No doubt due to the 1MB/block limit that's in place.
>There are lots of cryptocurrencies now, no chain is going to suddenly have 150 million transactions per day while all the others die off
So large transaction volumes aren't going to be an issue because there's also going to be multiple blockchains to spread the transaction volume across? I'm not sure that's any better, because you'd either be heavily dependent on intermediary exchange services and be exposed to exchange rate fluctuations, or having to keep multiple crypto wallets synced and having to juggle disk space between them.
>Even then, it would cost a single person far less in disk space than the electricity to run their refrigerator
The problem is that the cost compounds, so comparing the cost to running a refrigerator isn't exactly fair. A refrigerator costs around $90/year to run today, 5 years ago, and 5 years from now. On the other hand, running a full node might cost $90/year today, but 5 years from now would cost $450 upfront + $90/year.
>and again, few people even sync with the chain.
This goes back to the decentralization debate. Needing a huge upfront investment to fully participate in the network is very much anti-decentralization.