Good day and thank you for standing by. Welcome to the Gevo Incorporated Quarter Three 2024 Earnings Conference Call. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. After the speakers' presentation, there will be a question-and-answer session. Please be advised that today's conference is recorded. I would now like to turn the conference over to your speaker today, Dr. Eric Frey, Vice President of Finance and Strategy. Eric, you may begin.

Good afternoon, everyone. Thank you for joining us today's call to discuss Gevo's third quarter 2024 results. I'm Eric Frey, Vice President of Finance and Strategy at Gevo. With us today are Gevo's CEO, Dr. Patrick Gruber; and CFO, Lynn Smull. Earlier today, we issued a press release that outlines the topics we plan to discuss. A copy of this press release is available on our website at www.gevo.com. Please be advised that our remarks today, including answers to your questions, contain forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act. These forward-looking statements are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to be materially different from those currently anticipated. Those statements include projections about the timing, development, engineering, financing and construction of our sustainable aviation fuel projects, our recently executed agreements, our renewable natural gas project, and other activities described in our filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, which are incorporated by reference. We disclaim any obligation to update these forward-looking statements. In addition, we may provide certain non-GAAP financial information on this call. The relevant definitions and GAAP reconciliations may be found in our earnings release, which can be found on our website at www.gevo.com in the Investor Relations section. Following the prepared remarks, we'll open the call for questions. I'd like to remind everyone that this conference call is open to the media and we are providing a simultaneous webcast to the public. A replay of this call and other past events will be available via the company's Investor Relations page at www.gevo.com. I'd now like to turn the call over to the CEO of Gevo, Dr. Patrick Gruber. Pat?

Thanks Eric. Good afternoon, everyone, and thanks for joining us on our call. We have filed our Form 10-Q today. We ask that you refer to it for more detailed information after this call. During the third quarter and shortly after the close of the third quarter, we achieved several important milestones. Not only do these milestones enhance our financial outlook, but they also reinforce Gevo's commitment to advancing drop-in, cost-effective, scalable carbon abatement solutions for those difficult to electrify market sectors and industries. In fact, two of the milestones we achieved are transformative to our company even when you consider them individually. Let's start with our acquisition of Red Trail Energy's low-carbon ethanol and carbon capture sequestration assets in North Dakota. This acquisition, which we expect to close by the first quarter of next year, brings a well-operated low-carbon ethanol plant along with an active CCS site into our portfolio. Red Trail assets will be a valuable addition to Gevo. In fact, they generate approximately $200 million in revenue in the fiscal year of 2023. They're going to be a great addition to our company. It's transformative. This positions us for long-term success, providing a platform for further growth by developing our carbon abatement capabilities. For example, we are exploring converting low-carbon ethanol at the site to SAF using our Verity business to track the farms and count carbon and ensure we can account for all the carbon abatement that occurs throughout the business system. We also, by acquiring this site, provide our Net-Zero 1 project in South Dakota with access to a wholly-owned CCS site that could be important for the future. In short, this acquisition, once closed, is expected to accelerate our plans to scale SAF production, which we call Net Zero North, and strengthen our footprint in the region with abundant renewable resources, strong rural communities and resilient domestic circular economies. Now let's talk about the other transformative milestone we achieved. That is the conditional commitment from the U.S. Department of Energy. This is a major milestone for our Net-Zero 1 SAF project in South Dakota. This $1.63 billion loan facility marks the first large-scale, alcohol-to-jet project to receive such a commitment. We believe this commitment validates the strength of our project, reduces our execution risk, and supports our financing plan. Net Zero 1 is the largest economic development project in South Dakota's history based on our research, and we expect to attract other capital investments to unlock SAF commercialization, given the robust due diligence conducted by the DOE. We are grateful for the support from the DOE, Loan Programs office. We also recently acquired Cultivate Agricultural Intelligence, LLC or CultivateAI. It's a proven business with expected 2024 revenue of $1.7 million and correspondingly positive cash flow. CultivateAI provides agricultural data, including that from drones with near infrared sensors to clients through a Software-as-a-Service platform, a SaaS platform. We are combining CultivateAI's digital agricultural data and analytics platform with Verity's carbon accounting and tracking solutions to provide the highest quality data-driven solutions for carbon abatement in food, feed, fuels, and also industrial markets, while simultaneously helping farmers improve their operations, sustainability and profitability. Finally, in the third quarter, we were granted not one, but two patents for our Breakthrough Ethanol-To-Olefin Process. We also monetized investment tax credits related to our RNG business, generating cash proceeds and further bolstering our liquidity. So in summary, we've been pretty busy, and there's a lot more to come. We are looking forward to next year with this acquisition of Red Trail Energy assets and in combination with our RNG business. We believe this will help us achieve a positive adjusted EBITDA in 2025. That's very exciting. This quarter's achievements reinforce our commitment to reducing the carbon footprint of the things people need. That is food, fuel, and materials while transforming Gevo into a large-scale platform for growth. With each milestone, we're advancing our vision to scale drop-in, low-carbon molecules such as sustainable aviation fuel and, of course, to create value for our stakeholders. Now I'll turn it over to Lynn, our CFO, to discuss the financial results for the quarter. Lynn?

