Thank you for standing by. This is the conference operator. Welcome to the Origin Materials’ Second Quarter 2021 Earnings Call. As a reminder, all participants are in listen only mode and the conference is being recorded. After the presentation, there will be an opportunity to ask questions. Please follow the Operator Instructions. I would now like to turn the conference over to Ashish Gupta, Investor Relations. Please go ahead.

Thank you and welcome everyone to Origin Materials second quarter 2021 earnings conference call. Joining the call today from Origin Materials are co-CEO Rich Riley; co-CEO and co-Founder John Bissell; and CFO, Nate Whaley. Out of this call Origin issued its second quarter press release and presentation which we will refer to today. This can be found on the investor relations section of our website at originmaterials.com. Please note that on this call, we'll be making forward-looking statements based on current expectations and assumptions, which are subject to risks and uncertainties. These statements reflect our views only as of today, should not be relied upon as representative of our views as of any subsequent date, and we undertake no obligation to revise or publicly release the results of any revision to these forward-looking statements in light of new information or future events. These statements are subject to a variety of risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from expectations. For further discussion of the material risks and other important factors that could affect our financial results please refer to our filings with the SEC including our quarterly report form 10-Q. In addition, during today's call, we will discuss non-GAAP financial measures, which we believe are useful as supplemental measures of Origin Materials performance. These non-GAAP measures should be considered in addition to and not as a substitute for or isolation from GAAP results. You'll find additional disclosures regarding the non-GAAP financial measures discussed on today's call and in our press release issued this afternoon, and in our filings with the SEC each of which is posted on our website. The webcast of this call will also be available on the Investor Relations section of our company website. With that, I will turn the call over to Rich.

