Energy diversity is one of the US's greatest strengths. So I would prefer to base an energy economy around as many sources of energy as possible because different energy sources are most efficient with different applications.

Hydrogen peroxide isn't a great energy source because it naturally decomposes even without a catalyst. This happens fast enough that your bottle of H2O2 has an expiration date of a couple years because it looses much of the hydrogen peroxide in that time. It is also catalytically accelerated by ultra-violet light so it needs to be stored carefully. Hydrocarbons, on the other hand, are way more stable chemicals.

At best, freshly generated H2O2 can be used to power small devices. I've seen little cars (less than a pound) powered by them, though I have heard of some go-cart sized as well.

My answer is, no. You certainly can't make a competitive economy based on hydrogen peroxide (relative to all our other energy sources), and it is unlikely you could even make a complete economy, either (even when you include original sources such as solar/nuclear/other).

You would need a source of hydrogen peroxide.

Are you trying to meet women, or start a business venture, LOL!

By the way adding nanoparticles to water can make water turn to steam before it even boils..using two tiny solar panels of only a few cm to heat it. Then you can have free energy anywhere and go back to steam cars, which had almost unlimited power.

Rice University researchers unveil solar-energy technology using nanoparticles to heat water without boiling it, using tiny solar panels only a few square centimeters [news.rice.edu]