Thanks, Pat, and good afternoon, everyone. Starting with our financial position, we ended the third quarter of 2024 with $292.9 million in cash, cash equivalents, and restricted cash. Our continued strong liquidity position reflects our disciplined approach to Net Zero 1 development and other capital expenditures, our attention to corporate G&A expense, and our strategic approach to financing and our receipt of proceeds from the recent sale of RNG investment tax credits. Combined revenue and interest income for the third quarter was $5.8 million. The third quarter's results include $2 million in revenue generated by our RNG business, including $1.8 million in net proceeds from environmental attributes and $0.2 million in RNG sales. This also represents a reduction in sales by choice due to our preference to build up environmental attributes inventory in anticipation of our final carbon intensity pathway approval under California's low carbon fuel standard. We expect this approval, targeted for early 2025, to substantially increase the revenue potential from our RNG business. Operationally, the business has been running well, generating more than 100,000 MMBtu of RNG sales last quarter. And as previously announced, we sold RNG investment tax credits, netting about $14 million of cash to the balance sheet. Our corporate spend, that SG&A, was $8.6 million for the quarter, excluding non-cash stock-based compensation of $3.1 million. The primary driver for these costs is personnel costs in critical areas to support execution and growth, the majority of which we expect to allocate to our project segments and legal entities. During the nine months ended September 30, 2024, we invested $36.5 million into our capital projects, comprised of $23 million for Net-Zero 1 development, $11.4 million for the NZ program modularization design and engineering work, $1.6 million in RNG project expansion, and $0.5 million in other projects. Our strategic growth investments also include cash of $6 million we spent on Cultivate AI and $10 million of earnest money deposited in connection with the announced Red Trail asset acquisition. Our loss from operations in the third quarter was $24 million, and our non-GAAP adjusted EBITDA loss was $16.7 million. This includes personnel and consulting expenses associated with our Net-Zero and Verity growth initiatives. Notably, our development spend for Net-Zero 1 is tracking to come in under the previously estimated range, and we expect reimbursement of our development capital at financial close, allowing us to reinvest in Net-Zero 1 project equity and possibly recycle capital into other projects, depending on the total recovery and fee amounts, which will be negotiated with third-party equity investors. This project-level financing strategy also means we do not expect to have to commit further cash to the project once it's in the construction phase. The Red Trail Energy asset acquisition is going well. We're advancing due diligence and term sheet discussions with multiple project finance lenders and plan to combine third-party project debt with Gevo equity capital to consummate the acquisition early 2025. In summary, we remain focused on prudent management of our capital with a view to supporting the continued development of Net Zero 1, the Red Trail asset acquisition, and other value-generating projects. We're excited about the path forward and look forward to the opportunities in 2025. And now I'll hand it back to Pat.

Thanks, Lynn. Before we open the line for questions, let me reiterate how proud we are of the progress we have made this quarter. This is hard work we're doing. Between our DOE loan commitment, our pending acquisition of Red Trail assets, and the advancements in our Verity, RNG and Technologies businesses, we're making meaningful strides towards this vision of net-zero business systems, where we can truly drive out and abate carbon throughout the whole business system across fuels, food, and feed. This is important work, and it matters. Now remember what we're doing. This is about making something that is cost-effective, that works economically, and that competes with petrochemicals on a cash cost basis. That's what we're trying to achieve and the vision. Yes, we have to spend the capital and build it. We have to get on and go get that done. It's a different game to play. This isn't just about taking; it's not a giveaway. We're delivering products that are truly valuable, and that abate carbon and are cost-competitive. That's what the future holds here. And that's what makes it so exciting. That's why we're able to get this DOE loan commitment. We're looking forward to continuing this momentum into our coming quarters and sharing further updates on the transformed company and a new platform in 2025. All right. Let's open it up for questions. Go ahead, operator.

