Casey Handmer

Well, I think everything before about 2030 is spoken for at this point.

Yeah, you could make more turbines.

The funny thing is it's actually relatively expensive, I think, to spool up additional production of these turbines, for example.

So actually, here's one thing you have to grapple with sooner or later.

Conventional power generation is a steam engine.

So you have some kind of chemical that you find inside the Earth that is out of chemical equilibrium with the atmosphere, and you burn it and it makes heat.

It could be coal, it could be gas, oil, whatever.

You're going to be the true birds and bees here.

Yeah, exactly.

And it makes heat, and you boil water, and the water goes through some kind of mechanical contrivance that creates motion, and then that motion twists a magnet and generates an electrical field, which then pushes electrons down wires, which then push electrons through a series of gates that then approximate thinking.

It's kind of complicated.

But the key step in this, which is converting heat into electricity, in the most efficient, most common, and this is the same if it's a nuclear plant or a gas plant, combined cycle plant or a coal plant or whatever, is what's called a Brayton cycle.

A jet engine on an aircraft is a Brayton cycle as well.

And just any time you have a Brayton cycle with a bunch of Inconels spinning at high speed, it's just going to cost you a bunch of money.

Sorry, because it's inherently inefficient or what?

I guess, yeah.

I don't actually know what the retail price is.

I would suspect that if their price is flexible, it would have gone up a lot.

But if I recall correctly, it's like $35 a megawatt hour is just the flag for cost for... How much, right?

$35 a megawatt hour, just for the Brayton cycle, right?