The original claim,"...would be too energy intensive and thus costly..." is based on the assumptions of currently employed processes and methods.
Brian was neither right nor wrong. He pointed out an obvious issue, and I provided a solution.
I placed patent numbers for devices and processes which make the energy requirements a moot point.

You responded,"Perpetual motion machine for sale. Contact Steve."

As far as I am concerned, I presented a solution to the problem of energy requirements.

The Bedini patent utilizes a method of generating energy through asymmetrical regauging, creating an open thermodynamic system far from equilibrium.
Kondeputi and Prigogine have pointed out that sharp gradients are a known area that violates the second law of thermodynamics.
Although it will require:
1. An acceptance of the fact that electrical engineering has not kept up with advances and discoveries in physics.
2. The fact that this doesn't utilize a closed current loop.

If you feel that I presented unjustifiable, "...extraordinarily specious arguments...", I apologize. I was merely responding in the same sardonic manner in which you responded to my suggestion of a solution to the problem posed.