Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

NameUnavail t1_j1v5hsm wrote

That's not at all what it means. And it makes no sense. Net energy positive has nothing at all to do with cost or price of development. And as I said, comparing output value to production cost (rather than running cost) also makes no sense without a time span.

If you run it long enough, even a trillion dollar reactor that produces only a milliwatt of power will eventually have produced more value out than it's production cost.

2

PeterM_from_ABQ t1_j1v8yoc wrote

Just want to point out that you also need to figure in operating and maintenance costs, and cost of capital. If you invest a trillion dollars, you need to generate at least $50B-ish per year just to cover the interest on the loan. You ain't gonna make $50-B-ish per yera on a milliwatt. You also need to consider opportunity cost. If you took that trillion and invested in gas fired turbine plants, you'd get back your investment....

1