Circulat Economy doesn't make much sense after we are weaned off of energy extracted from Earth.

To anticipate that, you have to start viewing energy as a linear journey, from source, the sun, to destination on Earth. It is a one way ticket for those Joules, except when humanity gets its hands on them.

In that case, we take a little of those Joules that nature put into creating the materials or stored energy back out.

We can only get a tiny fraction back out that nature put in, but the material or force field itself is entirely destroyed, by being less than whole, no longer performing the purpose it had by nature, but actually becoming pollution, hazardous to life.

An example is a gallon of fuel, which took millions of years of sunlight to make, but we can only get back out a few hundred kilowatt hours, which converts to a fixed, known number of Joules. The vast bulk of the remainder stays trapped as the material of pollution.

We have to define taking the Joules back out of what nature created as a negative process, denoting destruction / subtraction, reducing the total number of Joules put to use on Earth by nature.

Our mode of business, all fueled by negative energy, is to withdraw x Joules, whilst throwing away 10^x.

Tracing this through, energy from the sun is the only mathematically positive energy source, it all came from the sun.

Using that source ourselves now we have the technology to do it, and are doing it, utilities energy supply is down by 20% whilst domestica and community solar energy is up by the same fraction.

The reason we do not see thse working together is that they are mathematically incompatible. One is physically mathematically positive, and all the others are physically mathematically negative.

Put the two together in the economy, either connected together via grid, or otherwise, they are not compatible, each exists at the expense of the other, but only one is sustainable forever, the other is from finite stores, created from the first.

This is the thing not made clear or researched much by conventional science, because it is anti-profit, and all science has to earn a living, whilst profit is something wholly dependent on energy by extraction, yet it ends all argument about energy, the way forward becomes very clear, it is solar, only solar.

A further factor in this confusion is that money issued as debt (Promises to pay / do work), can only represent energy by extraction, not energy donated, like solar, because there is no requirement for work, or other cost associated per Joule of energy received from solar, after the gate allowing it to flood in is opened, but putting in the appropriate interface to receive it.

Since that energy flow can be converted directly to money, or to money via hydrogen fuel, or to money via food (See "Solein"), or actually to an infinity of valuable things, the infrastructure comprising the gateway can be scaled up with no extra cost.

Hence why right now, there should be money issued on solar product already received over the years since 2005.

In UK this sum is more than 600Billion.

In US it must be trilliions.

Release of that money not only fixes inflation, but fixes everything.

It doesn't have much to do with the economy being circular, in fact as long as it can be interpreted as circular, then there is a problem, the baby (us) has not yet been weaned off of the energy of its mother (Earth).