Currently? No I don't believe that this infrastructure comes close to providing the functions of the financial industry, and as such the energy comparison are completely spurious.

The smart contracts languages can have whatever intent they like, the fact is that comparing the power use of a full financial system to something which is effectively operating as a bad payment processor is so wrong it's funny.

You seem to be missing the fact that the infrastructure in place is sufficient to not only specify but also enforce the properties needed for all the functions you describe. So while you call the comparison spurious, the fact is that no additional energy would be required to achieve the functions you think are missing. So the comparison is not as spurious as you imply.

> So while you call the comparison spurious, the fact is that no additional energy would be required to achieve the functions you think are missing.

Really, none at all to, for instance, provide physical cash? A function of current financial systems and in some countries commercial banks?

Interesting.

No more to run mobile phone wallet apps?

No more to run PoS systems?

No offices full of traders?

No helplines, advisors or support for customers?

No teams of developers puttig together trading strategies and algorithms, and building smart contracts?

No datacenters opportunistically precalculating smart-contract outcomes to try to get ahead of the market?

You're once again only looking at a tiny part of a system, and comparing it to something much more complex.