Perfect cash

We already know what an ideal bank transfer is: it is a well-thought-out cryptocurrency, slightly improved bitcoins (what needs to be improved has been discussed many times; I don’t want to develop this topic here, the text is not about that).

And what is perfect cash? The question is not as simple as it may seem.





To begin with, the familiar to us banknotes and coins in cash in the full sense of the word are not: they are also only symbols, “materialized promises”. And outside of some sufficiently developed, extensive and sustainable infrastructure they have no value. Even in recent history, there are no examples when the usual "cash" we rapidly depreciated, leaving with nothing those who diligently stored them - simply because the infrastructure, which had to guarantee the value of such money, ceased to do so. Obviously, ideal (well, or close to such) cash - just cash! - money should be, among other things, from such as somehow insured. And, if possible, from any infrastructure does not depend at all.

If you are now thinking about sheep (grain, concubines, iron or silver bullion ...) - then you are absolutely right: the ideal cash should be a deliberately sought-after self-sufficient product. But at the same time, there is one that is most convenient for physical exchange - but the same sheep are already poorly satisfied with this requirement. You can’t put a ram in your wallet, it’s easy to spoil rams without care, it’s difficult to select the twentieth of the ram, and so on.

Gold is just a convenient compromise: it is not enough, it is beautiful, durable and easily divided. But, in fact, this is already a transition to bank transfer: if silver can still be considered as a good material for making dishes, etc. products, then soft and heavy gold is practically hardly applicable. In fact, it is not suitable for anything other than jewelry (and some high-tech parts; but this application has appeared recently and is quite narrow). And the value of gold, like the value of any other non-cash money, is already the result of an explicit or implicit agreement. Which is also subject to very significant fluctuations.

A good example of "real cash" is the people's village currency, that is, moonshine: it is sufficiently in demand, stored for a long time, it is easy to divide. The value of such a currency depends little on the value of various non-cash money, anyone can “release” it, and it is difficult to track its movement. But you will not accumulate much wealth in it. A million of current rubles, expressed in such a currency, are already thousands of bottles. It is inconvenient not only to transport, but even to store. And with all the demand for alcohol, they will be able to settle accounts far from everywhere - especially in the modern city.

There is, however, a cash, in which there is no doubt that it is universal and in demand - it is energy. Kilowatt hours are needed by all and always. Yes, their practical value and cost may also vary depending on the time and place - but they are unlikely to fully depreciate (for an example, see the charts of oil prices). And if such a moment comes - that is, an infinite amount of energy will be available to everyone and for free - you can relax: it means that we are already in Paradise, earthly or heavenly.

Technically, however, it is difficult to pay kilowatt hours. A kilowatt-hour "out of the socket" costs a few rubles in Russia - well, and how to, say, store and transport energy equivalent to at least a thousand-dollar bill? A kilogram of gasoline at a gas station will cost the retail buyer about fifty - and if all the energy of the combustion of such a kilogram could be turned into electricity, we would get 11-12 kilowatt-hours at the output. The price tag is very close to the "rosette". That is, energy is, indeed, universal and in demand, but you don’t drag it in your wallet: hard and cumbersome.

Of course, if there was some kind of safe and easy-to-use nuclear fuel, the situation would have been different. But this is not yet invented.

Nevertheless, the solution of the problem, apparently, is still there - these are solar cells. Durable and strong solar panels the size of a large coin that can be combined with each other on the principle of a puzzle, connecting them in series or in parallel. If such an element has a power of 0.1 W, then in order to produce at least one kilowatt-hour, it must work 10 thousand hours. This is a lot even for a good location, where there can be 3-4 thousand sunny hours a year. Therefore, there is not yet any direct reference to the cost of such a “solar coin” to the cost of the energy it produces. To make it convenient to use such coins, they should be valued much more expensively than even their annual output in ideal conditions. That is, the "solar coin", like the usual cash, will still be "not quite a real cash." However, this would have been a serious step forward. Moreover, the fake of such a settlement means is not too meaningful in itself: if the “solar coin” gives out the standard power when illuminated with a standard light source, and it looks right (it has a standard form factor for such coins), then it means Any real, not fake. Wherever and whoever made it. Inflation of such “coins” (for example, because someone learned to make them — while maintaining the quality — very cheaply and threw a huge amount on the market), for obvious reasons, will have more positive consequences than negative ones. and it looks right (it has a form factor that is standard for such coins) - it means that, in any way, it is real, not fake. Wherever and whoever made it. Inflation of such “coins” (for example, because someone learned to make them — while maintaining the quality — very cheaply and threw a huge amount on the market), for obvious reasons, will have more positive consequences than negative ones. and it looks right (it has a form factor that is standard for such coins) - it means that, in any way, it is real, not fake. Wherever and whoever made it. Inflation of such “coins” (for example, because someone learned to make them — while maintaining the quality — very cheaply and threw a huge amount on the market), for obvious reasons, will have more positive consequences than negative ones.

Another compromise option of “almost real cash” could be a combination of standardized coins made of aluminum and fuel cells that can turn them into electricity. The complete oxidation of a kilogram of aluminum is theoretically capable of producing about 8 kilowatt-hours (which is curious, approximately at the cost of such a quantity of electricity, aluminum scrap in terms of a kilogram is bought up). Again, due to the relatively low energy intensity, such aluminum “fuel coins” do not make sense only energetically - that is, as already mentioned, this is not “real cash”. But they will not be able to completely depreciate either - just like batteries with batteries.

But still the variant of "solar coins" (and puzzles of them) seems more interesting. Especially if you think well about the standard, with a view to future development. I saved a thousand of such coins, made blinds out of them on the sunny side of a country house - and now the tablet with a mobile phone is always charged, and the headlamp too. Money should work, right? If a modern “solar coin” beats off its cost for 20 years of normal operation - this is 5 simple percent per year. Not a lot, but quite comparable with many bank rates.

Also popular now: