2026-01-10 16:34:46

An interesting economic hypothesis is circulating: energy is the true measure of value, and in the future, the traditional monetary system may be replaced by a currency mechanism backed by energy.

Bitcoin, as a representative of proof-of-energy consumption, has demonstrated this logic, but can this idea be extended to other asset forms? For example, can we design a digital currency where each unit corresponds to a certain energy quota (such as X kilowatt-hours), similar to the historical gold standard—where the US dollar was linked to gold—could an energy standard be feasible in the future?

This involves not only technical feasibility but also a redefinition of the essence of money. With the development of renewable energy and on-chain settlement, the combination of energy and crypto assets may be worth exploring.

BTC2,52%

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

20 Likes

Reward
20
5
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

RugpullAlertOfficer

· 01-12 03:18

Energy-backed? It sounds like directly incorporating mining costs into the currency's attributes, but can it really be implemented... Basically, it's just shifting inflation pressure to electricity prices. But if renewable energy costs drop, this system collapses. Bitcoin has already proven a problem: you can't price all assets based on energy consumption. The logical flaw is too big. Energy-backed sounds sophisticated, but in reality, it's just a new way to extend miners' lifespan... The gold standard has already failed. Do you really think energy-backed can save the world? You're overthinking it, buddy. This idea is interesting but lacks a practical implementation path. Who will absorb the fluctuations in energy prices?

View OriginalReply0

HodlTheDoor

· 01-10 17:02

Energy-based? It sounds quite idealistic, but is this logic actually feasible in reality... The issue of Bitcoin mining consuming electricity has always been criticized, and an energy-based standard might actually intensify this contradiction. This idea is fresh, but it seems even more difficult to implement than the gold standard. With such large fluctuations in energy prices, using it as an anchor... I have some doubts. Renewable energy is a good direction, but with such significant regional differences in energy prices, how can a unified standard be established?

View OriginalReply0

ser_ngmi

· 01-10 16:54

Energy-backed? It sounds romantic, but can it really be anchored, or is it just another Ponzi scheme. --- BTC mining is essentially converting electricity costs into consensus. Can this logic be applied to other cryptocurrencies? It doesn't seem that simple. --- So, basically, it's trying to replace gold with energy as collateral? The problem is that energy is renewable, whereas gold has a different scarcity. --- It's interesting, but if renewable energy becomes cheap, wouldn't that cause the monetary system to collapse? Haha. --- Money supported by energy—what happens if there's a power outage? There are issues at the microeconomic level. --- Isn't this just trying to generalize the PoW mechanism? Just because it's technically feasible doesn't mean it's economically viable. --- At least it's more reliable than printing money with a fiat currency machine. At least energy is real. --- Gold standard was eventually abandoned; energy backing might meet the same fate. --- On-chain settlement ✓ energy quotas ✓ sounds like a perfect plan, but centralized energy distribution is another black hole. --- I just want to know, who gets to define how much one kilowatt-hour is worth? That power is too great.

View OriginalReply0

LiquidityOracle

· 01-10 16:50

Relying on energy as a standard sounds good, but energy prices are also crazy... At least gold can be accumulated, but how do you store electricity?

View OriginalReply0

FOMOSapien

· 01-10 16:46

The energy standard sounds impressive, but what about reality? Energy costs have been fluctuating constantly. Using this as an anchor currency isn't just inviting trouble?

View OriginalReply0