Thank you, Ashish, and thanks to everyone for joining us today. For today's presentation, we will be referring to the slides that were posted to the Investor Relations section of our website earlier this afternoon. We will begin on slide 3. The second quarter of 2021 was momentous for Origin. First, as previously announced we successfully completed the business combination in June and at the end of the second quarter have $471 million in cash and equivalents on hand. Second, we made significant progress on our first commercial scale plants Origin 1 and Origin 2 and are reaffirming our expectations as to capital budget, production timeline, and our anticipated ability to fully fund both projects from existing cash on hand and previously identified traditional financing sources. And third, our customer demand has more than tripled over the past six months with uptake and capacity reservations reaching $3.5 billion as of today. As this is our first earnings call, I'll start with an overview of Origin Materials and then provide a commercial update. I'll then turn it over to John who will discuss Origin's intellectual property, core technology, updates on Origin 1 and Origin 2, and recent executive hires. Nate will wrap up with a financial overview. Origin was founded in 2008 with a mission to help solve climate change by enabling the world's transition to sustainable materials. Our patented drop-in core technology, economics and carbon impact have gained the support of a growing list of major global brands and investors including Pepsi, Nestle, Danone, Ford, and Mitsubishi Gas Chemical. The CPG companies mentioned that publicly disclose their intent to migrate 100% of their current petroleum-based PET consumption to decarbonized and recycled materials. After extensively testing our technology, these market leaders have made significant financial contributions to Origin both as investors and customers demonstrating their environmental commitment and competence in our technology. We believe Origin is positioned to be an industry disruptor in the material space at large commercial scale. Unlike other companies who serve smaller niche markets, we believe Origin is structurally advantaged to address an estimated trillion-dollar market just beginning to transition from petroleum feedstocks to sustainable ones. We are positioned to be the clear category leader based on the simple yet powerful fact that our technology was built around converting the lowest cost feedstock, wood residue, into decarbonized supply chain-ready materials. While the big focus of the decarbonization movement among the media and investors has been electric vehicles and renewable energy, 45% of the world's emissions come from the manufacturing of products, with a significant portion coming from the underlying chemical material. Over 10 million barrels of oil per day are used to create these materials, and the production process releases massive quantities of new carbon into the atmosphere. Origin's vision for the future is to replace these 10 million plus barrels per day with plant-based feedstocks. We think the best place to start the transition to sustainable plant-based materials is plastics, which represent an enormous and rapidly growing portion of the world's materials. When we say plastics, we're not just talking about water bottles and other consumer packaging that probably first comes to mind. The majority of plastics are used in textiles, cars, and other household products. Just capturing a small portion of the incremental annual growth in plastics is more than enough to manage to build our business. Importantly, our solution is designed not to require companies to change their products or processes. There are near-zero switching costs because we produce a material identical to what they currently use. The only difference is that our feedstock is derived from plants rather than petroleum. We believe this is the path for us to deliver carbon negative materials at massive scale, dramatically reducing carbon emissions and creating products that are readily recyclable within the existing global infrastructure. Turning to slide 4, the attractiveness of our solution is what drove the early partnership and anchor investment from Danone, Nestle, and PepsiCo. Recently, we have also taken significant steps to commercialize the business by broadening our customer base beyond consumer packaged goods into apparel and industrial markets including automotive. In April, we announced a strategic partnership with PrimaLoft to develop carbon negative insulating fiber for outdoor gear in apparel. PrimaLoft makes high-performance insulation and fabric for over 900 global brands including iconic companies such as Patagonia, Lululemon, Adidas, and Nike. This is a very significant partnership for us, an example of being able to partner with a company in the supply chain to deliver materials to hundreds of brands. Many apparel companies are eager to decarbonize, but they don't actually manufacture their own products. This is where our partnership with PrimaLoft can have a huge impact. During the second quarter, we also announced the Net Zero automotive program with Ford Motor Company. Ford and other automakers have committed to electrifying a significant portion of global production, providing a tailwind for Origin. Because plastics help make cars lighter and more energy efficient, EVs are estimated to use three times the amount of plastic per vehicle as internal combustion vehicles. Our Net Zero automotive program with Ford offers tremendous opportunity for Origin to work with an industry leader to decarbonize the very large addressable market. Our partnerships with Ford and PrimaLoft demonstrate the steps we have taken to further commercialize the business and expand our end markets. Notably, corporate commitments to net zero are increasing daily, and Origin is engaged with many of the world's largest companies to help them achieve their decarbonization and sustainability goals. In addition to exciting customer and partnership announcements, we also announced last week that our CMF and HTC products have earned the U.S. Department of Agriculture certified bio-based product label. This is a coveted third-party verification that our products meet or exceed the biobased content requirement for the U.S. government. This certification qualifies our products for mandatory federal purchasing under the 2002 and reauthorized 2018 Farm Bill. With that, I would like to turn it over to John for technology overview and an update on Origin 1 and 2.

