It’s probably more like if we had a common point of comparison for all the energy spending points in our society we wouldn’t be focusing on blockchain that much.

Pointing out the environmental impact of NFTs is not taking away a meaningful amount of attention or effort from pointing out the impact of nonrenewable power, cars, etc. What it can do is clue in NFT users who may not understand the impact of their participation.

Anecdotally I've seen several artists on social media making posts recently saying "wow okay I just heard about the power use of NFTs, this is nuts" because it's really not obvious if you're not already familiar with blockchain-related stuff.

Even if something like frozen desserts used the same amount of energy as NFTs, it's still not a good light for NFTs considering those frozen desserts probably support a large number of jobs, infrastructure, and at the very least some kind of nominal amount of calories (even if not very healthy ones).

NFTs might help some artists get money. That's not really as much of an impact.

So if we're comparing things, the full context needs to be included as well, not just some strawman of a magnitude.

And all of that being said, if the world decided that it would stop producing desserts, I'd probably be on board with it anyway, but the impact would be pretty large. If the world decided to stop supporting NFTs, not much would change (I suppose it could in the future, but based on their current trajectory it doesn't seem like that'll be the case).