I& #39;m tired of seeing this kind of artist-shaming in my timeline; and frankly it does little to reduce Ethereum& #39;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& #39;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.)