Thanks. I'm going to begin on slide 5. As Rich mentioned, Origin's technology platform uses proven traditional chemistry to convert carbon negative feedstocks like wood residues, post-consumer cardboard, mixed paper waste, and construction waste into two principal intermediate chemicals, CMF and HTC. These chemical intermediates will be used to make materials like PET that currently use petroleum as an energy source in their manufacture. Moving to slide 6, what separates Origin from these biomaterials companies is our proprietary CMF and HTC production properties, which are based on sound, scalable, carbon efficient technology. The process to convert biomass is very carbon efficient. The vast majority of the carbon ends up as one of our products. This is in stark contrast to thermal chemical properties such as gasification processes and fermentation processes, which nearly invariably lose a substantial proportion of the carbon in feedstock to emissions. This carbon efficiency contributes both to the extraordinarily competitive economics of our process and to the very low carbon intensity of the process. While biologically mediated properties are often hindered by any variation and feedback, our homogeneous chemo-catalytic process is robust to a huge range of variation. Similarly, components of the feedstocks that are non-volatiles, such as salt, can be showstoppers for thermal chemical properties, but they're largely immaterial to the performance of our process. The flexible nature of our chemistry enables many different feedstocks to be used, including sawmill and pulp mill residues, construction waste, agricultural waste, post-consumer paper packaging, pulp wood, and mixed paper waste. That feedstock flexibility directly contributes to the low cost and carbon impact of our products. Finally, turning to slide 7, our process is constructed entirely of conventional physical and mechanical properties that have been used in countless chemical properties for centuries. Our chemistry is new. The process physics are analogous to many processes that have been in widespread operation for generations, crack helping among them. The use of conventional processes makes the technical scaling much more predictable and much lower risk, as despite the vast number of chemical processes and operations applied to physical goods of civilization, there are very few examples of unsuccessful scaling for technical reasons. Since founding the company in 2008, Origin has made substantial improvements to the technology through continuous innovation and licensing agreements. Today, we hold 19 families of patents protecting our proprietary production process to make CMF, HTC, and their downstream products. We believe this provides a defensive moat around our technology. Now on to slide 8, I will turn to our progress on Origin 1 and Origin 2. We are, of course, continually reviewing construction costs and timeline to assess macroeconomic perturbations such as inflation and supply chain disruption. We were pleased to reaffirm our previously disclosed expected capital budget and production timelines for Origin 1 and Origin 2. In terms of timing, we expect the construction of Origin 1 to be completed before the end of 2022 with commissioning and production of the plant thereafter. We're pleased to be working with leading capital product partners, Koch Modular Process Systems, Worley, KSH Solutions, and Jacobs Engineering Group. As of June 30, 2021, installation at most foundations for building and processing is significantly underway and on track for timely Origin 1 mechanical completion. We had also completed fabrication of the modules that contain the principal equipment used for the conversion of biomass feedstock into high-value chemicals. By the end of 2021, we expect the modules to be lifted and erected roughly four months ahead of schedule. Similarly, Origin 2 remains on track for completion by mid-2025. Further, we are working with Worley, Delight, and Fisher International to select the site for Origin 2, which we expect to have designated by the end of 2021 in line with our prior forecasts. Turning to slide 9, we thought it would be useful to provide more of the story behind Origin 1: how did it start, what do the modules look like, and what will it look like? You can see here the modules themselves. They're large, 60 to 75 tons each. The modules are on-site in Sarnia, Ontario, and ultimately, they will be interconnected and erected. With slide 10, I'd like to provide additional background on how we got to where we are today. We spent over 10 years developing and proving out this process invention at pilot scale. That translated to process design and engineering, which in turn translated to these designs being fabricated and shipped. An advantage of doing modular construction is that it offers better control over environmental conditions and therefore a more predictable schedule. Additionally, module construction also gives you better control over the quality of the work. Here on slide 10, you can see our CTO Ryan Smith, next to a vessel at a new module while it was in the shop. And now with slide 11, we see that those modules are transported to our site in Sarnia, Ontario, Canada. Those modules will be erected onto the anchor bolts in the foundation. Other pieces of equipment such as tanks are also delivered on-site. We've labeled the 3-D model that you've seen before. You can see the conveyor that moves the feedstock of the system, the feedstock silo, the ISBL or inside battery limits equipment, which is where the real chemistry happens. You can see the process building where the solids handling happens for HTC. You'd also see more general items like the tank farm and an area for trucks to load and unload liquid materials. You can see the brain regeneration area where we handle some of our equipment. So while there's work to be done other than the core process module authority fabricated on-site, that work is generally routine and is particularly specific to our technology. Lastly, moving to slide 15, I'd like to talk to you about our efforts to strengthen Origin's leadership team. We were excited to welcome Jim Wells, Ben Freireich, and Madhu Anand, who will play an instrumental role in scaling our platform technology. Jim has an incredible background; he is an experienced engineer and was instrumental in the execution of capital projects. Madhu Anand brings extraordinary engineering analytics and processing expertise to Origin from Phillips 66, where she was the chief engineer of the hydroprocessing and naphtha upgrading unit. Ben Freireich is a leading industry expert in solid particulate materials for both product and process R&D and joined us from PSRI where he led applied process research efforts for a consortium of over 30 multinational corporations. We're excited to be bringing that expertise to Origin. Recently, we've further strengthened our team with the addition of Bob Nissen as the Origin 2 Project Director, who has a background with BP Jacobs, as well as David Balliow as the Origin 2 Process Technology Director, who brings experience from Worley and Burns and McDonnell. We're happy to welcome both of them on board. I look forward to their contributions for years to come. And with that, I will turn it over to Nate to discuss some financial details.

