CALC-045
Null measurement: forward-projected firmed terrestrial LCOE
What this is
This is the project's own arithmetic, published in full so it can be checked rather than taken on trust. It is not a source. Every input it uses is cited to a record, and the conclusion it reaches only carries as far as those inputs do.
Feeds CLM-0546. Answers QST-004. SEARCH-METHOD, not arithmetic.
Why it was needed. The SBSP economic case is argued against a terrestrial comparator at a future date. If nobody has computed a rigorous firmed terrestrial cost at that date, then both sides of the argument are using a static comparator, and that is a defect in the debate rather than in either position.
Corpora searched.
| Corpus | Result |
|---|---|
| The held corpus | nothing |
| Fresh general web search | nothing |
What exists instead, and why neither is the thing sought.
| Piece | What it is | Why it is not a forward firmed LCOE | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lazard Cost of Firming Intermittency | 2026 snapshot, real market prices | a snapshot, and Lazard states LCOE+ "is explicitly not a forecasting tool" | CLM-0264 |
| NREL/NLR ATB storage-plus-generation | forward projection to 2050 | 4-hour onsite storage only, not a capacity-accredited firm figure | CLM-0260 |
Result: no source publishes a rigorous, resource-adequacy-standard or ELCC-based firmed terrestrial LCOE projected to the 2040s or 2050s.
Conclusion. The two pieces that would answer the question exist and have never been joined by anyone.
Where this fails, and it fails harder than the other nulls here. The search was general WebSearch. Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex and Crossref were not used, which is what the task brief for that pass specified. This is a weaker null than CALC-040 or CALC-047 and should be re-run against the academic indices before it is quoted. CALC-036 is the model for how that re-run should be recorded.
Cite this
energyaperture.com/calc/calc-045
CALC-045. The working above, not a source document.