You have contradicted yourself. By your own admission, Bitcoin is backed by the world's energy and computing resources (at least what is used on the network)
All energy and computing resources used on mining Bitcoin are spent and cannot be used for anything else. The concept of "backing" means that resources are available, and the entity backing them merely represents them. Stock is backed by the services and products a company provides. Fiat currency is backed by their respective part of the world economy. Resources are not depleted by backing those.
Saying Bitcoin is "backed" by the world's energy and computing resources is like saying that a wildfire is "backed" by a state's forestry reserves.
Let's also not forget that every bitcoin contributes massively to the destruction of our planet. From wasting massive amounts of energy (as much as a modestly sized developed nation) to wasting massive amounts of resources in terms of computing hardware.
>All energy and computing resources used on mining Bitcoin are spent and cannot be used for anything else.
Bitcoin mining can be used to monetize excess energy (especially with renewables) that would otherwise be wasted, so what you said is not entirely true.
The statement you quoted is true, regardless of your assertion. As for addressing your assertion by itself:
Energy storage and distribution networks constantly strive to minimize unstorable excess energy. Even under the assumption that that will not happen sufficiently, or, less hypothetically, by only taking into account the currently achieved levels: What you propose cannot be enforced. By design.
Bitcoin is decentralized, and everyone with an Internet connection and energy available can participate. That includes anybody with an even mediocre Internet connection and access to precious resources that can be converted into a single Bitcoin block and a massive amount of heat, for personally enriching transaction fees and a block reward in return. One of Bitcoin's very core principles makes gapless regulation unlikely, if not impossible.
What is your proposal for guaranteeing that only non-storable, non-transmissible excess energy is used for Bitcoin, other than individual goodwill?
Bitcoin isn't backed by energy,.it burns it. If a real estate bond was backed by physical buildings the same way that Bitcoin is backed by energy then the bond would be created by burning the buildings down.
The opposite is the case: whatever backs up Bitcoin's current valuation, it's all that allows the system access to those energy resources. Those energy resources in no sense support Bitcoin's valuation.
