The first point is classic whataboutism. Would you defend a murder court case by claiming people don't care when the police kill people? It's the same thing, but people being replaced by the planet.
Second point - who are these people, and how much of BTC usage comes from that, vs greedy 'investors'/'evangelists' who have bought in, and get rich by other people buying in?
It's a rich people's plaything. Poor people in third world countries own very little of it, because they are poor. Bitcoin, and crypto as a whole, is a solution in search of a problem. It can be hammered into lots of use cases, but most are solved more quickly and efficiently by a backend and a database.
Sweden wouldn't be the first western country to ban crypto mining if it was just about power. Sweden has a lot of environmentalists in its government though, so it makes sense that Sweden is the first western country to ban it for environmental reasons.
If you think a government wouldn't ban crypto for environmental reasons, can you believe a country would ban drinking straws for environmental reasons? Yeah, that happened, banning crypto is much more reasonable than banning drinking straws.
Do you really have to just make stuff up like that?
Speak for yourself. YOU may not have any environmental concerns because you don't give a shit about the environment, but you can't blame everybody else for being that negligent.
Second point - who are these people, and how much of BTC usage comes from that, vs greedy 'investors'/'evangelists' who have bought in, and get rich by other people buying in?
It's a rich people's plaything. Poor people in third world countries own very little of it, because they are poor. Bitcoin, and crypto as a whole, is a solution in search of a problem. It can be hammered into lots of use cases, but most are solved more quickly and efficiently by a backend and a database.