Ah, but if there's good and bad energy, as you say, you're mixing up the scientific, objective account with a more philosophical or religious one. The two discourses can be combined, but we should be clear about the limitations of each.

For instance, isn't nature winding down via entropy? So are you really saying that all natural energy is good, while the humanistic use of energy for progressive purposes is generally bad? Natural systems build on each other but are also quite destructive. Wouldn't we have to destroy much (the wilderness) to build something new, such as civilization? We'd be foolish to destroy ourselves in the process, of course.

In any case, the talk of good and bad energy seems subjective. "Sustainability" might be a more objective concept, but as I said, the universe is winding down via entropy, although that will take trillions of years to happen.