SamuraiCrow Would the second layer of encryption be the only reason the power draw is high?
If I had to guess it would probably be netDB and tunnel handling, rather than the encryption itself. I2P makes a LOT of calls. Encryption is not expensive at all.
I2P and Tor do not use DNS servers for hidden services. Its not apart of the protocol. I2P has a pesudo-DNS like system known as the address book. Tor does not support aliases for hidden services. The UN has little control on both services nor do DNS servers have anything to do with the UN.
I2P decided to use a distributed consensus system called the NetDB
Tor uses the hardcoded Tor nodes called authority nodes that handle the consensus.
I2Ps advantage is the consensus is distributed and not controlled by a single group, but attacks towards the consensus are easier. Its easier to falsely seed I2P as well with a malicious group of nodes, which can isolate you in the netDB. If the maintainers routers went off, netDB would still function.
Tors consensus is harder to attack, but comes at the cost of being controlled by the operators of the authority nodes (which are across the world in different territories). Its harder to maliciously seed Tor and separate you from the network. If the authority nodes went offline, the consensus would fail and Tor would become unstable. (this has happened a few times)
Both are valid ways of handling a consensus, they come with different tradeoffs.