Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
BruceMcF:
Adopting energy units as a commodity-money would lead under current circumstances to a constantly deflating monetary unit, which would be destabilizing precisely in those periods of real resource constraints when financial side instability would be particularly unwelcome. They would be far more useful as an asset than as a form of money.

There is a difference between an Energy Standard - which is a Unit of measure of Value - and a Unit of currency, which is what I prefer to think of as 'money's worth'.

A Value Standard cannot deflate, any more than a kilogramme or a metre - it is, by definition, an absolute.

A Unit of currency, on the other hand can deflate or inflate by reference to a Value Standard.

Why do you say energy currency units must necessarily deflate?

There is a virtually infinite amount of renewable energy - not to mention energy savings - available to be monetised/unitised in the course of financing the transition from carbon.

"The future is already here -- it's just not very evenly distributed" William Gibson

by ChrisCook (cojockathotmaildotcom) on Mon Aug 2nd, 2010 at 08:32:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Others have rated this comment as follows:

Display:

Occasional Series