Read on Twitter
I'm tired of seeing this kind of artist-shaming in my timeline; and frankly it does little to reduce Ethereum's energy costs. Those seeking more carbon efficient artistic revenue streams may do well to explore & research this further than the front page of a GitHub repository.
Minting a single PoW NFT carries no more emissions than a tweet, but users are (understandably) assigned some share of responsibility of Ethereum's annual carbon output. There is no clear quantification for this, some metrics will put that at 10, 30, or 50 KgCO2, or lower/higher.
This is undoubtedly higher than anybody using the system would like it to be. But, to place this in context: minting 1 NFT lies in the range of shipping a couple dozen or so Giclée prints from my art shop (yet, the revenue per NFT sale is over a couple dozen times higher).
Instead of shaming an artist for what amounts to a couple dozen print sales, we should be aiming to better understand the carbon efficiency of current artistic revenue streams; why so many artists are still choosing PoW NFTs; and how we can help minimize & offset these costs.
(FWIW I fully support PoS NFTs like Hicetnunc and hope it continues to grow—my issue here lies specifically with the toxic harassment of PoW NFT artists, sensationalism, and a general lack of desire to discuss & better understand these issues, which I often see on Twitter/IG.)
