Gevo, Inc. (GEVO) Earnings Call Transcript & Summary

This is an open access research for all investors as well as the webinar. This will be available on demand. You can use the same link, should use to forward it to anybody, they can use the same link with a live link for the live event, and we'll be able to go from there. Today, we have 2 participants from Gevo with us. First as VP of Government Relations, Lindsay Fitzgerald; and VP of Finance and Strategy, Dr. Eric Frey. As we mentioned, we'll be talking about several things related to federal and state incentives and some tax treatments. So good timing given the news late last week, so great to have everyone. And before I start, why don't we just run through a quick introduction. I'll start with you, Lindsay, and then we can go to Eric, just so the investors and participants know who's on today.

Awesome. Thanks, Shawn. So good morning. Lindsay Fitzgerald, I'm the VP of Government Relations for Gevo. So that means I have oversight to all of our government relations, whether it's state and local or federal or international.

Eric?

Nice to be here, Shawn. I'm Eric Vice President of Finance and Strategy at Gevo. So I work in corporate finance and strategy, special projects, and I'm also responsible for Investor Relations here at Gevo.

Great. Thank you both.

And let's jump right into it. Big news last week. I will let you talk about it and describe it and obviously, put into some context for Gevo and for investors. So Lindsay, do you want to start with some comments on that?

Sure. So thank you. Last Friday, the government finally released guidance for the 40B tax credit. So you'll remember that this tax credit is for SaaS specifically. It was part of the IRA that came out a little over a year ago. And this guidance is for 2 years. So it's for 2023, which we're almost finished and for 2024, and it's for sustainable aviation fuel that is blended for use in the U.S. And so that guidance was there because that sustainable aviation fuel has to hit a 50% greenhouse gas reductions threshold, this guidance says, how do you calculate that? How do you meet that? And we -- the legislation had one methodology in there for how to count this. And we at Gevo, you know that we are strong believers in the DEO's GREET model. So we really have been advocating for the GREET model, because it is the way that you count the most carbon and you really can look at things in a way that counts at all and doesn't let politics come into play, really let science do the talking. So this announcement said we're going to look at GREET and we're going to rule out an updated version of the GREET model by March 1. So this is really great for the industry as a whole to have some clarity and to have some guidance moving forward.

Great. And maybe an overview of some of the other federal and state incentives for clean fuels as well. I know this is an important one, but clearly, in your area of expertise and that you work in every day, maybe help give investors a little more overview of some of the other things that are important to Gevo.

Right. So in addition to just this tax credit, we've got the renewable fuel standard, which is the federal program under the EPA. So sustainable aviation fuel can qualify under that program, and that sets volumetric thresholds every year. So that is something that is growing and SAF can continue to play in. In the states, there are various programs as we're all aware of the California low carbon fuel standard. There's a similar program in Oregon and Washington. And we've been advocating for expansion of those programs. So whether it's New Mexico, whether it's Minnesota, Illinois, we're looking at other areas like New York. So we're really seeing this carbon intensity style evaluation is taking off no pun intended across the states. We also see Canada has programs and incentives for sustainable aviation fuel. And if you hop on a plane and go to Europe, we also have programs there that supports sustainable aviation fuel.

And this is something that's been in the works for some time, right? So from Gevo's perspective, as you looked at building NZ1 and really everything that's been going on at Gevo for some time. This has been a key part of the, let's say, call it, the milestones that we've been looking for to get to the -- not just the economics, but incentive -- overall incentives to help drive this ahead at a faster pace, because investors have been obviously looking for things that are going to accelerate this, make customers adopt faster could drive us back down to what really creates demand, right? So I guess it's a long way of saying my question, how does this and not just the most recent one, but all of this helped drive demand for sustainable aviation fuel?

Sure. So we talk about this in terms of what's out there to have that long-term consistent policy support is part of the package that helps create demand. And so whether it's the 40B or one of the state programs or something happening elsewhere, all of those pulled together to say we're behind this. We support sustainable aviation fuel. So you can, a, make the investment to go out and do this and build and to airlines, we will support you in you buying this fuel. So it's just another...

Go ahead. Sorry, Lindsay.

No, okay.

I was just going to say, let's dig into a little more details of the recent expected guidance from the federal government on the inflation reduction incentives specifically for SAF. So let's dig into those details a little bit more.

