> To put it another way, if the costs are identical, it's better to have 1000000 transactions than just 100 transactions; "environmental impact per transaction"

> To put it another way, if the costs are identical, it's better to have 1000000 transactions than just 100 transactions; "environmental impact per transaction" (or its inverse, "transactions per unit of environmental impact") captures that perfectly. I don't think it's possible to decouple # of transactions and the price of Bitcoin though. Every additional Bitcoin transaction proves it is a feasible means of exchange, driving the price higher.