>They don’t even necessarily need to be cheaper than all existing methods.
That doesn't make sense. Why would anyone use them instead of the more efficient alternatives? For artistic reasons?
That doesn't make sense. Why would anyone use them instead of the more efficient alternatives? For artistic reasons?
>They only need to be cheaper than (IMO inevitable) carbon tax penalties plus the cost of these bricks compared to current methods, which is a rapidly falling curve.
this clearly indicates OP suggests they will become de facto cheaper once the traditionally externalized costs of environmental impact are accounted for.
The comparison is between this and carbon free solar-thermal for energy storage. Saying it doesnt have to be cheaper than solar-thermal simply isnt true.