So again, this is the -- for 2023 and 2024, and we will see that additional guidance. We know that it's CORSIA, which we're aware of. We know that you can use an existing EPA pathway, if you have one and you meet certain reduction thresholds. And we know that by March 1, we will see a rollout from Department of Energy as well as this interagency working group that says here are some updates to the GREET model that we feel -- or to the module that we feel meets the requirements of the law for this program specifically. And, a, that's great for companies that are producing today, companies that are looking to produce in the future. But this also really sets the bar for the next program, the next iteration. So also as part of IRA is this other 3-year package of tax credit, the 45Z, which we talk about a lot, to the clean fuel production credit. That too has a GHG or a CI reduction threshold. And so we believe that the groundwork that we've laid today with how to calculate is a nice point to either copy and paste or expand upon for this next credit, and we've also been really focused on this and getting this modeling right, because we're already talking about an extension. How do we do something longer term that really shows that strength in investment. And one of these credits, we think we can get extended and having that rate support of how to count carbon is really important before you start to talk about extensions.

And this is something that, I guess, users of SAF needed to understand and clarify, right? I mean so kind of bringing it back to an airline making a decision been doing offtake agreements really going down this route. Maybe tie what you said back to what it means to a user of SAF to the corporate itself?

Sure. So we all have to understand, you've seen from Eric and others before how we look at the value of a gallon of fuel and part of that value of that gallon are the various incentives. So do -- are we going to qualify? And a lot of companies were asking this question, are we going to qualify for the 40B? Are we going to qualify for RFS? All these different questions go into how any one whether they're on the producing end or the buying end, how do they calculate what is the value? And what are we sharing through this process?

And if I could add to that, too, Shawn. The -- I think the -- it's important to kind of zoom out and think about what this guidance means for us from a couple of different perspectives. There's the specific tax credit and that's important, because it creates another source of value when we -- for producing SAF in the United States. So that's good. But if you zoom out, there's some other kind of indirect benefits and the reason Gevo has been really focused on the Argonne GREET model is for a couple of reasons that are in addition to that. The first thing is we're -- in our business, we consider the Argonne GREET model of measuring and scoring carbon intensity to be the most scientifically valid and comprehensive way of scoring carbon. And our customers tend to agree. We've had customers come and they tour our demo facility in Luverne, their sustainability officers. We have, I think, almost 400 million gallons a year of contracted SAF offtake with a pipeline of many of the world's global airlines. So we think that, that's true, and our customers think that, that's true. But it's good to see the U.S. federal government acknowledging it is true. It's sort of their model, right? It's Department of Energy model that was created. So it's good to see that additional validation of what we think is fundamentally true about reducing carbon footprint. In addition, the second thing is it adds a tax credit, right? So that's more value, it's more revenue and more certainty of revenue for our SAF, okay? So that's the second thing. And then the third thing that is important, the reason carpets a lot is tied to that certainty is financeability. And we've been really focused on the financing of Net-Zero 1. We've substantially completed a lot of the engineering required to do Net-Zero 1. Gevo has invested the development capital and we're going to do more next year. But we need to pin down our EPC contract, and we need to pin down the DOE financing. And even though the Department of Energy is potentially a source of our product debt, even that lender wants to see certainty. And we've had to wait a little bit for the government to provide that certainty, because even though the Inflation Reduction Act was passed last year, we haven't had clarity of how they'll actually count carbon, because the counting of that carbon will impact the size of that tax credit. And so we -- that's why Gevo's been rooting for this, and we've been kind of sharing that this came out last week and why it's important for us. The last thing I'd say is that we think that we're competitively advantaged in reducing carbon footprint, because our plant in South Dakota is a purpose-built greenfield plant. What that means is that a lot of the carbon reduction goes into the design of the plant. It's hard -- once you have a plant that's been running for 10 or 20 years, it's a little harder to do that. You have less options. And the alcohol-to-jet pathway has all these shots on goal, all these abilities to reduce carbon footprint. So a method that recognizes all the things we can do, climate-smart agriculture, reducing fossil natural gas usage, carbon capture is important to -- it's a competitive advantage for Gevo because we're doing those things anyway, because we think it's the best way to reduce carbon footprint. But it's good to get rewarded for that and not get credit for the things that you're doing.

I think it's one of those things that often isn't fully appreciated is the fact that carbon CI scores have value, right? So we're talking about offtake agreements, you're talking about financing and plant construction, all of these things that accurate accounting for standardization of how to account for carbon accuracy and that all become critical to the progression of the industry, right? Because again, derisking creating some uncertainty around some of these variables is all part of that equation, right, that accelerates the industry forward.

