> once again, you have merely just assumed the role of arbitor. What makes this opinion better than the opposition?

This is literally the role of legislators. What makes "my" opinion better, is in the event that this sort of legislation passed, the majority of the elective representatives in both houses agree we should ban proof of work crytpo currencies, nothing less, nothing more.

> [alternative proposal]

I mean, I happen to like this proposal too, but you haven't given any reason not to do both...

I think OP is suggesting that a targeted ban on proof of work crypto will be more politically feasible -- particularly in the US -- than a carbon tax. Even the state of Washington (which is far more left/democratic/liberal than the US as a whole) failed to pass two different modest carbon taxes in recent years.

So while carbon pricing would be a more ideal solution, OP is suggesting that a targeted ban on POW crypto is a good-enough bandaid that might actually pass.

> What makes this opinion better than the opposition?

Nothing about the opinion is better than any other. But the only thing we have to achieve is that it is a majority opinion, which frankly doesn’t seem all that hard to me.