I'd like to remind you that the process we are discussing is currently responsible for 1% of the world's energy consumption annually. That's clearly a "net-negative" cost. Feel free to review the Haber-Bosch process to confirm.
The reason the Haber process is so costly is because it uses very high pressures and temperatures to overcome the activation energy, even with the best catalysts we have. Not because creating ammonia from nitrogen and hydrogen needs energy. It's in effect wasted energy.
Enzymes can't change the cost equation, but luckily it's in our favor. If they can reduce the activation energy without wasting a ton of energy, it can be a net energy producer.
0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ammonia 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haber_process
However, I was refuting the GP's wrong assertion that the energy cost equation of this reaction shows that it cannot be a net energy producer.
It makes sense to optimize this step, because the energy equation shows the energy is just wasted as heat, as it's not contained in the compound itself.