What Net Gain Means for Power
A machine can produce fusion power without producing net electricity; the honest distinction matters for any resilient-power claim.
Fusion power is not net electricity
It is easy to conflate a machine that fuses with a machine that delivers net electricity to a base. They are different. The breeder's design point is a scientific gain Q_sci of 3.076 at 85.0 MW of fusion power — a gain measure, not a statement that the machine powers a base. There is no hardware net-gain claim before FOAK.
The chain from gain to delivered power
- Scientific gain (Q_sci) compares fusion power to heating power in the plasma.
- Engineering gain accounts for the whole plant's power draw — magnets, cryogenics, systems.
- Net electricity is what remains for the base after all plant loads.
- Availability then determines how much of the time that net power is delivered.
Why this candor matters for defense
A resilient-power claim must rest on net delivered electricity at high availability, not on a scientific gain figure. Kronos uses the frozen design numbers exactly and does not translate a Q_sci of 3.076 into a delivered-power promise. The burner's own net-power case is subject to its plug, regime, and fuel gates, none closed today.
The honest statement: these machines are design-and-simulation studies aiming at net power, with a defined first hardware step at breeder FOAK (~2030). Net gain in hardware is a milestone ahead, not a present fact — and resilient sovereign power depends on reaching it.
Delivered power is the real test
A resilient-power claim must rest on net delivered electricity at high availability, not on a scientific gain figure. Kronos uses the frozen design numbers exactly — Q_sci 3.076 at 85.0 MW for the breeder — and does not translate a gain measure into a delivered-power promise. Net gain in hardware is a milestone at breeder FOAK (~2030), not a present fact, and resilient sovereign power depends on reaching it.