUWLpVr" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><code>1Counterparty..</code></a>, 111111.., adding to Satoshis' coins.</p>
<p>Regarding 2, any address can receive an unlimited number of different coin amounts. Each is independently spendable.</p>
<p>Regarding 3, OP Return cannot contain coins.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-02-23T13:28:33.953Z
2022-02-23T13:28:33.953Z
Paul Otto
<p>I'm interested in the different ways in which bitcoin can be burnt. I can see three ways:</p>
<ol>
<li>Send coins to a 'made-up' address. There's no way to distinguish it from a real address (so the transaction will not be rejected), except that no-one has the private key</li>
<li>Send a de minimis amount (e.g. 1 SAT) to an address which already holds coins. These will get 'overwritten' and thence lost</li>
<li>Begin an output address with OP_RETURN</li>
</ol>
<p>Both (2) and (3) demonstrate that coins are destroyed. (1) relies on trust.</p>
<p>Firstly, are the above descriptions accurate (and am I using terminology correctly)?
Secondly, are there any other way of destroying coins?
Finally, in reality do either (2) or (3) represent a material loss of coins?</p>

<blockchain><op-return><destroy-bitcoins>
Different ways in which bitcoin can be burnt
andrewr
# Different ways in which bitcoin can be burnt

(Asked by: username_0 on 2022-02-20)

I'm interested in the different ways in which bitcoin can be burnt. I can see three ways:

1. Send coins to a 'made-up' address. There's no way to distinguish it from a real address (so the transaction will not be rejected), except that no-one has the private key
2. Send a de minimis amount (e.g. 1 SAT) to an address which already holds coins. These will get 'overwritten' and thence lost
3. Begin an output address with OP\_RETURN

Both (2) and (3) demonstrate that coins are destroyed. (1) relies on trust.

Firstly, are the above descriptions accurate (and am I using terminology correctly)?
Secondly, are there any other way of destroying coins?
Finally, in reality do either (2) or (3) represent a material loss of coins?

**Tags:** blockchain, op-return, destroy-bitcoins


---

## 3 answers

### Answer by username_1 on 2022-02-20. Score: 2 | Accepted answer

there are indeed several ways of burning bitcoin:

comment on 1: you dont have to rely on trust, you can send bitcoin to 1111111111111111111114oLvT2. This address is spendable with if you have a keypair with `RIPEMD160(SHA256(publicKey)) == 0` which nobody has (yet)

comment on 2: you can't send amounts under the dust limit (transactions doing that are not relayed) and those coins will not be burnt if the owner of the address spends them and thereby paying more fees than the UTXO is worth. Note that the fees are going to the miner and are thus not burnt

comment on 3: i think you meant scriptPubKey not address. it creates a provably unspendable transaction output

number 4: a miner can claim less bitcoins in his coinbase output. consensus rules only disallow claiming *more*, and coins cant go to fee in a coinbase transaction

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: Thank you that makes sense (and I realise that my (2) was based on a misunderstanding). I can't upvote but I would if I could  

---

### Answer by username_2 on 2022-02-21. Score: 0

As already mentioned in other answers, you can burn funds by sending them to an address with an unknown or provable non-existent private key, or by allocating them to an `OP_RETURN` output, which can never be spent.

I want to talk about the second suggestion from your question:

> Send a de minimis amount (e.g. 1 SAT) to an address which already holds coins. These will get 'overwritten' and thence lost

Imagine if someone held ₿100,000 in a single address. Don't you think that someone would just send a single satoshi to destroy it for giggles? Clearly, this mechanic would be completely unsafe, and luckily, it doesn't exist. Whenever you send a transaction, new *Unspent Transaction Outputs (UTXOs)* are created. These "pieces of bitcoin" are tracked via their *outpoint* which is the combination of the transaction that created them and their position in the output list: `txid:vout`. Addresses are merely a shorthand to encode output scripts that define the spending conditions for funds. There is no issue with multiple outputs sharing the same spending conditions, except the obvious privacy implications.

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: Thank you. My (2) is clearly based on a misunderstanding. I would upvote if I could  

---

### Answer by username_3 on 2022-02-23. Score: 0

1. Works
2. & 3. Don't work

You could also destroy your private keys to addresses you control. Then you know the coins are lost, but others do not know.

If you send to a known burner address, everyone knows the coins are burned. Popular addresses are [`1BitcoinEater..`](https://www.blockchain.com/btc/address/1BitcoinEaterAddressDontSendf59kuE), [`1Counterparty..`](https://www.blockchain.com/btc/address/1CounterpartyXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXUWLpVr), 111111.., adding to Satoshis' coins.

Regarding 2, any address can receive an unlimited number of different coin amounts. Each is independently spendable.

Regarding 3, OP Return cannot contain coins.


---