Yes, absolutely right.

And yes, right, I mean this is something that has to be taken into an economic model. And so again, tying it back to recent events, and we'll talk a little bit more about state -- some other state and federal regulations. But this in and of itself creates a step towards derisking, understanding better the economics and creating an environment. And Eric, maybe I'd ask -- go back to you for a second. When it comes to like the DOE loan, we know this on investors' minds every single day, right? Are these types of things and maybe recent announcements, is that -- I should assume that's already in the model, but is this one of those variables that needed to be cleared up?

Absolutely. So this was this guidance knowing what method carbon intensity will be scored for the Inflation Reduction Act, SAF tax credits, is -- has been a necessary thing that we needed, because the original legislation said that the tax credit could use CORSIA or a similar methodology. And now we have greater confidence that, that -- of what that similar methodology is so we can actually calculate that tax credit. That was a necessary milestone for us is to get clarity. And also, it came out, we think, in our favor. We're excited because directionally, one of the things we've been focused on is, for example, using climate-smart agriculture. Well, there was some uncertainty about whether or not that would be counted or how it will be counted, right? The fact that the guidance has indicated, it will be included is we consider a win for Gevo, because we've been -- we've had multiple growing seasons where we're counting the carbon using climate-smart agriculture, and we want to have -- we want to use Verity to have an audit trail so that we can -- we sort of anticipated that this guidance and this tax rate would go our way, because if you're getting a tax credit, you're probably going to get audited. And if they're saying, if you're going to claim that you used climate-smart ag and other practices in your carbon intensity for a tax credit, you want an audit trail, where Gevo has been sort of out ahead of that, anticipating this, and we're glad that it kind of broke our way or at least it's starting to break our way.

So expanding on that, this falls into Verity, right? This is positive for Verity, what you've been doing. And I'd just remind people, we had a great fireside chat with Paul, not that long ago on Verity. I encourage people to go take a look at that because it's a great overview. But to go back to the point here, this does take into account agriculture and Verity, being able to work in this environment. So again, it's a positive for parity because I know this is something you focused on is the agriculture itself, right? Methodologies. So...

Yes, very specifically calls out that this new GREET module will include some climate-smart ag practices, which is great on a federal level, because to your earlier point, Shawn, we are seeing that and seeing some traction in the states where we're working on state programs for those states to also include climate-smart ag programs. So using that and having Verity as a tool for counting is a really great thing.

To add. Go ahead, sorry, Shawn.

Go ahead, Eric, please.

I was going to say the -- there's a couple of additional reasons why that's so important and interesting is if you don't -- if you just take a national average of the carbon intensity of using agriculture, it turns out that the different fields and different farms, there's a big dispersion around that average, and it's meaningful. And so one of the reasons that we picked the location in South Dakota is there's many farmers, who are already using much better than the average practices that significantly reduce carbon intensity. Now there's a range, some are a little worse, some are a little better and some are a lot better. But the point is if you can get that system going, that positive feedback loop of continuous improvement, we can create value for the people who are already doing good, doing -- they can do better by doing good, because they're already using much better than the average in terms of the climate -- the carbon footprint of their climate-smart ag and then you can also encourage others to adopt those practices that aren't currently using them, right? But you have to have incentives to get that ball rolling. And I think Paul talked about this in his fireside chat, the very tool, we've had multiple growing seasons now to collect data and the very tool went live. I think we announced that in the last quarter. And those amounts can be significant. There are cases where the carbon intensity that's calculated using measured -- a bunch of measured inputs at a field from the ag at the agricultural feedstock source. The difference between that and just the national average is like 30 points of carbon intensity, which is -- or thereabouts, which is comparable to the impact of doing carbon capture. So that's a really significant source of value and source of carbon intensity to go after. And it'd be a shame to not recognize it. It sounds like the SAF tax credit will recognize it, but we didn't know with much certainty before last week, whether it was on a path to be recognized.

Let's talk a minute about how carbon reduction is actually measured and the Argonne GREET method. I didn't know if you wanted to -- I know you had some slides if you want to run through those, just tell me when and please go ahead.

Yes, sure. Do you want me to. Yes, if you don't mind.

Can everybody see that?

