The CEO of Bitcoin did, in fact, speak up from his hidden fortress back in 2010 and delivered a pointed response to 2022's faux environmentalists.
In 2010 a user on the forum raised a criticism about the very high "energy waste" needed for Bitcoin mining. Satoshi responded —
It's the same situation as gold and gold mining. The marginal cost of gold mining tends to stay near the price of gold. Gold mining is a waste, but that waste is far less than the utility of having gold available as a medium of exchange. I think the case will be the same for Bitcoin. The utility of the exchanges made possible by Bitcoin will far exceed the cost of electricity used. Therefore, not having Bitcoin would be the net waste.
And Satoshi wound up persuading the original critic —
After more careful study of the design of the Bitcoin network and trying to understand the exact manner in which Bitcoin attempts to create value from the computational work invested, I am now inclined to think that bitcoin is in fact high EFFICIENT rather than inefficient. My thinking now is that bitcoin does not, in fact "waste" computational work at all - instead it works hard to deliver the most value possible from that computational work. Something like a government issued fiat currency may not have any obvious energy burden beyond its printing - but in fact, maintaining the value of a fiat currency requires a substantial investment in maintaining police enforcement, a legal system, and national defense. In comparison to the energy cost of hiring police officers to enforce economic honesty, the energy costs of investing cpu cycles in guaranteeing that honesty mathematically seem very small.
Notice, Stacker News peeps, this little exchange is a microcosm of the argument we're about to have at an international level; the solution given is the same one we'll use, and which everyone will come to realize.