If tokens are set up on a proof-of-stake cryptocurrency system, instead of a proof-of-work system like Bitcoin, the environmental impact is much less, arguably less than transferring money electronically through more traditional financial institutions, especially international transfers.
The NFTs are a way to establish the unique authenticity of some digital thing, and allow ownership of that authenticated thing to be bought and sold, in whole or in many tiny ownership slices. NFT ownership can be exclusive, just like exclusive transfer of copy rights, but they don’t have to be.
For me, it’s easiest to think about NFTs for music. Every time I download an NFT album, I would be assured that the download is not some bootleg version, and my money is instantly being distributed to all the people that were involved in making that album, in the percentages that were set up in their NFT contract. The contract is scalable; it works for one purchase or millions.
I can see a few cases where authenticated uniqueness of some iNaturalist observations may have NFT value, but it seems like there are more opportunities with other digital tokens, like smart tokens or smart media tokens.
Using a POS system with fast transaction speed and multiparty contracts, these other tokens make sense for supporting iNaturalist system hosts, administrators, curators, observers, and identifiers, with the distribution among each party being set by the contract established in that cryptocurrency system. A funding group would buy or establish the tokens in the cryptocurrency system being used, and then the contracts self-execute as each party performs their part of the contract.
It could be a way to support observers and identifiers in parts of the world where financial circumstances are difficult. Or a fun way for a club to raise money through a bioblitz and pay identifiers for their help to make ids during the event.