The Ghost in the Ledger - by Russell Warner - Banapana
SubscribeSign in
The Ghost in the Ledger<br>On Energy Allocation, Traditional Economic Assumptions and Algorithmic Actors (AI)
Russell Warner<br>Jun 17, 2026
Share
Our economic game with AI will never be fair to us due to information asymmetry<br>If you have ever stared at the potential of a blinking cursor, prepared to receive an answer to a query or even a disjointed list, you have stood in the midst of a quiet revolution—not a nascent one. It is not merely a revolution of transistors and code, though it is certainly that. This revolution is more esoteric and really more of a rebellion. It is a rebellion against the fundamental blueprints we have used to understand collective economic human behavior since Adam Smith wrote “The Wealth of Nations” in 1776 (also celebrating a semiquincentennial anniversary).<br>To understand the scale of this rupture, one must first look at what a vast collection of modern economic thinkers actually agree on. For all their ferocious debates over interest rates, tax policy, and the virtues of the free market, it’s fair to say that most mainstream economists share a remarkably unified view of their model. They see the world through a concept known as the Circular Flow Model. It is an elegant, self-contained perpetual-motion machine. In this model, households provide labor and capital to firms; firms use that labor and capital to produce goods and services; and money spins in the opposite direction to pay for it all.<br>Thanks for reading Banapana! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.
Subscribe
The Economics 101 textbook example of the Circular Flow Digram.<br>Within this symmetrical loop, two foundational economic assumptions hold the entire apparatus together. The first is Rationality—the idea that individual actors possess consistent preferences and will, as best they can, calculate the choice that maximizes their personal well-being. The second is the belief that value is fundamentally subjective, created entirely by the human mind. If human beings want a lot of something, it becomes scarce. If humans randomly changed their preferences from a car to a pile of dirt and then moments later a toaster, none of this works. And if firms automate the labor required to make products that fulfill those preferences, that scarcity should be reduced.<br>Two more foundational assumptions in economics provide the speed of the flow around the circular flow diagram. Individuals respond to incentives. If firms raise prices, the flow of money from households to firms is reduced. If wages doubled but laborers put that money in their mattresses the flow of money would stop up. Further, when individuals make decisions, they do so at the margins. They don’t provide all their labor, they measure, when it is feasible and legal, the value of the next hour of labor versus not working.<br>It is a comforting, mathematical vision of human progress. And it is currently colliding head-first with a dual reality that standard economic models are completely unequipped to handle: the stubborn laws of thermodynamics and the rise of algorithmic actors.<br>The Weight of a Thought
Where the model first begins to fray, we must look at the critical element that it leaves out. A standard introductory economics textbook will discuss the scarcity of time, labor, and financial capital. You will find almost no mention of energy. There is a school of thought called Biophysical Economics, founded by Nicholas Georgescu-Roegen in 1971 who compared the circular flow model to a locomotive that must be driven by the exchange of tickets and money between passengers and conductors, entirely ignoring the coal and smoke.
The Circular Flow Diagram with the Biosphere taken into account.<br>Traditional economics has long treated nature as a passive passenger—just another column on a spreadsheet under “Land” or “Raw Materials.” If oil gets scarce, the model assumes that the invisible hand of the market mechanism will incentivize humans to invent a clever substitute, like solar panels or fusion reactors. The system assumes infinite growth is possible because human ingenuity is the primary driver of value and that value system is in a vacuum.<br>Biophysical economists have long pointed out that this view violates the First and Second Laws of Thermodynamics. Energy cannot be created or destroyed, only transformed, and when that transformation occurs, there is inevitably waste. You can not only not win the energy game, you can never even break even. The economy is not a self-contained circle; it is an open subsystem of a finite, closed ecosystem. It takes in low-entropy, highly ordered energy (like oil, sunlight, and raw minerals) and inevitably spits out high-entropy, dissipated waste heat and pollution. Labor and capital are not magical sources of value; they are merely transformers of energy.<br>This brings us to one of the great fallacies of the artificial intelligence age: the...