Thank you very much. At this time, we will conduct a question-and-answer session. Our first question comes from Sameer Joshi of H.C. Wainwright. Sameer, your line is open.

Hi, guys. Thanks, Patrick, Lynn, Eric. We have discussed this before, the $1.6 billion conditional commitment is not dependent on any change in the administration. But can you explain what are the remaining steps before the money gets released? And is there a cadence to the release of the money?

So yes, you're correct. This conditional commitment is a real commitment. It survives administration changes. They've designed it that way. And so yes, we just have to go through and do the work. Right now, I think that everyone is trying to sort out what's what, where. So we can't talk about specific details of that according to their rules. That's just the way it is. We still have to push forward and get it done. Our project is a good one. So that's the thing that people forget. Our project is a good one. It creates many jobs. Our project capital is high when we deploy in part because these are really good paying jobs that we're doing with thousands of people to build things. It plays to lots of agendas. And remember, the Charles River study shows that it creates $170 million regionally in South Dakota, and it creates a lot of tax revenue. So it's a good project, and it makes money, right? That's the unique aspect.

Yes. I mean it's a tax generator. It's a job creator, and it is in a traditionally Republican state. So...

Yes, and one other important thing that everyone seems to overlook is that the cash cost of our net zero type systems would be competitive with petro jet. It's in that range.

Yes.

So that people forget that. This isn't a free handout for carbon. No, it's not. Yes, the carbon credits, remember, for every dollar of carbon credit value, it creates six dollars back to the general economy according to Charles River. That's pretty important. And then of course, there's the RIN value and all the rest. All those values, the RINs, the LCFS, and what comes from other federal programs, those things all fund the capital. You'll notice this is a conditional commitment without the finalization of the 45Z. Someone should ask themselves why. I can't talk about it in detail, but you need to notice that. How did that happen?

Yes. No, it's very interesting. On the other major news from you guys, the Red Trail acquisition merger. I know it will be early 2025. But from now until then, are there any financing discussions? Are there any other steps that need to be accomplished, milestones to be accomplished before the merger can take place?

We are planning to take on debt and have been actively working on that process, which is progressing well. We are quite satisfied with how things are going.

Okay. And then the CultivateAI acquisition, of course, is there a pathway or any plan of integrating the Wei program into this? Or are these going to be independently operating?

They are being integrated to create a more complete offering. For everyone listening, it's important to note that simply hoping for good corn quality isn't enough; you need to provide real data to back it up. This approach gains bipartisan support and is also critical in the marketplace. It's not just about growing the crops; you need to consider how you processed them and what energy you used. It's essential to track the entire supply chain. This understanding seems to be overlooked by many, which presents an opportunity for Verity. CultivateAI already has excellent tools in use that assist farmers in measuring their crops' performance and identifying their needs, which adds significant value. As we develop Verity, we plan to incorporate additional technologies into its overall portfolio.

That is indeed a significant opportunity with a large market to tap into. Regarding research and development, I understand that you haven't sold these environmental attributes yet. What is the basis for the valuation of the inventory listed in the press release? Is it determined by a higher carbon intensity value? Should we expect that this inventory will convert into revenue in the coming months, or will it be valued above what we currently see?

Yes, we expect to hold the gas for now because we anticipate receiving pathway approval in California. We have seen progress through site visits, and it's just a matter of timing for completion. By holding the gas until we secure the pathway, we can achieve a better value instead of selling it at the lower 150 pathway price. Regarding your inquiry about the current inventory valuation on the balance sheet, that's what you were asking about?

Yes, yes.

We're going to plan on monetizing it at the full value. But I'll have to get back with you and check. Lynn is telling me it's booked at minus 150.

Okay. So it is on. Got it. Last question; sequentially, the operating costs are slightly lower. Should we expect these new lower levels for operating costs, research and development, and selling, general and administrative expenses?

Yeah. Stacy Buchkol, who runs that plant, she's on a mission to keep driving out cost. So that's what I expect.

Thanks for taking my questions and congratulations on all the progress.

Thank you very much.

Thank you very much. One moment for our next question. Our next question comes from the line of Saumya Jain of UBS. Your line is open.

