Natural scarcity in the form of land, gold, etc., or unnatural scarcity in the form of crypto, water rights, futures, stocks.
I find your arguments kind of silly about emissions and energy. Real estate in the form of teak farms are inherently 60+ year investments, fix carbon, and basically require no energy, and have nominal upkeep. Teak has been a steady supply of income for hundreds if not thousands of years.
99-year leases are also normal and allow you to retain land while letting others develop it or use it and puts the paying of taxes on them. Banks routinely finance mortgages on 60 and 99-year leased land for housing development.
Crypto's only true benefit is the lack of minimum investment quantities. I can more easily store for 100 years $100m of cash today than I can $100.
It also has the benefit of allowing people who don't know how to invest money to believe that somehow the flawed logic you just used is actually sensible.