It's quite different: the energy represents the market cost of securing the network. The value of the network supports that cost otherwise nobody would be perfo

It's quite different: the energy represents the market cost of securing the network. The value of the network supports that cost otherwise nobody would be performing mining. If this were taxpayer supported I could understand the objection, but the people buying the energy to run the system are doing so as a commercial activity to make a profit. How is this commercial use of energy inherently worse than other commercial activities?