Nice catch. It's just another indication of their weak and disappointing tactic. Using already debunked papers and arguments to justify their movement. Pathetic.

For what's worth, energy spent per transaction, as I've already said, is a pointless and misunderstood measure. A median on-chain transaction costs essentially zero energy to be created, essentially zero energy to be signed it, and takes very little storage to save it in hard drives across the world. The energy spent by the process of including this transaction, along with many others, into a block should not be confused with the energy that was taken to make this transaction. The energy that is spent in the Bitcoin network, is primarily used to protect the network. Once that is done, transactions can be confirmed. There might as well be no unconfirmed transactions. Just energy spent for network protection.

Furthermore, one on-chain transaction doesn't equate with one transaction. Nearly infinite transactions can be made with just one on-chain transaction, and two computers connected within a payment channel. Again, this projects on how pointless it is to measure the energy that is potentially spent for one Bitcoin transaction.

It's unfair, I know. But their 5 million dollars are going to end sometime. Until then, we debunk.