Two IPs In A Pod
Brilliant inventions, fresh product designs, iconic brand names and artistic creativity are not only the building blocks of successful business - they deliver a better world for us all. But these valuable forms of intellectual property must be protected in order to flourish. We are the Chartered Institute of Patent Attorneys - the UK's largest intellectual property organisation. Our hosts Lee Davies and Gwilym Roberts chat with entrepreneurs, creatives, patent attorneys and the occasional judge about how patents, trade marks, designs and copyright can improve our lives and solve problems for humanity.
Two IPs In A Pod
Revolutionizing Carbon Capture with Ray Naughton
Join Lee and Gwilym for an enlightening conversation with Ray Naughton from NEG8 Carbon, a pioneering force in the world of carbon capture technology. Ray takes us on a journey from a humble research project at Trinity College Dublin to a cutting-edge enterprise nominated for the 2025 Earthshot Prize. Ray and the peas discuss how innovations might reshape industries by turning captured CO2 into valuable products like strengthened concrete and the role intellectual property plays in maintaining a competitive edge. This episode offers a thought-provoking look at the intersection of technology, personal impact, and the quest for a sustainable future.
Lee Davis and Gwilym Roberts are the two IPs in a pod and you are listening to a podcast on intellectual property brought to you by the Chartered Institute of Patent Attorneys.
Speaker 4:Hey, gwilym, good to see you mate. New series of the. Is it a season? They're called seasons, aren't they? In podcast land, not series? I think New season of the podcast.
Speaker 1:I think we can call it what we like. What about? I don't know, I haven't got a better word. What did you say? Season Season. They're seasons, aren't they? I think that's what they're need to get back. I need to get back into this.
Speaker 4:I've forgotten my words I I don't really understand podcast seasons because I listen to podcasts, obviously, and they always seem to end a season and then the next week they start the next season. It's like what? What happened? There was there was no break between them. We at least have a little break between us. We have a little bit downtime, don't we?
Speaker 1:well, this is this behind the scenes stuff, lee, but you know, as you know, we don't necessarily always record them exactly when it might sound like we recorded them. Sometimes you do a bit of a burst, so maybe that's it, I don't know.
Speaker 4:So that's it. So what are you doing in your downtime? Anything exciting.
Speaker 1:Well, given that I haven't seen you since Christmas, kind of you haven't seen me since Christmas. Yes, that's right, Because this is the one that's going out now because of the magic of time shifting. So how was your Christmas out now?
Speaker 4:because of the magic of time shifting. So how was your Christmas? I have a really, really manic Christmas, as you know, because I've got far too many children and, by extension, far too many grandchildren. In fact, as we speak, I'm waiting for grandchild number seven. How exciting is that? Who is eight days late? Eight days late, yeah, so due last week.
Speaker 1:Excellent. We have another podcast going after this one where the baby is further out so people can have to get their heads around that. Did I mention it last time? Did I do that? Yeah, you did.
Speaker 4:This is so complicated. Can you think of some better friendly bants? That means that I don't mark up the time.
Speaker 1:I've got an idea. Why don't we pretend that we actually recorded this in June of 2025 and talk about recent current events? How's about that? What do you know is happening in June 2025? Well, that's what I mean Last week. It'll really confuse people because I think, my God, they recorded this in June. They know the future. That's what will happen. So I think in June, that'll be when the dinosaurs reappeared. That was really weird in May, wasn't it?
Speaker 4:It did, but didn't we have a podcast shortly before that about some sort of DNA gene invention thing? And then the world went horribly wrong. We're losing the plot, okay, I think we need to crack on with this podcast. Yes, so exciting one today, because it's the start of our new Earthshot nominations for 2025. And really, really delighted to have on one of our nominees. So, Ray, have I got your surname right? Ray Norton, is that right, Ray?
Speaker 2:Ray Norton. That's right, Ray.
Speaker 4:Norton. Welcome to the podcast, Ray.
Speaker 2:Thank you very much thank you very much.
Speaker 4:It's, it's good, and I get really excited when we have bona fide inventors on, but also inventors that are doing stuff that benefits the planet, and, um, there can be no sort of example of the way the ip system serves the world really in terms of protecting inventions that are there for the for the betterment of us all, can there so lovely to have you on super, that you're, uh, one of the 2025 earthshot nominees little ways out, aren't we? Because we won't find out until towards the end of this year how you've done so, um, so I think all we can say at the moment is good luck, good luck with all of that, thanks again. And so where, where should we start? Do you want to tell us a wee bit?