Yes, again. So if you go to the, I think, Slide 2. Yes, excellent. Okay. So putting all these different -- oh, no, actually go to the previous slide. So the -- there are a number of different regulatory incentives and tailwinds. There's voluntary and there's also regulatory tailwinds for demand and for value for our -- for sustainable aviation fuel tool in the U.S. In Europe, there are mandates, there are blending mandates. Corporations have net-zero goals. Here, we're just talking about the U.S. state and federal incentives for SAF, okay? Just to put that in perspective, because there's almost like a crossword puzzle of all these different things out there. And so just to put it all in context here, what does that mean for Gevo and why do we care a lot about it. So here's that value stack of the state and federal tax credits for SAF. So the first thing is you have -- is you make jet fuel, and let's just say that that's $2.50 per gallon. It will depend on the price of crude oil and the price of jet fuel. But that's kind of a ballpark number, I think, last week. Jet A globally was like $2.43, something like that. The next part of the value stack, you have RINs, which is part of the EPA's renewable fuel standard. So biofuels made RINs, the Inflation Reduction Act, SAF 45Z tax credit, that will start in 2025. And that's a tax credit based on carbon intensity up to $1.75 per SAF gallon if you get to a zero carbon intensity. And then there's state SAF credits. That will depend on where the SAF goes. So if it goes to California, you can get low carbon fuel standard credits. If it goes to states like Oregon, Washington, that you might get that in Canada. You might get tax credits in Minnesota and Illinois, they have SAF tax credits. And if you add up all those that bucket, depending on different assumptions, you're going to get somewhere between like $5 and $6 per SAF gallon. So if you add all that up, the total value stack to us and our customers is somewhere around $750 and $850 a gallon. And it's going to -- that's going to depend on the price of RINs. It's going to be on the price of jet fuel, but it's somewhere in that ballpark. And I can -- if you just flash the next slide, Shawn, I don't know if it makes sense to actually go through it, but these are the assumptions that went into that. So you see here, it shows $715 to $849. And it just depends on the assumptions that are shown here. That's for a zero carbon intensity SAF. If your carbon intensity is a little more than that, your value is going to go down a little bit. If your current intensity is better than that, if it's negative, your value should go up a little bit. But we're kind of targeting zero or negative carbon intensity at Net-Zero 1. So that's why we picked that just to show how the math works, basically. So we wanted to walk folks through that, because it can be admittedly a little bit confusing. There's a number of different tax credits. But those things are all -- that's also a strength that we have because there's so -- there's a lot of regulatory and also voluntary tailwinds for us to make SAF. That's why this stuff is important.

And I think some of this to area of credits, where Gevo's call proprietary or process knowledge comes in, right? And as you mentioned earlier, building a plant from scratch, right, versus using an existing plant. Where does that really come in here for Gevo when we look at those contributing factors, right, to the value of that gallon of SAF? Where does Gevo really do something different in here? Would you say is the proprietary part of Gevo's process?

Yes. So that's where you can get differentiated value, right? So any gallon SAF, whether it's from Gevo or anybody should qualify for the things that are on this slide. But there are differences. So for example, our SAF because of the process happens to have lower sulfur content and lower -- less aromatics than fossil jet fuel, which was an additional benefit. Our SAF will use very tracking so that the sustainability footprint both in terms of carbon footprint, but also other -- a whole bunch of other factors will be auditable. That creates a higher quality carbon inset. . And then the final thing is lower carbon intensity. So because we have a purpose-built plant, where everything from the beginning was intended to reduce energy footprint and wherever we're using energy to use renewable energy, you can get very low carbon intensity. If you're doing other forms of making SAF, if it's not a greenfield and if it's not alcohol-to-jet, it's harder, it's a lot harder and more costly to get really low carbon intensity. And so it turns out that it's just more efficient to have a concentrated gallon that has concentrated carbon abatement, if that makes sense. You can make a lot of gallons that are maybe a 40 or 50 carbon intensity or 30 carbon intensity. But if you can get zero or even negative carbon intensity gallons of SAF, it's now possible to blend that with petroleum jet fuel and actually get the industry to achieve its net-zero or carbon reduction goals. It's also possible if you're making a -- if you're able to get to a negative carbon intensity to take more carbon out of the air than you put into it, those are things where as you reduce your carbon intensity, yes, it has more value. But as you get to zero or negative, it should have outsized value, if that makes sense. And that's what we're targeting.

