Yup. But I was pointing more at the fact that the notion of "price" is not very useful here. If we're talking about mankind's future, money should be brought back to the level of "minor technical detail".

Price is a proxy for "how much resources would it take to roll this out at scale." That's important regardless of how your economy works.

Price also tells us whether the new energy source would require government support, or require less resources than building and fueling a new fossil plant, or (if extremely cheap) would prompt people to shut down even brand-new fossil plants because the new energy source is cheaper than the cost of fuel.

Money is what we currently have as a means of getting a consensus about what is important for mankind's future and how to allocate resources based on importance and expected payoff. It's not the best system, but it's hard to introduce alternatives.

I agree that it should be that way.

Price is important to motivate people to develop nuclear fusion technology, and to finally build commercial fusion plants when the time comes.

Nuclear fission is a superior power technology already, but we've largely stopped building new plants because of the exorbitant upstart costs compared to other technologies.