Dude this is a great idea, I wish we would have the will to do it. But actually, something much bigger is happening which is likely to force the same result.
It takes a while to get our heads around this, it took me a couple of days to digest the full consequences after analysing utilities energy consumption data, noting that it has shrunk. In UK, it has shrunk by about 20% despite the population being up by 10%.
That is actually very significant. It bucks a long established rule of thumb, that energy consumption always follows population growth. It did, until around 2005. After that, it has diverged. I bet by similar amounts in every developed country. Some folk with jobs on the line if anything happens to the utilities energy supply industry will argue that the reduction is because of efficiency savings, because we started using LED lightbulbs, etc. But in practicality, efficiency doesn't make anywhere near as big a dent as the industry that came up with LED lamps makes out.
In winter, when most of our energy consumption is for heating, the effect of adding a load of LED lighbulbs is more or less zero, because it still takes the same amount of energy to heat a room to a particular temperature, and bulbs consuming significan energy share the load of heating the room. In my lounge I had 12x50W downlighters, which generated 600W of heat. I also have two 700 Watt heaters, and a 700 Watt LCD TV. I used to only need one heater with all those lamps on, and none at all with lamps and TV on. Now with all LEDs, the room is always freezing until I've heated with both heaters, and one has to stay on, even with TV on, in winter.
So what we save in one hand is lost in the other.
This is the truth about LED lamps. They cost an awful lot more than filament lamps to manufacture, with much more damage done to environment, but they don't save much energy in buildings that need heating. Even central heating will ramp up its output automatically, to compensate for whatever is lost from other heating sources no longer producing heat.
I believe the reason for the reduction is because of domestic and community solar.
Remember no money is normally issued on solar, despite it being the same valuable product (Joules!), as what is obtained from extraction. Money issued as debt can only ennumerate / monetise extracted energy, not solar energy, because there is no fuel required for solar, so no labor of extraction, and promises to pay can only translate to promises to do the labor of extraction.
The result is that the same energy is being used per head of population, but only the part supplied by grids is recognised as valid for the economy.
So there has to be actually a shortage of money in circulation.
Of course this will hit retail business. We literally don't have the money between us to spend.
Yet there is business there to monetise, it has to be by issue of Kardashev Money.
It turns out to be quite a lot of money. In UK, £50Bn of business was lost this year alone by the utilities industry, that business being transferred effectively to folk supplying their own energy from solar. And yet, not a penny was issued on it.
There, we see something truly incredible, the illusion that solar is worth nothing, despite the fact we are using it, to do what used to cost a lot of money, and all this without any harm to the environment.
But the catch, is inflation..
The only way they can make the money representative of anything at all, as energy extraction is forced dwon, is to make it representative of free energy, so the money has to be issued for free, not as debt.
This is actually really big news, the end of the road for extracted energy is in sight, and the big switch will happen very quickly, after the free money is issued, becausee by that, we will finish the job af all people installing whatever solar backed by hydrogen infrastructure they can get their hands on, because that is how we will maximise the solar stipend.