And I think you had an important point that enabling the airlines to hit their goals, right? So in other words, how many gallons do they need to buy and blend, right, in order to achieve those goals? So I guess, if I'm interpreting this right and understanding it right, it's a higher CI score reduction per gallon, which would make an airline choose one versus, let's say, a higher carbon intensity gallon, right? Because it just -- you get more bang for your buck per gallon for blending. Is that correct?

Yes. Think of it as like if you go to the hardware store and you get concentrated weed killer, if you get like the really concentrated stuff, you can always dilute it to exactly whatever concentration you need. Here, we have concentrated carbon abatement and it's done efficiently and cost effectively, because of the design of the plant. The other competitive advantage, I should say, with our SAF is the patents that we have on the isobutanol process and the patents that we have and that we filed on the design of the plant, because as I said, carbon intensity is a differentiating factor and a source of competitive value. The plant design goes into that, and Gevo has and has issued patents around the design.

Great. And Lindsay, maybe we go back to you for a moment to talk a little bit about what is the latest on the RFS renewable fuel standard and state tax credits for SAF. I know we touched on it a little bit already, but expanding on that, I think, would be helpful.

Sure. So the RFS, I think we just saw in this past year, the EPA rolled out a few years in their RFS program. And I think that takes us through 2026. So we have some trajectory there. I don't expect anything out of EPA with additional years or additional changes until at least after the election next year. So I think that they'll wait for after that election season. But based on the history of the RFS, I think that we will continue to see strong -- we'll continue to see growth in that program, which is important. And I think we'll also see some expansion. Obviously, we'll be continue to update or advocate for updates to the modeling so that fuels can qualify, and we can see additional GHG reductions from fuels. As it relates to the states, we have -- there's a lot going on this year coming up. So I believe that there are 13 states currently looking at some sort of low carbon fuel standard. And starting in January, a lot of these state sessions will kick off. So we've got Minnesota going, we have New Mexico going, and those are really our 2 first key states. Minnesota will -- we are advocating for that climate-smart agriculture and CCS in that full scope of decarbonization tools. New Mexico is an interesting state, because it's a heavy oil and gas state. So a low carbon fuel standard there will be a really nice stepping stone for other states in the area to be able to implement a similar program. We also have New York and we're looking at Illinois. We're looking at Michigan. And when you think back to Eric's slide, it's that combination of incentives at the state level, whether it's a tax credit or an LCFS style program plus the federal programs like an RFS or a tax credit, it's that stacking ability that really helps it really helps the full package for the fuel. And when you're able to really value the CI, the lower that CI score, the higher the credit in some of these programs. And that just further drives incentive for change for driving innovation to where it needs to go.

Great. I'm going to ask one last question. We have several from the audience. I do want to get to a few -- try to get a couple in. Let's get down to what this means for SAF revenue. So obviously, when we all sit down, we eventually have to model this, how does this come into play for driving or increasing revenue per gallon? I think we touched on some of the RINs and other things like that, but break it down in terms of really what it means for revenue for Gevo per gallon of SAF would be great.

Sure. So I mean we sort of covered it on the slides, but in brief, in addition to the call it, $2.50 that's the value of just jet fuel, if it's just like fossil jet fuel, you've got a pool of about anywhere between $5 and $6 using approximate numbers of credits, RINs 45Z state tax credits. The thing that Gevo is really interested in is things that reward carbon intensity, because we think we have competitive advantages on cost effectively producing the gallons, but also driving down the carbon intensity and it's that cost of carbon abatement and concentrating that carbon abatement in gallons that where we think Net-Zero 1 and the alcohol-to-jet process generally has an advantage. And that's what should be being rewarded if the goal is carbon abatement. And that just fundamentally comes from the way you're leveraging photosynthesis, the way you're leveraging fermentation and the way you're using the whole integrated process from farm to fuel to drive down costs and drive down CI scores. So you're talking about a value proposal of anywhere between $7.50 to $8.50 per gallon of SAF. That's kind of the total revenue stack. If you just look at jet fuel plus those state and federal credits.

And we've got several questions on how this benefits Verity. I know we touched on it a bit, but could you summarize again what in the tax credits now is helpful to Verity? You have several questions on it. So recap it would be good.

