CBC does a pretty good job of ripping on banks for a lot of their shady and predatory practices, but I would think that their energy consumption is a much less significant issue -- likely several orders of magnitude lower than bitcoin mining (given corporate energy consumption is -- I would imagine -- lumped in with national energy consumption; if bitcoin mining is found to be using more energy than small~medium scale nations, then office buildings using lights is probably insignificant in comparison).

I agree with you though that not enough context is given for how much energy is consumed by large tech companies, their huge campuses and server farms.

That being said -- I've written all the above without checking out the video, which I'm checking out right meow.

EDIT: Just watched the video. Anton makes a lot of good points -- and I think his case of understanding the "hidden costs" is super important. A lot of this also applies to stuff like Hydroelectric dams. While better than coal-fired plants, or other dirty power generation methods -- they still, typically, require flooding huge areas of land that were previously animal habitat or fertile farm land (Site C dam in BC suffers from these issues as well). Rivers get choked off, or materials are consumed to produce PV panel arrays.

I guess at the end of the day -- yes, the energy consumption claims of bitcoin are probably overblown and taken out of context to other products or industries. But it still stands that the world is suffering from energy shortages in certain places, as well as the effects from intense resource consumption. It certainly seems like PoW consensus is more of an energy hog than some alternatives -- so it would make sense to be striving to attain that level of efficiency where possible, practical, and secure.

EDIT 2: Thanks for the chat!