HN Explorer

Ask HN: Viability of an Economy Based on an Energy Standard

2 points by ilovetux ↗ HN
In the US, we currently live in an economy tied to the price of energy. If oil prices go up, the prices of everything else increases. If oil prices go down, (usually) the price of everything else decreases.

From my understanding, we used to be on the "gold standard" in which each treasury note was backed by the presence of physical gold held in the treasury. From my limited research it would be difficult to go back to the gold standard, but would it be possible to refactor our economy to use energy as the sole medium of exchange.

The idea would be similar to the following:

Customers wishing to purchase goods or services would exchange energy (specifically electricity) for the item in question. Energy could be exchanged in a variety of ways like small "button-style" batteries or by the transfer of energy from a larger battery (maybe the size of a standard "trifold" wallet). The medium of exchange would need to be standardized but would be "pluggable" so new technologies could be adopted in a backwards-compatible way.

Potential benefits include the ability for almost anyone to convert expertise and work into a valuable commodity with minimal overhead. For instance, facilities could be established where if one has no other way to earn money they could come and ride a stationary bicycle to charge batteries which they could then use to purchase the things they need. A percentage would be taken off the top for the owner/operator of the facility. Also with some investment in time and materials, one could guarantee a steady income for their family by the installation of solar panels, wind turbines or even gasoline generators.

My interest is specifically in other potential benefits or any potential problems or pitfalls.

This question is really meant as a thought exercise to help me understand how the exchange of value operates at both a micro and macro level.

Thanks in advance.

2 comments

[ 3.7 ms ] story [ 16.5 ms ] thread
sharemywin
The cost of a battery would be >>> than the cost of the energy it stored. Also, you can't transfer energy around the would as easy as bits, you lose energy.
ilovetux
Good point about the cost of the battery. The way I was thinking the battery would be rechargeable and ownership would be retained by the customer. This precludes my thought on "button-style" batteries, but I would not be against carrying a rechargeable battery in lieu of a wallet.

The second point is really good as well, and after reading it I am thinking that existing Power Plants and grids would transition to a sort of bank where value could be allocated and disbursed like a check or money order. For instance, I am in Pennsylvania and I have a diesel power plant serving my needs. I could theoretically store my energy by back-feeding into the grid and I could send that energy to you by having my power plant tell your power plant to allocate some of my energy to you. This would require a sort of clearing house which might take the form of a world-wide smart grid where taxes and tariffs could be automatically deducted in transit across national or state boundaries.