Yes, sure. So Verity, as Paul talked about in his fireside chat, Verity intends to earn revenue through fees for service and also profit sharing. So what is that profit? Well, the profit is going to be related, if you're a biofuel producer or you're in that value chain, that total profit pool is going to be impacted by the size of credits like the 45Z. And if the 45Z gets larger as carbon intensity goes down, that has value to Verity. So for example, if you are -- I think for an ethanol producer, the 45Z goes up to -- I think, it's $1 per gallon of ethanol, if they're at a zero-carbon intensity. And it's -- I think it's zero, if they're a 50%, about 50% carbon reduction. So there's somewhere between a 50% carbon reduction and zero-carbon intensity, they're going to get between $0 to $1 per gallon of value. Well, the U.S. ethanol industry is the world's largest, and it produces something like 15 billion gallons of ethanol a year. So that's a very large value pool. And if Verity can help customers attack that value pool, they're going to do a lot better. That's a lot of value in an industry where the margins could be $0.20 a gallon, right? But they're also targeting driving down carbon reduction. So Verity has a large market to participate in, just from the 45Z for ethanol alone and then you can consider other fuels and other credits, too.

Great. Thanks Eric. We have a couple of questions on qualifying for Europe international flights, how you're addressing that issue?

So yes, there's a number of different policy kind of guidelines in place for Europe where your feedstock is coming from, how you're processing. But all of that -- some of those will look to RSP and ISCC for compliance and to verify your pathway. And I think the question I saw was around CORSIA. So CORSIA is in place for those international flights and that is a -- it's a way for airlines to show that they are hitting their GHG reductions. And those -- you need a 10% reduction to meet that. So the way our facilities are being looked at and our feedstocks are being looked at, there is a possibility to meet some of the European requirements for feedstock and for process. It will just all depend on how we end up doing things at the end of the day. But there is possibility for building in Europe for SAF infrastructure to be built out. There's plenty of feedstock there and there's plenty of incentive through requirements for volume in Europe.

And next question is on the updates to the GREET model coming out in March. Are there going to be additional revisions or changes?

So think about this in terms of there is GREET as a whole. It's like your loaf of bread. And then different states like California, take GREET, they take what they like and what they don't necessarily want for the goals of their program. And outcomes their version of this loaf basically. So it's got all the same components, but some are turned on and off. So what we will see in March is a 40B GREET module. So there will be some things that will be different from the overall GREET package, but it will be its own GREET module that we'll be able to put our inputs into and get a score out. There are things that are being looked at, that are going to be updated from -- and remember, this is coming a lot from EPA. So when they did the RFS, they looked at a 2010 version of GREET. So they've been talking about how they'll want to see updates from that version. So there's a lot because we already have our 2022 version of GREET. So there will be some updates, but I don't think that anything will be -- I don't expect significant changes. And I expect to see, as Eric said, we'll be able to include climate-smart ag, CCS, the renewable electricity, R&G, all of the things that really help lower will be -- should be included.

And take one last question here. Again, I apologize to everybody that we didn't get to, but it was on some of your variables in your model, Eric. How do -- and the questions are around what drives those things, and they're mostly focusing on RIN value. And how is that determined? What's the variability there? Obviously, for long-term contracts, some of these things have to be addressed. But what are the variables in that model that you spend most of your time focused on?

Yes, sure. So the price of RINs, just like the price of anything that's liquid is going to be based on supply/demand. So the supply is if the U.S. produces a lot of biofuels and produces a lot of that category RIN, that's going to increase supply. Demand is driven by the environmental protection agencies, setting their renewable fuel obligations periodically, and that drives demand and then oil and mostly oil and gas companies, but energy companies generally are obligated to either blend a certain amount of biofuel in their pool or purchase a RIN from a biofuel producer who did that. So that -- those are the dynamics for RINs. The program has been around for a very, very long time. The prices can go up and down. The -- what's attractive to us is, okay, there's a value pool that's attractive for product financing, our contracting structure and strategy has to allocate those risks to the party that's best suited to assess and price those risks. So that goes into our whole contracting strategy around Net-Zero 1, and that's something that we're really focused on. So we know the value is there. There's no guarantees in life, so that price may go up and down. So our financing strategy has to account for that.

Great. We're going to end it there. We're 40 minutes in. Again, I appreciate everybody taking the time today. I know we ran over a bit, but very timely, very interesting topic. Thank you, Eric. Thank you, Lindsay, for your insights today. You can send additional questions to me or of course, to Gevo Investor Relations. Again, I'd encourage you to take a look at prior fireside chats and research we have available on our website at www.watertowerresearch -- you can access them -- research.com. And with that, I'm going to end it today. Everybody have a great holiday. Thank you, Eric. Thank you, Lindsay.

Thank you.