Environmental impact is only an issue if the energy source is dirty (which is becoming less of an issue as cost for renewables goes down and green energy mix in the grid increases) and or if you see no value in it. I agree with the former but at the same time I think the issue is not crypto in specific but ANYTHING whose energy source is dirty. The latter is obvi subjective and at the end of the day irrelevant as, like it or not, there are plenty of people that see value in it (2 trillion total market cap in cryptos right now).
Well of course there is plenty of speculative investment going on in this field (also not unique to cryptos, just look at what's has been going on with tech stocks and the Nasdaq), there is no doubt about that. But at the same time all adoption metrics have been increasing like crazy. Two things can be true at once here. There are plenty of people gambling (no bueno) and there is also plenty of other people using the tech/network/etc with other intentions as well. You have governments (at regional and country level) adopting the tech (like it or not), you have people in South America using it inflation hedging (yes it works for this when you country's currency devalues like crazy on a weekly basis) and for remittances, etc. The speculation part fuels the volatility, but it is also obvious that it has proven to withstand many bubbles while at the same time increasing its reach an adoption as this (like it or not) fills a need. A need for an alternative that while not the most efficient, is inclusive, fair, and open by design.
