Figure shows the specific capital cost (Figure ) and capital cost share of major components (Figure ) for each case. The net electricity generated from each plant in MW e is shown in black at the top of the bars in Figure . The total capital cost of each power plant in $M is shown in white at the top of the bars in Figure . The per-well mass flowrate used is reported after its name. Figure shows there are large discrepancies across all three tools for the low temperature gradient cases, but in the Tungsten Mountain case, the cost estimates are all relatively similar. The primary reason for this agreement is that the electricity generation is much higher than in the other two cases (i.e. about 30 MW e vs. 3 MW e ). There is greater generation in part because the high transmissivity (10 -9 m 3 compared to 10 -11 m 3 ) permits high mass flowrates in each well, and the Tungsten case uses four well pairs instead of one well pair. As a result, when the cost is divided by high power generation, as in Figure , the tools produce similar specific capital cost estimates even though the total capital costs differ by more than 20 M$. Even in the Tungsten scenario, however, the GETEM specific capital costs increase from about 4 M$/MW e to about 6 M$/MW e when the default 110 kg/s per-well flowrate is used instead of 250 kg/s.