Sorry my choice of words is often not best, appears to have resulted more in you defending your position, which is fully understandable, than examining the system proposed.

The only criteria we should be applying to it to analyse validity is whether or not it truly reflects nature.

Politics of all kinds arise from concepts which are arguable. Systems built on those things obviously cause more problems than any they might solve.

So I would not try to design or build anything that cannot be observed to follow exactly the way nature works, rather than how we would wish that it works.

A fair system will simply provide a formal mechanism to reward us in the same way as nature does, in return for us adding our human value to it.

To ensure the system does not impose unnatural rules, it must have none built in.

Sunlight is indeed stored, in many forms, in fact our individual consumption from it, is almost exclusively from a stored form, but the end result is the same, we consume a little of it every day that we live, and we convert that by way of influencing our surroundings in return. That seems to be the only mechanism that needs to replicated, by monetisation, in order to ensure a financial reward for every human which reflects exactly the way nature rewards all living beings for existing.