Search for a command to run...
Version 1.02 introduces minor structural clarifications and formatting improvements. No modifications were made to the core theoretical framework, mathematical formulations, or formal constructs. This update aligns the Zenodo record with the SSRN submission version. Version 1.01 introduces clarifications in the front matter to explicitly define the theoretical scope and structural positioning. No modifications were made to the core theoretical architecture, mathematical formulations, or formal constructs. This update improves structural precision and presentation consistency while preserving the original conceptual framework. --- ### Conceptual Orientation #### Quantification of Energy Value and Adjudication Conditions of Transitional Industries The central question of this study is simple: Can the value of energy be structurally quantified? Traditional energy industries operate under low-return, low-depreciation capital structures. Hydropower plants, for example, are designed to preserve capital stability over long time horizons. However, electricity prices vary depending on location, transmission constraints, and distance. In most industries, such price differences are not problematic. On the contrary, spatial and scarcity-based price differentials generate margins, activate logistics and distribution networks, and attract capital through marketing and intermediation. The energy sector operates differently. Value differentials that arise at the point of consumption do not proportionally translate into revenue differentials at the point of generation. Fluctuations in consumption-side value are not structurally converted into corresponding quantitative changes in producer income. In this sense, energy does not yet function as a fixed value unit. If energy could be converted directly—without additional processing—into measurable digital output, certain industries might allow its value to be expressed in a form that is comparable and less constrained by location. Cryptocurrency mining and AI computation illustrate such possibilities. In both cases, electricity is directly transformed into computational output. However, these industries do not share identical structural characteristics. The AI industry produces service value, yet its revenue realization mechanisms remain unstable. Capital may be invested, but recovery pathways remain uncertain. In contrast, cryptocurrency mining operates within a mature liquidation market. Production is directly linked to revenue, and revenue can be immediately converted into liquid assets. In structural terms: Production = Revenue = Immediate Monetization. For this reason, mining may function as an initial transitional pathway for testing the direct value conversion of energy. Yet a structural paradox emerges. Both mining and AI industries operate under high-depreciation CAPEX structures. Hardware replacement cycles are short, and capital consumption rates are high. We are therefore confronted with a contradiction: Low-depreciation energy capital must pass through high-depreciation transitional industries in order to achieve measurable value quantification. This contradiction constitutes the core problem. What is required is not optimism, but adjudication: • Can the transitional industry structurally manage depreciation? • Can CAPEX be preserved or at least controlled? • Can capital pass through the pathway without structural erosion? This study does not advocate for or against mining or AI industries. Its objective is to establish a structural adjudication framework that determines under what conditions capital can move into a quantifiable energy-value regime. The specific industry is secondary. If structural conditions are satisfied, it functions as a pathway. If not, it must be replaced. The focus is not the name of the industry, but the structural preservation of capital value. This work does not declare energy to be finance. However, if under certain structural conditions energy value can be quantified beyond locational constraints, then in limited industrial configurations energy may become interpretable as a financializable base asset. The purpose of this study is to propose a framework that adjudicates whether entry into such transitional industries is structurally justified.