If mining an asset that’s primarily used as a store of value is considered “waste,” then most gold mining would fall into that category.
Every year, billions of tons of earth are moved with diesel-powered machinery.
Entire landscapes are treated with cyanide and mercury.
Large amounts of energy go into refining, then the metal is transported and locked away in vaults - rarely used, mostly held.
The process also leaves behind toxic tailings that can impact ecosystems for generations.
And yet, the majority of that effort produces gold that isn’t consumed in any practical sense - it’s stored, displayed, or simply held as a form of wealth.
There's a lot of things humans do that could be considered wasteful.
I think what gets Normie's about mining is that there is some sense that the point of the energy usage is to produce something that proves you used energy. That's not quite it, but it makes the "waste" aspect seem particularly clear. They just don't seem to get that such a quality is useful.
And they still try to pin the polluter label on bitcoin miners, who use cheap, surplus energy.
What’s platinum garbage then
Those uses are a form of consumption, thank you very much. Also: yes, #1480191
Gold mining destroys landscapes and leaves poison behind. Bitcoin mining uses energy that can be renewable and leaves nothing toxic.
Digital gold wins