Thank you John. I'll begin with some commentary on our second quarter results, provide a financing update for Origin 2, and then finish with our 2021 outlook. Speaking to slide 16, second quarter operating expenses were $6.7 million compared to $1.7 million during the same period in the prior year. Adjusted EBITDA loss was $3 million for the second quarter compared to a loss of $1.6 million in the prior period, and finally, net income was $62.5 million for the second quarter compared to a net loss of $1.7 million in the same period in the prior year. As of June 30, 2021, Origin had 136.7 million shares outstanding, excluding 4.5 million shares held by certain stockholders that are subject to forfeiture based on share price performance targets applicable to earn-out shares. Turning to our balance sheet as a result of successful business combination with RDS, Origin ended the second quarter with $471 million in cash and cash equivalents. Based on preliminary feedback from leading financial institutions that specialize in financing similar-sized capital projects, which indicated that our financing assumptions are reasonable and executable, we are able to reaffirm our expectations of fully funding the construction of both plants using our existing balance sheet, cash, and cash equivalents and previously indicated traditional financing sources. Upon completion of Origin 1 and Origin 2, we expect to begin generating positive EBITDA and anticipate our business will generate sufficient cash to allow us to build Origin 3 and beyond. Hence, we do not anticipate needing to raise additional equity capital to fund our current business or capital project needs. Further, we would note that we anticipate having approximately $100 million of excess cash beyond the capital budget of Origin 1 and Origin 2. Finally, as John mentioned earlier, we received many questions on inflationary pressures. We are continually updating our cost estimates in real-time based on current inputs we've received from vendors and suppliers. I'm pleased to report projected construction costs are still within the overall capital budget. Wrapping up with our full year 2021 outlook, we're expecting an adjusted EBITDA loss of up to $25 million and capital expenditures of up to $111 million consistent with our previous outlook. With that, I will turn it back to Rich for closing remarks.

Thank you, Nate. I would like to wrap up with three simple reasons that we are so excited about where Origin is today and what its future holds. First, we are the industry disruptor with a clear line of sight to commercial scale and the category leader in carbon negative materials. Second, demand is very strong, and we think Origin will be supply constrained for the foreseeable future. Third, our financing is on track or ahead of schedule to bring Origin 1 and Origin 2 online and begin production. Thank you for your time today. Now we'll open up the line for questions.

Thank you. We will now begin the question and answer session. Please follow the Operator Instructions. Our first question comes from Frank Mitsch of Fermium Research. Please go ahead.

Hi, guys, it's Lisa on for Frank. The first question on slide 4, you lay out the growth in offtake agreements and capacity reservations, which has now reached $3.5 billion. How are you guys expecting this level to track over the next 12 months? And which end markets are expected to provide the most incremental opportunities?

Hi, this is Rich. Great question. We're experiencing really strong demand across the board. If you think about just six months ago, we had customers that were only from the CPG vertical. Since then, we've seen apparel companies, automotive companies, building materials companies, and we're experiencing a wide range of demand from those verticals as well as additional companies really around the world. So it's not any one specific category that's driving this growth. It's really across the board. In addition, we continue to partner with other chemical companies who want to build on top of our materials.

