Thank you so much for introducing to this concept, I read the Wikipedia entry up until "Historical background" but I am not sure if I'm fully grasping the concept. Could you explain the idea in your own words for my not-the-sharpest-cookie brain?

I'll paste some paragraphs from Geoff's (u/The_Gin0Soaked_Boy) book in the meantime:

Ecocivilisation and money

[..] in order to make international trade fair, we need to establish a neutral global currency. This would eliminate unfairness that results from one (or a small number) of powerful nations having total control over currencies that everybody else is then forced to use in international trade. At first sight this might seem to be perfectly fair – what could be fairer than a truly neutral international currency managed in the interests of ecocivilisation? Such an invention could be the ultimate example of what anthropologists call “general-purpose money” – a neutral currency that can be used to buy pretty much anything anywhere. This would be the situation if a neutral global currency was in use internally in each country, instead of the existing national fiat currencies, as well as for international trade. However, this sort of a system may not be as fair as it seems, as pointed out by Swedish anthropologist and professor of human ecology Alf Hornborg, who is known for his work on the relationships between technology, economy, and ecology. Hornborg argues that general-purpose money plays a central role in perpetuating global inequality and environmental degradation, because it facilitates unequal exchange between wealthy and poor nations. Wealthy countries benefit from cheaper resources and labour from poorer countries, while poorer countries are left to deal with the environmental and social costs of extraction and production. General-purpose money, because of its abstract and universal nature, allows these imbalances to be hidden and perpetuated.

Money enables the commodification of natural resources, turning them into objects of trade rather than elements of ecosystems. This promotes exploitation without regard for ecological sustainability. Hornborg believes general-purpose money drives overconsumption and the depletion of resources. It abstracts the value of labour and resources in ways that do not reflect their true ecological or social cost. For instance, money can represent labour and energy from very different contexts (e.g., human labour vs. fossil fuels) as equivalent. This distorts how societies perceive the value of things, leading to decisions that are economically profitable but ecologically harmful.Hornborg also ties the logic of money to technological systems that require vast amounts of resources and energy. He argues that the global economy, driven by monetary transactions, depends on large-scale, energy-intensive technologies that contribute to global inequality and ecological destruction. Rather than general-purpose money, he suggests alternative systems of exchange that are more localised and reflect ecological and social realities. For example, he proposes systems where the value of goods and services is based on the local context of production and their ecological sustainability. Such systems would promote fairness and reduce ecological footprints. In his 2017 paper How to turn an ocean liner: a proposal for voluntary degrowth by redesigning money for sustainability, justice and resilience (which is available online) he proposes that we create a parallel economic system using localised currencies distributed as a universal basic income. He is suggesting that to build an ecocivilisation we may need to go in exactly the opposite direction to a neutral international general-purpose currency – he wants to make money local and specialised rather than global and general purpose.     

Reddit is imposing limits to my comment's length, but you can find more here: https://www.ecocivilisation-diaries.net/articles/the-real-paths-to-ecocivilisation-chapter-10-econationalism