In my humble opinion, no one will want to burn, but if there are lost wallets.
--snip--
I'm defenately not involved in this project, but if i had to take an educated guess, the burn address would not be used to burn coin on the bitcoin chain, but rather to burn coins on OP's "bitcoin eco" chain.
The OP indicated he cloned bitcoin, changed the POW algo to POS and premined >21M coins. He then indicated he'll give btc holders the chance to switch to his chain and afterwards he promises (eventough you'd have to take his word for it) that he'll burn any leftover coin.
So, i assume the burn address will be used to burn leftover "bitcoin eco", since nobody in his right mind would burn btc (worth ~$40k) to get an equivalent amount "btc eco" (worth ~$0 at this point in time).
What the OP is doing is nothing new... Byteball (for example) had a similar distribution method.
On the other hand, if the OP was serious about distributing his "eco" altcoin according to current BTC holdings, he should have forked at a certain blockheight in the future, hence everybody who would have had funds on the original chain before the forkheight, would have also had funds on the "eco" altcoin chain... And by doing this, he would have been able to incentivise POS mining, since not all "eco" coins would have been mined, and there would have been some room left for block rewards. Also, by forking instead of premining, he would have built something that didn't rely on trusting him to burn all his premine, but he would have had a project that was completely verifyable and trustless.
But hey, bitcoin is open source, OP is free to try and experiment if he wants to... On the other hand, his "green" (white) paper contains little to no techical background, and his questions sometimes make me wonder if he has sufficient technical knowledge to pull something like this off.....