The per-transaction electricity measure is pretty flawed as the number of transactions per block is independent from the mining difficulty. Block size has already been increased twice (BIP 102 and then by SegWit), and can again in the future as number of bitcoin transactions scales up.

Over 75% of bitcoin miners are also now merge-mining (mining for other blockchains like RSK for example so this hash power secures not only BTC, but other currencies as well.

>A single bitcoin transaction (amortized) uses as much electricity as an entire house uses (on average) in more than 2 days.

That could be true, but how much energy does the finance world consumes through all the quantitative easings and other shenanigans? I doubt it's even possible to burn that worth of energy in electricity.

BTC replaces currency and currency transmission. It does not replace all financial systems or policy. If you just compare what BTC does, it does it like five orders of magnitude less efficiently.

quantitative easing -> Needed to ward off a recession as seen fit by most of the economists ... Not saying it's efficient / needed, can't say anything for sure since I am a lowly dev and not a world class economist This whole concept of bitcoin having value just because it's finite is asinine ... The whole world used gold standard and there was a reason the US and other nations got rid of it after WWI. Comparing bitcoin's energy usage to traditional financial systems makes zero sense, mainly because traditional financial systems have a much bigger purpose. I'll never buy any goods or services with my bitcoin because of the upside potential and I'll never accept payments in bitcoin because of the downside risk.