The carbon footprint you refer to applies only to proof-of-work blockchains. Unfortunately 3 of the largest systems use this (bitcoin, Ethereum, and doge) but an alternative has already been created called proof-of-stake. Nearly every new crypto uses proof-of-stake and Ethereum plans to switch to it. The market seems to approve of this as well as some of the big gainers in market cap use this system.
> The ecological problem is, in my opinion, what should lead the conversation.
I don’t because it’s a very weak argument. You could conceivably run all crypto on renewables and excess energy.
The fact that the main purpose of the network seems to be running ponzi schemes, even in poor countries, is much more damning IMO.
Climate change being what it is, we shouldn't even be considering technologies with carbon footprints as large as existing blockchains.
In theory that problem is solvable, but in the present, it should be a deal breaker