The "mining is bad for the environment" narrative was created to debase PoW because it's a bigger threat to government control.

Why do you think there's such a hard push against proof of work? Would media conglomerates push a "bad for the environment" narrative if it didn't serve some kind of purpose? These are the same people who continue to refute climate change because the owners profit from oil extraction.

Proof of stake is not a true iteration on proof of work because it removes market externalities from the system. In proof of stake, there are no miners. The rich don't actually have to spend any money to profit, they just stake it. The person who holds the most coins holds all the power.

In pow, miners have to spend money to buy new equipment and maintain it. Thus, their fortunes are used in the economy, creating a system that sustains itself by forcing those who maintain it to actually spend the asset they're maintaining. This is not true of proof of stake, which actually encourages people to not use the currency at all.

I hear all kinds of pros for proof of stake, but I've never had someone directly refute the argument against it, that it does not have market externalities and thus is not a sustainable economic system.

I would love to hear some comments to that point specifically.

By debasing Proof of Work, the type of cryptocurrencies that can actually threaten world governments' control over the monetary supply, they push crypto users to the less viable proof of stake chains. It also represents a classic divide and conquer tactic. Creating the division in philosophies between crypto users takes the target off the backs of controlling governments that are only trying to preserve their power in terms of monetary supply and the movement of funds.

Edit: I'm not disputing energy use is bad for the environment. But, driving cars is bad for the environment, watching tv is bad for the environment, washing dishes.. you get the point. Im saying the government and media don't care about the environment except when it sells a narrative, and I'm saying that I think PoW is worth spending energy on, and I'm saying if there were an alternative that used less energy I'd be all for it, but I don't think PoS is a viable alternative that achieves what PoW achieves, economically speaking.