I can't speak about energy in such detail, its not my field, but I can say that its about control of the resources, so the technocrats think only energy that would be allowed is the one they control and monitor, that is why the whole Climate Agenda hoax, because everything is about "carbon", that way they can use beurocracy as a weapon of mass destruction. Off course Climate is not fast enough so they applied eco terrorism to burn forests and eco terrorists on the streets like "extinction rebellion".

In a nutshell, historic Technocracy is a utopian economic system that discards price-based economics in favor of energy or resource-based economics. Technocracy is so radically different from all current economic norms that it will stretch your mind to get a grasp of what it actually means and what it implies for a global society.

From the book: Technocracy rising - the Trojan horse of global transformation, 2014 by Patrick M. Wood

Technocracy Study Course

This treatise was specifically designed as a study course to fulfill the needs of individual groups that were meeting in homes, halls, churches and granges across the U.S. and Canada. Without top-down guidance, different groups were headed in different directions. The big question is, what was the ideology that Scott and Hubbert intended to implant?

The Preface of the Study Course details some basic elements of the organization itself:

• Technocracy, Inc. is a non-profit membership organization incorporated under the laws of the State of New York. It is a Continental Organization. It is not a financial racket or a political party.

• Technocracy, Inc. operates only on the North American Continent through the structure of its own Continental Headquarters, Area Controls, Regional Divisions, Sections and Organizers as a self-disciplined self-controlled organization….

• Technocracy declares that this Continent has a rendezvous with Destiny; that this Continent must decide between Abundance and Chaos within the next few years. Technocracy realizes that this decision must be made by a mass movement of North Americans trained and self-disciplined, capable of operating a technological mechanism of production and distribution on the Continent when the present Price System becomes impotent to operate….

• Technocracy offers the specifications and the blueprints of Continental physical operations for the production of abundance for every citizen.

Here we see, first, an organizational structure with an intensive hierarchy that roughly resembles a para-military organization: Headquarters, Controls, Divisions, Sections, etc. Second, it is interesting to note that they had to assure readers that Technocracy, Inc. was “not a financial racket or political party”; apparently they had been accused of both. Third, the Study Course is a blueprint for the future. As such, a blueprint normally contains diagrams of various elevations and details such as are necessary for the complete and forthwith construction of a building or structure. Thus, we should treat the Technocracy Study Course with due respect that its purpose is very clear; Scott and Hubbert intended to build a new society that did not currently exist.

In the Preface, a glimpse into the scope of Technocracy is seen:

Technocracy is dealing with social phenomena in the widest sense of the word; this includes not only actions of human beings, but also everything which directly or indirectly affects their actions. Consequently, the studies of Technocracy embrace practically the whole field of science and industry. Biology, climate, natural resources, and industrial equipment all enter into the social picture. [Emphasis added]

There is no doubt that Technocracy, Inc. intended to be an agent of change for a new social structure, although there was nothing that qualified either Scott or Hubbert to play the role of sociologists. That did not hinder them in the slightest. Simply put, they believed that the actions of human beings, both direct and indirect, were the root cause of societal problems and that they were directly related to biology, climate and natural resources. The absence of enlightened scientific management would doom mankind to certain destruction. It is not coincidental that the most visible and manipulative modern agents of change - Sustainable Development, Agenda 21, global warming, the U.N.’s green economy and the modern ecology movement, etc. - all hold to the same underlying assumptions.

Scott’s version of Technocracy was intensely focused on energy. Whether human or mechanical, all work involves the expenditure of energy. Humans and beasts of burden eat food, and machines consume electricity, gas, oil, etc. This emphasis on energy was most certainly fine-tuned by the presence of M. King Hubbert who was a well-educated and aspiring geophysicist trained in energy-related science. In 1955, Hubbert went on to create his “Peak Oil Theory”, commonly known as Hubbert’s Peak, that stated that known reserves of oil would peak and go into decline as demand and consumption increased to an unsustainable level. It is also not coincidental that Hubbert is often revered as a “founding father” of the modern environmental and Sustainable Development movements.

According to Scott and Hubbert, the distribution of energy resources and the goods they produce must be monitored and measured in order for their system to work. Every engineer knows that you cannot control what you cannot monitor and measure. Both Scott and Hubbert were keenly aware that constant monitoring and precise measuring would enable them to control society with scientific precision.

It is not surprising then that the first five out of seven requirements for Technocracy were:

• Register on a continuous 24 hour-per-day basis the total net conversion of energy.

• By means of the registration of energy converted and consumed, make possible a balanced load.

• Provide a continuous inventory of all production and consumption.

• Provide a specific registration of the type, kind, etc., of all goods and services, where produced and where used.

• Provide specific registration of the consumption of each individual, plus a record and description of the individual.

In 1934, such technology did not exist. Time was on the Technocrat’s side, however, because this technology does exist today, and it is being rapidly implemented to do exactly what Scott and Hubbert specified, namely, to exhaustively monitor, measure and control every facet of individual activity and every ampere of energy delivered and consumed in the life of such individual. The end result of centralized control of all society was clearly spelled out on page 240.

The end-products attained by a high-energy social mechanism on the North American Continent will be:

(a) A high physical standard of living, a high standard of public health, (ç a minimum of unnecessary labor, a minimum of wastage of non-replaceable resources, an educational system to train the entire younger generation indiscriminately as regards all considerations other than inherent ability - a Continental system of human conditioning.

