H Veeder <hveeder...@gmail.com> wrote:
> No. LENR will be far cheaper than any other source. Eventually it will be >> thousands of times cheaper. >> >> >> > Some history on the phrase "too cheap to meter" > LENR will not be too cheap to meter. It will be free. The cost will be so close to zero it will be negligible. An ordinary person will use no more than a few dollars worth of water and nickel in a lifetime. The cost of equipment will be no greater than it is for today's power supplies. You don't count the cost of the electric motor in your food processor as an "energy cost." That's equipment. In the distant future it will be a thermoelectric cold fusion device, which will eventually be as cheap as today's electric motor. People will use energy the way we breathe the air; or the way I use hard disk storage these days; or the way you burn firewood when you live in 50 acres of woods. (Except that there is a cost to gathering and cutting the wood, which there will not be in case of LENR.) I commented on Strauss in my book: "It is foolish to dismiss the likes of von Neumann or Strauss. They were wrong by several decades, but in the long term they will undoubtedly be proven correct. With or without cold fusion, methods will be discovered to generate all of the energy we want." As explained in the link, "too cheap to meter" implies it might be sold on a flat fee basis by the power company. I say it will be far cheaper than that. Not sold by anyone. Not accounted for. There will be no power company. It will be built into every machine. Listing a charge for the energy supply in your car would be like charging you an extra 3 cents for one of the screws, or for a 1 cm square section of the carpet. - Jed
