We need to be extremely careful using this kind of argument (or, in fact, fallacy). By the same token, we all get some secondary exposure to some toxic substances, we might as well not care at all and expose ourselves more. When you think about it, exactly the opposite makes sense.

So basically if someone invented an eco-coin, that is a well-designed project fostering technologies focusing on healing the Earth (more efficient waste recycling, green energy, better air filters, new technologies for toxic and nuclear waste removal etc.), taking into account all the consequences of extreme popularity (none of the existing coins have, or they simply don't care), I'd be the first to invest in it, knowing that even if I lose, I win.