Got it. And as a follow-up, could you guys share your thoughts on future bio premiums and carbon credits in terms of your pricing?

Sure. So our pricing strategy, let's take PET, for example. We typically start with third-party projections for the forward pricing of PET and then add a reasonable premium to that to account for the carbon negativity of our materials and the sustainability. To some extent, the fact that we can offer a fixed rate pricing to our customers, which takes the volatility out of their cost structures. Overall, we're trying to be strategic about it. We want our customers to feel confident that we see them as long-term partners. We want to be a very meaningful part of their supply chain going forward. Part of that means offering very fair pricing and not trying to take advantage of them in any way when it comes to pricing, but we are commanding reasonable premiums.

Our next question comes from Stephen Byrne of Bank of America. Please go ahead.

Yes, I'd like to keep that discussion going on these additional contracts that you've been talking about here Rich? How would you describe the structure of these additional contracts? And how firm is pricing in them?

Sure. Hi, Steve. So these contracts are, first of all, they're large. They're typically over $100 million. They're 5 to 10 years in length and they're typically with big companies. They would normally start with what we call a capacity reservation, which specifies the product, the price, the quantity, and the duration of the contract. Then we'll move that into an offtake agreement, certainly in time for project financing of the plants. That's the very standard structure that we use with most of our customers.

And then Origin 1, you're going to start up in early 2023. Are you at a point where you're starting to negotiate with processors, and if so, how firm of a pricing can you get from them for the upgrade of the CMF all the way to paraxylene or even PET?

It's a great question. We are, yes go ahead John. I am sorry. Go ahead.

It's a great question. So the key here is, there are a variety of different steps in the tow manufacturing chain coming off Origin 1. In the broad scope, there are some areas where we have quite a bit of certainty, and we really do understand what sort of cost collars are on what that's going to look like, and there are other areas where there's a little bit less certainty. But generally speaking, if you're looking at the overall quantity of demand or revenue that we're expecting to generate from Origin 1, for the majority of that, we have a pretty good understanding of the collars on cost for that section of the tow manufacturing event. In many ways, that's because a substantial amount of the downstream processing is chemistry that's pretty well understood and mirrors existing chemistry. So we sort of understand what the throughput is going to be, and we understand what the reaction profile is going to be. We understand how the equipment that is going to be operating and performing, and in many cases, this won't be the first time that processors have operated in this general style of chemistry. They really understand it pretty well. So all that to say, I think we have a pretty good understanding of it, even though it isn't 100% locked at this point, just because generally speaking, you don't get that kind of long-range commitment on pricing from processors, which I think is probably why you asked the question.

And just real quickly, is the HTC produced out of Origin 1 have a phase, what are you going to do with that?

It does have a phase. We haven't disclosed exactly what that phase is going to be yet in large part because, as is the case for most of the products coming out of Origin 1, those products are being used for commercial market development and application development for products other than PET and other than HTC. We really see that as an opportunity to advance the ball in some of the higher margin, higher value kind of product areas for us. This also means that we're, as typical for us, working with other companies on those products and applications, and we disclose them when those companies or we are ready to disclose them, but I don't think we've done so for HTC at this point. But it will have a depth in it.

Our next question comes from Mark Connelly of Stephens Inc. Please go ahead.

Thank you, very happy to hear Nate's comments on inflation. But we're obviously seeing a lot of companies across a lot of industries spending more on topics, even to get things done with more certainty or because this stuff has gotten more expensive. So how have you guys been impacted so far? Are there significant pressure points if this labor short transportation constraint environment continues?

Yes. So I think you're right. We have seen, as you say there is movement in the supply chain. We are seeing impacts in certain areas. But I'd say for Origin 1 in particular, we've seen, I'd say modest impacts there and frankly there have been both puts and takes on it. That's why we feel pretty comfortable. We've said we are going to deliver that on budget in our prior capital budget. I think for Origin 2, we had looked at that originally with materials prices that were substantially higher than what a lot of us were seeing in 2020. We just carried those forecasts across. We didn't take advantage of the trough in materials pricing and labor pricing everybody saw in 2020. From that perspective, I think frankly, we're sort of seeing a return to what we were expecting the prices to be when we originally put that forecast together. For Origin 1, of course, we've made a lot of those purchases already for raw materials in the places where you see some of that inflation occurring.

