About The Blog

Debate at the intersection of business, technology and culture in the world of digital money, both commercial and government, a blog born from the Digital Money Forum in London and sponsored by Consult Hyperion

Advertisers

Money Links

Technorati

  • Add to
Technorati Favorites

License

  • Creative Commons

    Attribution Non-Commercial Share Alike

    This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution - Noncommercial - Share Alike 2.0 UK: England & Wales License.

    Please note that by replying in this Forum you agree to license your comments in the same way. Your comments may be edited and used but will always be attributed.

« The first rung | Main | Innovate or not? »

WInd power

By Dave Birch posted Feb 19 2010 at 10:12 AM

[Dave Birch] I wonder if this means something. In the last couple of months I've been invited to a couple of meetings where the topic of alternative currencies and wind power (and other renewables) has come up. I'm starting to think there might be something in this. One of the problems that windpersons have to deal with is that they need lots of money to build windmills, but because the electricity produced costs more than electricity produced by, say, coal then no power company will invest unless bribed. We might decide that the wind is better for us overall, but we need a mechanism to align social costs with private costs.

How can the future of money have anything to do with this? Well, there is a neo-Bono, neo-Hayek compass that might point us in an interesting direction and there was a discussion about it at a New Economic Foundation seminar that I was invited to.

Remember noted lateral thinker Edward de Bono's pamphlet on "The IBM Dollar" written for the Centre for the Study of Financial Innovation all those years ago? The essence of his argument was that switching money around is more efficient than dealing in equities and bonds so that a company wanting to raise money for a new idea should, instead of selling stock or taking out loans, simply print its own currency that is redeemable against future services. This currency would initially trade at a huge discount, but over time (assuming the company was successful) it would rise.

So, here's the idea. A community interest company (CIC) forms to sell the future output of not-yet-built windmills. It prints a currency -- Edgar Kampers was calling these "KiVas", pronounced key-vahs, at the NEF seminar and I think that sounds rather good -- with a start date five years on but no end date. These are the sold to the general public. Utility companies agree that they will take them in payment starting in one year. Thus, people buy and accumulate the kivas as a cheap hedge for their electricity bills (in the UK, the government's plan to ensure that there is not enough power to go round by 2015 is well on its way) and the CIC obtains "hard" currency to buy windmills (although some of those suppliers might also accept discounted kivas if they are heavy electricity users). The kivas become a currency traded on the foreign exchange markets just like any other currency.

Why would anyone bother to hold kivas? Well, here's where the neo-Bono argument crossed with the neo-Hayekian argument. The kivas ought to be a stable currency, because we will always want to use energy. I might choose to hold part of my pension portfolio in kivas rather than dollars, because when I retire (a vanishingly unlikely contingency, but there you go) I will still want to have light in my house for the same number of hours everyday but I have no idea what a euro will be worth: thus I obtain stability by stashing away light (in the form of kivas) rather than dollars.

These opinions are my own (I think) and presented solely in my capacity as an interested member of the general public [posted with ecto]

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c4fd753ef01310f1cbd9e970c

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference WInd power:

Comments

The comments to this entry are closed.