Hey. How are you guys feeling about raising your, I guess, equity portion of the project financing? Are you guys looking towards that?

Yeah. There's a lot of interest in it. The thing about having a conditional commitment from the DOE loan office is that the amount of diligence that's done is absolutely mind-boggling, detailed. And so that helps. All the questions that can be asked have pretty much been asked. So people know that there's built-in extra costs to protect the project financially, and that benefits equity holders, too. So yeah, there's a lot of interest in it. So we've got to go work through it with the equity firms.

Got it. Okay. And then how is your annualized RNG production looking this year compared to last?

Last year, the annualized rate was approximately 3.25, with an increase of about 325,000 million BTUs. This year, we expect to reach around 400,000 million BTUs, and our instantaneous rates are even higher.

Okay. Perfect. Thank you.

Thank you very much. One moment for our next question. Our next question comes from the line of Greg Gumer at LPI. Greg, your line is open.

Hi, everybody. Can you talk more about the conditional loan with the DOE? When did you say you'd be giving us more information on that?

When they tell us we can.

Okay.

Yeah. It's one of these things where they're super detailed.

Dr. Gruber, are you there?

Hello?

Hello?

Okay. There we go. We're back.

Okay. Dr. Gruber, are you there?

Yes, I'm here.

Okay, sorry about that. As for the updates, they'll inform you, and then you'll share that with us. The important thing I gathered from the earlier question is that this will remain effective despite the change in presidency, which is positive.

It feels pretty good.

Okay. Because I was very concerned about that. So I'm glad to hear that.

Yeah. That's the most important thing. And the other part I was trying to get across is that our project plays to both sides of the aisle. We're in a red state. It's about creating jobs. It's rural economic development, rural infrastructure development, lifting the price of corn in the region. It's a big economic impact. It also sets a precedent. Think of it instead of oil from under the ground, this is oil at the surface of the ground captured. And the paradigm buster is, yes, it can be cost competitive with oil. Hello, that's an important point. It's not that these things are just pie in the sky; it's going to cost 10 times more. No, that's not the case of a project like ours. That's what makes it important. That's why we get lots of bipartisan support.

And this is something I should probably already know. But as far as fuel, it's coming from things like corn and soybeans and...

Corn starch is a key part of our business model. We utilize climate-smart corn, which allows us to potentially improve and even achieve a negative carbon footprint over time. Although we may not receive immediate credit for this, it is a goal for the future. The process begins with the corn kernel, which we fractionate to extract the carbohydrate portion for ethanol production, and eventually convert that ethanol into jet fuel. This process also generates significant amounts of protein—three times the tonnage of protein compared to jet fuel in such a facility. Additionally, we produce oil for either the food market or industrial applications. We are effectively capturing value from protein, oil, and the carbohydrates used for jet fuel. Our entire operation is powered by renewable energy, enabling us to aim for net-zero emissions. An essential aspect to consider is the low carbon intensity (CI) scores we aim for through carbon capture, which enhances the value of our output. For instance, when we blend one gallon of our net-zero fuel with one gallon of petroleum-based jet fuel, we create two gallons of fuel that reduces emissions by 50%. This has significant implications for market value and demonstrates a competitive advantage; many other technologies in our sector struggle to achieve that level of reduction. Moving forward, discussions revolve around improving CI scores further, which means fewer gallons will be needed to impact the market positively. The technologies we are developing are crucial, and their importance is recognized by stakeholders.

How high quality does the corn need to be to produce your SAF? For example, if we face drought conditions impacting edible corn, can that corn still be used, or is it necessary for the corn to be of very high quality?

The corn grown in the United States is primarily used for purposes other than food, with only 1% actually designated for human consumption. The corn we're discussing is field corn, not sweet corn or any other varieties found in food products like cornflakes or canned corn. This is standard field corn. Instead of converting it into high fructose corn syrup or using it as animal feed—which can upset cows’ stomachs and lead to methane production—we separate the protein from the carbohydrates, resulting in healthier cows. That's the approach we're taking. So, to clarify, this is standard field corn.

Drought conditions would not impact.

Not the way you're talking about it. That's one of the beauties of the supply chain is that it's well established, fundamentally no new creation of this. This is about what we've done in this business system is taking giant business systems that exist, and we're adapting them to make them decarbonized. The technologies that we're using in converting the carbohydrates from the corn into jet fuel, we're co-opting things that are already existing in other industries and bringing them all together and putting them with renewable energy. That's how we achieve net zero. In that sense, we don't have technology risk like you do in new magical things. Yes, we're boring. We use things that work for sure at giant scale. That's what we're doing.