And second question, your initial comment on CMF and HTC from Origin 1 and 2 are going to be relatively limited, considering the size of the market and the potential interest. My understanding is your strategy has been to reserve some of that tonnage for new development customers. But how do you prioritize given that you've got early sponsors and early customers that are likely to want more than you can actually produce?

That's a great question. So the way that we think about that is really which products and markets are strategic for us. A lot of that has to do with where we see, and this is probably unsurprising, where we see the performance of our sort of non-dropping non-PET products show up. What are those applications? How do we double down essentially with that material or those applications? The other thing that we find is, while our customers are always interested in more material, I think that sort of consistent drumbeat across the board for us is that they all want more. The reality is they understand there's a somewhat limited amount of material, coming out of Origin 1 relative to, of course, the total market size for these applications. They're focused alongside us on doing the work that is most valuable with the material in order to move these markets along, beyond the sort of beyond the PET and non-PET markets. There's a lot of common interest in getting these markets moved along as easily as possible, even though, of course, as you say, they want as much as they can get as soon as they can get it.

Our next question comes from Eric Stine of Craig-Hallum. Please go ahead.

Hi, everyone, thanks for taking the questions. Just to take that last question a little bit further. I mean, even beyond Origin 1, as you play this out, clearly, you're seeing a big expansion in what you've got under contract off takes in that $3.4 billion. But are you sensing that your customers are starting to get concerned or at least look out a little further and see some scarcity value to the production that you're planning? Is that something that you could potentially ask for prepayments or things along those lines that could maybe accelerate Origin 2 or Origin 3's timeline?

Yes, that's a great question. We are placing some orders on Origin 3 already as an example, and as part of our contracting process, when we go from a capacity reservation to fully reserving the capacity, there is a choice of a prepayment or going straight to offtake. We do think it's likely that many customers will choose to make pre-payments as they have in the past. Having that demand, those pre-payments are the kinds of things that will help us accelerate Origin 3 to the extent we can and Origin 4 and beyond.

Yes. And just to be clear, when you talk about Origin 1 and Origin 2 being fully funded, and also having access, you're not factoring in any pre-payments. If that were to be the case, that would be above and beyond the projections that you just gave today. And as you said, it would serve to accelerate things?

It's true that we have not included prepayments in any of our funding assumptions. If we were to receive meaningful prepayments, that would clearly help fund Origin 3 and beyond.

And maybe this last one for me just curious as you've gone through this process, as things develop, the merger closes all that if anything has changed or any updated thinking on the feedstock strategy and how you're approaching that?

Yes. Got it. Certainly. No, we haven't seen a huge change in our feedstock area even a really much more modest one. I think what we're seeing is consistent support of our view of the feedstock market for our process, which really means lots of it available, very consistent pricing historically, and looking forward. Obviously, we're looking at sites that have great access to feedstock, which includes pulp mill residuals, but all sorts of other materials as well. Generally speaking, we feel like there are, frankly, if anything, more opportunities than we were expecting to see these pulp mill sites than we were interesting originally. There are definitely more opportunities than we were expecting on the feedstock side.

Did you say that Origin 2, you thought that or you were hoping to have a site selected? Was it by the end of 2021? Did I hear that correctly?

That's correct.

Our next question comes from Pavel Molchanov of Raymond James. Please go ahead.

Thanks for taking the question. In your comments about financing for Origin 2, you talked about commercial lending arrangements. But what's the role of the public sector? And how you're thinking about Origin 2?

