No, it isn’t quite that. For it to count as “environment” the organism must be able to survive for at least a time without it.
The issue here is, the metal wasn’t a nutrient. That would be fine and exactly like it is for all life now.
Instead the metal was the anchor. If an organism needed to grow on it to enable half its metabolism, it is at the least very distinct from current life.
The only issue with the “two origins” claim is both lineages, bacteria and archea, come from this, and even with an open metabolic chain, you already had the nucleic acid function etc all sorted out, and common between both kingdoms.
So it’s a stretch to say there were two origins to life, but not that this proto life is distinct from modern life. That we need things from our environment is not the same as what they found about proto life in the vents.