It's not really proof-of-burn as described in that wiki page. You aren't giving up any currency, just a smaller proof of work.
To avoid misunderstandings, I'd replace or explain the word "burn" then.
You are building quite a complicated scheme to to avoid a hardware-upgrade race which I'm not convinced that it really works the way you intend it to (ASICs compete with ASICs, GPU with GPU). Being engineer I tend to believe in simple solutions. Complicated solutions usually do not behave well in unforeseen situations. Let them build ASICs. Let them adopt whatever new technology. Just make sure that the energy use stays at a reasonable level. High enough to get your link to real world basket (if it's too low, people might find ways to get the energy "for free", like electricity thefts) , but low enough not to really matter ecologically.
But looking at Decrits potential energy use I fear that
the problem I pointed out earlier for the case of bitcoin is not solved entirely by your proposal.
As Decrits shall have a stable value, energy use for mining doesn't rise with the coin's value like in bitcoin's case. Instead, you're proposing to adjust the mining reward (in number of Decrits) to the demand for the coin. So if demand rises, energy consumption rises. Then you propose:
B. Producing Energy Efficient Currency All of the difficulties associated with minting are in place so that new currency is created only when the value of Decrits are profitably above their cost to produce. However, this is not at all energy efficient. To provide energy efficiency in currency creation, free money will be distributed to users of the network (not minters) based on minted money. 5x the MB award will be given to either the sender or receiver of a random set of transactions during a certain time frame before (and potentially after) the MB based on multiples of the tx fee; 5x will be awarded to a random selection of accounts based on each account's percentage of the total amount of currency in existence. If a second MB is started within a time window of the first, these multiples will increase to give out more free money in response to network expansion. More details: at the end of
this post and
here.
Giving 10x the award to somebody else than the miner is just a leverage ratio to energy use but it scales all the same. But I see you propose to adjust this ratio according to the number of transactions. Can you provide more info on this adjustment algorithm? How can you make sure that energy use stays at reasonable level?