Thanks for the respect! I understand your points and I think you are correct in light of today's technology, but respectfully I think you're being a bit pessim

Thanks for the respect! I understand your points and I think you are correct in light of today's technology, but respectfully I think you're being a bit pessimistic about the future. (I'm an Electrical Engineer, qualified to work in power systems, but ended up working in data networks and RF.) What I'm envisaging doesn't rule out voltage transformations. A "packet" could have its voltage or current transformed as required to suit the mode of transmission. Nothing to say it has to remain as DC either. The idea is that the energy (or some other property) would remain the same (apart from losses). The packets might also be conceptual in some transmission modes. For example, take a bunch of "packets" all with the same DC voltage, butt them up in time and you have a regular DC transmission line with a constant voltage and current, the main difference being that you now have an embedded/parallel data stream which logically delineates the packet boundaries. This data stream allows the receiving station to treat each packet differently if required. The talk of non-specialists wiring systems doesn't mean your hairdresser will be running a 1MV transmission line across the suburb. Rather they could wire something like a house in a risk free manner with no need for a specialist electrician. The idea is that a source would be measuring what it is driving, so safety is inherent and serious power would only be delivered if the measurement says it is safe to do so. Yes, this is pie-in-the-sky talk. It's not a design, but a collection of wild ideas which might turn out to be practical. It's the sort for thing one talks about with colleagues at the pub, but those colleagues do include academics with high level power engineering qualifications and in conversations they are also thinking along similar lines.