Do you have any relationships with other countries? For instance, do you still have partnerships with India or any other overseas collaborations?

Yes, we do. We collaborate with Praj and other companies regularly. For instance, when jet fuel was flown into India, that was our contribution. We've had numerous discussions and remain engaged with them and in other regions globally. We are very focused on executing our plans. We are eager to advance our Net Zero 1 project and secure financing to demonstrate that these initiatives are financially viable. Additionally, we aim to establish our Net Zero North plant in North Dakota, which is an excellent location due to its existing sequestration capabilities. We have other sites in the United States, but we are also exploring opportunities in other parts of the world.

Okay. Lastly, I'm sorry, is there any plans to dilute this current share base in the near term...?

I don’t think so.

Yes. Okay. I think you might be raising capital through debt. Is that what you say?

We are looking at project-level financing for Net-Zero 1, which will be a separate entity from Gevo. We have already invested around $210 million in developing this project, which will count as equity in the project. By the time we reach financial close, we anticipate spending around $250 million, which will also be credited to us as equity, granting us ownership. We don't expect to need any additional capital unless we decide to invest more. Regarding our Red Trail acquisition, we have actually acquired three assets: an ethanol plant, a CCS plant, and a significant area of pore space underground for future expansion, which is very important. To fund this acquisition, we will be utilizing debt. Therefore, I do not foresee any need for Gevo to raise capital, as we have sufficient cash on hand.

All right. Thank you, Doctor Gruber. Appreciate it.

Got it.

Thank you very much. One moment for our next question. Our next question comes from the line of Peter Gastreich of Water Tower Research. Peter, your line is now open.

Thank you very much. So thanks for the presentation and congratulations to Doctor Gruber and team, just really a transformational quarter there. A question on CCS, the Summit Carbon pipeline appears to have hit a snag with this referendum in South Dakota. Gevo already has the industry's lowest CI score. So CCS is kind of a nice to have, so to speak, I understand that. But still would be interested in your thoughts there? And also related to that, could you discuss how Red Trail could be brought in as a CCS option for NZ1? Considering that we've got some distance there between NZ1 and Red Trail, is that something you can work with in terms of logistics? Or is that something that's not on the table? Thank you.

Yes, sure. So what was so bizarre about that referendum in South Dakota was that it was a landowner rights bill. People commonly talked about it as a pipeline referendum. It wasn't a pipeline referendum. It was about making sure that people got paid more money if a pipeline went through and they had more protections if a pipeline went through. That got defeated. That's astounding. What you saw was a bunch of activists talk about it as, oh, this is a pipeline approval. It has nothing to do with pipeline approval. It was about protecting landowners' rights. That got defeated. That's astounding. It doesn't change anything. The authority rests with the Public Utilities Commission, and that remains unchanged. Nothing has shifted from a fundamental perspective regarding what needs to happen. The responsibility lies with Summit. They inform us they are moving forward and have a plan to proceed. That's encouraging. We will assist in educating people about the realities of this pipeline. It's surprising to see opposition to a CO2 pipeline, especially from green activists who view it as dangerous. There is a significant need for education on this matter, and while it will take some time, we will reach that point. In South Dakota, it's important to respect landowners' rights when constructing a pipeline, and there has been commendable effort to ensure cooperation among stakeholders. This elevation of fears from all sides is unproductive. Remember, burning one gallon of jet fuel produces 21.5 pounds of CO2, which is also the case for gasoline. Unless using ethanol, in which case it’s only 18 pounds. These statistics are provided by the Energy Information Agency, highlighting that this is a significant issue that many may not fully understand. The pipeline is capturing biogenic carbon, which is CO2 from the atmosphere. There's a lot of talk globally about the desire for carbon capture, and this provides a solution. Yet, we have environmental groups opposing it despite advocating for what they claim to support. It raises the question of why they would want more fossil fuels burned. It's going to require effort. Decision-making rests with the Public Utilities Commission. There is a plan in place, and we’re willing to collaborate. Building the pipeline may take time, during which we could transport materials to our site in Richardton at the Net-Zero 1 North location. This might come at a slightly higher cost, but the economics appear to be favorable. If we believed there would never be a pipeline, South Dakota would face a significant challenge, much larger than what we can handle, making it potentially an unsuitable place for us. We do have other options available.

