This is a profoundly bad idea, and will likely never happen. The OP makes the assertion that quality of life is directly proportional to energy usage, so creat

This is a profoundly bad idea, and will likely never happen. The OP makes the assertion that quality of life is directly proportional to energy usage, so creating more energy is the primary way to grow an economy. While this is true to a limited extend, do we really /want/ it to be true? Using energy as the measurement of an economy's size would naturally lead to economies across the globe investing in raw energy output, rather than other equally (or more) important areas of technological progress like making future infrastructure more energy-efficient. This wouldn't be so bad if it weren't for the fact that the sources of energy we most commonly turn to today, fossil fuels, are inherently limited and have huge negative externalities. We need to come up with a standard that convinces markets to grow the standard of living in a way that doesn't require increasing the energy supply. If we don't, we risk exacerbating the global environmental and resource crises.