The achievement of these ends will result from a centralized control with a social organization built along functional lines… [Emphasis added]

A word must be said about the above mention of the North American continent. Both Scott and Hubbert viewed the entire continent, from Mexico to Canada, as the logical minimum unit for Technocracy. They never specified how such a merger might take place. If Roosevelt had become dictator as proposed by Porter, perhaps he might have led a military campaign to conquer our two closest neighbors. Whatever the case, it was presumptuous from the start to assume that Canada and Mexico would willingly participate in Technocracy’s utopian scheme, giving up their respective political systems simply because a group of radical engineers suggested it. What is particularly disturbing is Scott’s and Hubbert’s total disregard for the nation-state and national sovereignty; they would have wiped away both with the stroke of a pen. It is not coincidental that today’s call for a New World Order is predicated on the same assumed necessity of eradicating national sovereignty and the structure of the nation-state.

The Technocracy Study Course also called for money to be replaced by Energy Certificates which would be issued to all citizens at the start of each new energy accounting period. These certificates could be spent for goods and services during the defined period but would expire just as a new allotment for the next period would be sent. Thus, the accumulation of private wealth would not be possible. Neither Scott nor Hubbert viewed private property or accumulated wealth as allowable in a Technocracy. After all, it was capitalism that caused all the trouble in the first place, and the accumulation of wealth due to ownership of private property was the primary culprit. In a Technocracy, then, all property, resources and the means of production would be held in a public trust for the benefit of all. They reasoned that since all needs for work, leisure and health were to be so abundantly met, people would willingly trade private property for the utopian dream.

By 1937, the topic of Technocracy had been discussed, analyzed, argued over, rehashed and regurgitated. This was an inevitable outcome given the complex implications of trading one economic system for another. People’s fears were ignited by the prospect of such change, and so there was never an end to heated interchanges. By this time, however, Technocracy, Inc. finally produced a concise definition that adequately revealed what it was really all about:

Technocracy is the science of social engineering, the scientific operation of the entire social mechanism to produce and distribute goods and services to the entire population of this continent. For the first time in human history it will be done as a scientific, technical, engineering problem. [Emphasis added]

In short, the heartbeat of Technocracy is Sustainable Development. It calls for an engineered society where the needs of mankind are in perfect balance with the resources of nature. Furthermore, this necessitates the “decoupling of resource use and environmental impacts from economic growth” as stated above. In other words, the driver is resource availability rather than economic growth.

The introduction of the PAGE brochure reiterates this idea:

“A green economy is one that results in improved human well-being and social equity, while significantly reducing environmental risks and ecological scarcities”.

The bottom line is that the U.N. agenda for a green economy is nothing more than warmed-over Technocracy from the 1930s.

Technocracy’s utopian siren call in the 1930s promised the same human well-being, social equity and abundance beyond measure. Technocrats failed to deliver on their promises and were generally rejected by society by the end of the 1930s.

It is necessary to review exactly how the United Nations arose in the first place, if for no other reason than to tie these policies to the same global elite as represented by the Trilateral Commission.

In the heat of the Great Depression during the 1930s, prominent scientists and engineers proposed a utopian energy-based economic system called Technocracy that would be run by those same scientists and engineers instead of elected politicians. Although this radical movement lost momentum by 1940, it regained status when it was conceptually adopted by the elitist Trilateral Commission (co-founded by Zbigniew Brzezinski and David Rockefeller) in 1973 to be become its so-called "New International Economic Order."

In the ensuing 41 years, the modern expression of Technocracy and the New International Economic Order is clearly seen in global programs such as Agenda 21, Sustainable Development, Green Economy, Councils of Governments, Smart Growth, Smart Grid, Total Awareness surveillance initiatives and more.

Wood contends that the only logical outcome of Technocracy is Scientific Dictatorship, as already seen in dystopian literature such as Brave New World by Aldous Huxley (1932) and Nineteen Eighty-Four by George Orwell (1948), both of whom looked straight into the face of Technocracy when it was still in its infancy.

"Does the USA government have stockholders? Absolutely! Global corporations and banks, NGOs and globalist foundations. Furthermore, they expect a return on their investments, namely, privatized “sweetheart” deals that lock out competitors. In many cases, this gives the “private” party a monopoly over the services offered. Citizens are only seen as consumers.

Prior to the 1993 Clinton/Gore initiative, the goal of government was to serve the people. Now the goal is not to serve the people but rather to serve its stockholders. Previously, the goal was to facilitate a price-based, free-market economic system. Now the goal is to facilitate an energy-based green economy predicated on Sustainable Development and Agenda 21 policies.

The bottom line is that our Federal government, as represented by the Executive Branch and all of its agencies, no longer represents the citizens of the nation, and that is why Congress and the Constitution have been effectively neutered. Lastly, we see the clear trail of Trilateral Commission members from start to finish.

Yes, on global scale. I think they are trying to kill the economy and dollar in particular to try and implement their crypto currency controlled by world bank. Feudalism by another name, basically. Slavery.

That is why now they are pushing for this type of monstrosity, to print the money and create hyperinflation, which will devalue US dollar to the point of being worthless. Than they will try their "great reset" with their currency as world currency. I don't think it will work, but that is their big plan. So don't expect common sense or attempt for these "Bureaucrats? Communists? Bankers?" all the same scum, to help us. They are all criminals. Straight up.

@Krunoslav They are obviously desperate to try to prop up their unjust system! Thankfully, God has other plans.

@dmatic Yes, they are watering at the mouth thinking they will be masters of the universe, so much so they are telling us into our faces we are stupid and worthless. Meanwhile I'm hearing peasants oiling their guillotines.