Okay, that’s great. Thanks very much.

Thank you very much. Our next question comes from the line of Emily Sorensen of Sorensen Farms. Emily, your line is open.

Yes, thank you. In light of the previous question, will you proceed with the approved loans to start building even without the pipeline?

I believe we will make that case. The way it needs to be presented is that it has to appeal to Wall Street and equity investors. This is our focus, and we can achieve that, but it's a situation where we might have to prepare solutions to address the issue. This is advantageous because we own our own sequestration site. So, yes, that could take place. However, there is a larger issue regarding business in South Dakota and how it will be received by the community. It's a broader concern that needs to be understood, and we will address it as we consider other options. I can't provide definitive answers, but I assure you we will move forward with this project. Our goal is to make the NZ project a priority. My preference is for it to be in Lake Preston, South Dakota. We will do everything possible to make that happen and gain everyone's support.

Okay. And I guess my second question and last question is, kind of working backwards, I guess. But with the new administration, I know he is pro-ethanol and pro-farmers. So I get that. If he is not pro-green deal, working backwards where you give credits to the airlines for their carbon neutral, if they lose those credits, would that affect what they purchase?

It's interesting to note that airlines do not receive that credit. It falls under IRA Section 45Z, which enjoys broad bipartisan support. To qualify for this tax credit, a 50% carbon intensity reduction is necessary, meaning the CO2 emissions must be reduced by half. For every point of reduction, further rewards are granted. Additionally, there is a requirement to substantiate these reductions with solid evidence. This process isn't a blanket giveaway; it requires genuine effort to obtain the credit. We favor this method because it has bipartisan backing. In cases where the credits are easily distributed, it often leads to contention from various political factions. In this structure, validation and transparency are essential to earn the credit, which promotes accountability and minimizes conflict, as the data speaks for itself. We appreciate this strategy. And they got to finalize the rules and all that kind of stuff, and we want to see it extended. It seems to have the good bipartisan support for that, too. As I mentioned, the conditional commitment we have was given to us without a finalization of Section 45Z. That is telling, isn't it, in that the DOE thinks the marketplace will accommodate it somehow. Is it important? Yes. Is it the right thing? Yes, I think that portion of that IRA bill was well done. Those things create real economic development, it's jobs. It's about energy infrastructure because with Net-Zero 1, you also get a bunch of wind energy. Why would it ever be built there? There'd be no demand for it. This is about economic development, job creation. It's fundamentally making cost competitive jet fuel. Forget all subsidies. If the plant was built and paid off, depreciated, and paid off, it competes head-to-head with Petrojet except for the footprint would be net zero.

And we're not talking about getting rid of jet fuel anyway. I mean we're going to work together. It’s not one or the other. You can work together. That's the thing I think people forget. You don't have to do 100% SAF. You don't have to do 100% jet fuel. You can do a combination and everybody can be happy.

You got it. The key aspect here is carbon abatement. The jet fuel itself is just that—jet fuel, derived from renewable carbon, but it still needs to meet specifications to be usable. We plan to blend it with Petro-jet. The goal is to achieve a lower carbon score, which would make it more carbon negative and require less production to significantly impact overall emissions. This is noteworthy because we're utilizing existing infrastructure, and the same approach is feasible with gasoline and diesel. We see great potential here. It's a new way to think about what's achievable. We've engaged with political figures over the past few years, and they were initially unaware of the possibilities. Now, we're demonstrating the economic viability, which is quite exciting and shifts their perspective.

Well, thank you. Thank you. I wish you all the best. I'm an investor, so I wish all the best.

You bet. Thank you, and best of luck.

Thank you very much. At this moment, I am showing no further questions. I would now like to turn it back to Dr. Gruber for closing remarks.

In fact, I'd like to thank all the investors for investing with us. It's been quite a ride lately. It's going to get, I hope, better from here. Whenever there's an election like this, it causes people to go, 'What?' and all they hear is all this crazy talk. You know what? Practical ideas, job creation matters, practical solutions to carbon matter. There's a marketplace that's growing that demands there be carbon abatement. That's what we're talking about. It's serving a new segment of the market that demands it. We have a practical solution. Yes, we got to get that first plant financed, get to the ground, and do it at scale and show people. It's an exciting opportunity, and we are extremely well-positioned in the furthest along in the space. Thank you all for joining us on this call today. Thanks for your questions, too. I appreciate it.