If you looked at the post above mine you'd understand what he was doing with it. With current conversion ratios, you can melt cobble in a magma crucible to produce a bucket of lava for 20k MJ. That bucket of lava can then be fed into Geothermal Generators for 20k EU, so it's a 1:1 conversion of MJ to EU, which is much higher than any other conversion ratio outside of Turbines, which require a fairly large amount of steel for their upkeep. With this system there is 0 upkeep outside of fuel costs.
I know this thread is a little old, but I still have a question regarding this. I had the same setup going - 6 magmatic engines powering a magma crucible and the lava would feed both the engines as well as a geothermal generator. I would always use netherrack in the magma crucible, not cobblestone. I'm not sure of the exact numbers, but consider this:
Magma Crucible:
cobblestone: 20,000 MJ per 1000mb (yes, 1 bucket haha)
netherrack: 8,000 MJ per 1000mb
Now, you'd be feeding that lava back into the engines in order to power the magma crucible:
Magmatic Engine:
Efficiency rating = 90%
18,000 MJ per 1000mb
18,000 MJ - 20,000 MJ (to melt cobble into 1000mb) =
-2000 mb per cycle
18,000 MJ - 8,000 MJ (to melt netherrack into 1000mb) = +10,000 mb per cycle
So using cobblestone, you are actually operating at a loss of 2 buckets a cycle, but using netherrack, you gain 10 buckets a cycle that you can put into an IC tank to make sure both your magmatic engines as well as your Geothermal Generator is always supplied, allowing you to run whatever you want. Am I wrong in those numbers? Yes, you do get a 1:1 ratio of MJ to EU using cobblestone, but it's inefficient fuel-wise, and eventually you will run out of lava.