Pavel, it's Nate, let me see if I can take that one. It's a great question. One, I think that you thought first, you have to remember that we do consider ourselves fully funded. We see that through a combination of what our traditional project financing, which does include some government support programs. We think there are some terrific programs available through loan guarantees, for instance, domestically through the USDA and U.S. Department of Energy. We're also fully prepared to do this through conventional project finance or the municipal bond market.

Understood. Those are all options. How many sites for Origin 2 are you choosing from, and I guess what's the geographic scope of those options?

Yes, sure. So generally speaking, we saw many dozens of potential sites at the top of the funnel that satisfied our roughest criteria. As we've honed that down, we're seeing let's call it 6 to 8 sites at this point that we think are really good sites that meet every single one of our criteria, and each of which would be spectacular. I think generally speaking, the Gulf region broadly is attractive geographically because it has generally low cost of feedstock, it has lots of extremely skilled labor, both on the construction and the operational side, and an incredibly knowledgeable industry infrastructure around capital projects and processes of this sort. I think that is likely. But I wouldn't at this point narrow it down beyond that, although we have a handful of sites that we're extremely excited about.

Our next question is a follow-up from Mark Connelly of Stephens Inc. Please go ahead.

Thank you. Just a couple of big picture questions. You've pointed out in the past that the big plastic producers aren't your competitors, but our potential customers, partners to others? What needs to happen for those relationships to grow? What will we see from the outside? When are we going to see these? And what's it going to look like?

I'll start and maybe John, you can add if I missed anything, but we have existing relationships with Solvay, Mitsubishi Gas Chemical, and a few other chemical companies where they're taking our materials and then further engineering them into higher-value applications, including going into engine components and things like that. We certainly see them as customers in a way of taking our materials to market. We've also talked about the towing relationships and partnerships like that, which are in active discussions. We also approach those partnerships with a very open mind, with a lot of different ways to work together.

Do you expect in the next six months to be telling us about more of these kinds of relationships? That's really sort of what I'm looking for is the timing?

Yes. Timing is always hard with these big companies and big partnerships. But we have an active pipeline of conversations going on with other chemical companies. I would think we would have things to share in the coming months.

As we think about the transition to CMF and I suppose HTC, but I'm more interested in CMF. What role in getting that message out to consumers? Are you going to play versus your customers? Are you expecting most of the plastic buyers to be the ones that really do the promoting of this? I'm just trying to understand how you think about you mentioned early on easy gets all the press. So how do you attract more attention?

Yes. We'll certainly be as visible and promoting as much as we can. But if you think about the magnitude of some of our partners like Pepsi, Nestlé, Danone, Ford, and others, their marketing platforms and ability to put things on labels and deliver consumer messages will really be what pushes it through.

What kind of milestones should we be watching for in the second half to know whether you're on track? And what are we likely to hear from you?

Yes. Great question. Actually, the big ones to look for are for Origin 1 is the erection of the modules. Getting those modules up and bolted down to the foundation. We don't expect it to accelerate the overall timeline for Origin 1, but hitting that ahead of schedule, the way that we're now expecting to or ahead of our original schedule really shows that we're moving this thing along. It gives us just another thing to look at and say, okay, this is moving the way it's supposed to. I think that's one that I would look for. The second one on Origin 2 is really site selection. We mentioned in our prepared remarks that we selected Worley, in particular to work with us on the front-end engineering for Origin 2. Worley is best in class in this kind of stuff. We pulled that forward quite a bit. We've gotten it done already. We're moving along there. The second big one is when are we going to have the site selected, and we're still anticipating having that selected by the end of the year. So I think that's what I would keep an eye out for.

This concludes the question and answer session. I would like to turn the conference back over to Mr. Riley for any closing remarks.

Thanks everyone for joining us today. We look forward to future discussions, updating you on our progress. Have a great evening.

This concludes today's conference call. You may disconnect your lines. Thank you for participating and have a pleasant day.