Speaker 2:about this.
Speaker 4:So it's Negate Carbon, yeah.
Speaker 2:Yes, the name of the company is Negate Carbon, and we started actually about 11 years ago in Trinity College in Dublin, and we started off as a research project that went on for about seven years, looking at all aspects of carbon capture technology and going down through many rabbit holes and learning an awful lot about the subject. Sure, yeah, and finally, in 2021, we spun out of Trinity and we established ourselves in Waterford in the south of Ireland it's a town in the southeast of Ireland and we set up our labs there and recruited our scientists and engineers, and we've been busy since then developing our carbon capture technology, because what we do is we capture CO2 from the air, because what we do is we capture CO2 from the air, and that actually is the subject of our patents that have helped us get nominated for the Earthshot Prize, so we're very pleased about that.
Speaker 4:So before Gwilym gets into the techie patent stuff and I know he'll have done a little bit of research and I know he'll want to I'm not the IP specialist on the podcast, right, so I get. I get to ask the questions that perhaps aren't sort of directly ip related. Um, perhaps like have more of a social conscience. So if I, if I understand this right, it's about grabbing carbon from the air, yeah, and wouldn't a cynic say that that's just an easy way out for, like, fossil fuel companies to keep to keep doing what they do, because it's all right, because we can just grab it from the air, or is that? Is that an unfair question?
Speaker 2:Well, I think you know the planet has two problems. One is the current concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere. So at the moment, there are 422 parts per million of CO2 in the atmosphere. So at the moment, there are 422 parts per million of CO2 in the atmosphere, and that is the cause of global warming. So as we tip up 422, 423 and we go up to 550, which is when we expect to flatten the curve we will have many, many more extreme weather events and many, many more changes in our climate on the planet during the next 100 years as a result of the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere. So there's one problem, right the CO2 stays in the atmosphere for, let's say, about a thousand years.
Speaker 2:That's another issue, right, because when you come to say nature-based solutions for CO2, you're looking at maybe 80, 100-year life of those solutions in terms of their impact on CO2.
Speaker 2:Whereas if you capture CO2 from the atmosphere, and you take that CO2 and you mineralize it, then you're actually making a very significant difference to climate change. Now the question, then is how can you do it in volume? It's one thing to capture CO2 from the atmosphere, but there are billions of tons of CO2 to be captured in order to move the needle on climate change, and so what's needed are very efficient carbon capture technologies, and that has essentially been our focus for the last 10 years or so has been to try to develop highly efficient CO2 technologies, capture technologies so that the cost is affordable for the planet and so that the technology can be deployed at scale worldwide. That's the mission of Negate Carbon. That's what we're trying to do, and the patents are very important to us because they protect the novelty of the way we do this and the way that we achieve a very low cost of carbon capture.
Speaker 4:So presumably you're not operating in an exclusive environment, are you? There will be others trying to do what you're trying to do. Yes, and the way the patent system helps you is that your way is novel and different and obviously you want to to protect that. Well, I think probably time for you to come in yeah, no, it's very interesting.
Speaker 1:I was going to um pick off just by talking about technology. I'll give you a heads up technology, then ip, then investment. That's my three stages, so I'm quite interested in all of them um starting on this technology sounds like there's there's two elements potentially to.
Speaker 1:I don't know, I've not looked at the patterns, but, um, it sounds like there's a chemistry angle which is how to do it, and there's a scalability angle which is, it's all very well capturing carbon that happens to be wandering past your filter or whatever, but you've now got to work out how to get those billions of tons. So are you attacking both of those problems? Have I oversimplified it? Where are the problems?
Speaker 2:Right. So there are two key aspects to this right. One is the material that you use to capture the CO2. So that's number one, and so we have quite a number of material scientists working for us, and our objective is to identify the best materials to capture CO2 and to modify them for use in our process. That is our focus. So materials are critically important, and then the process itself is critically important how you actually do this. So, like any process, it requires power and that is the key point. It requires less power than other processes and so less costly. And how we do that is actually in the package.
Speaker 1:That makes loads and loads of sense. You've got a material that does the capture. You've looked at what kind of capture you're trying to sense. You've got a material that does the capture. You've looked at what kind of capture you're trying to do. You've then built a process to do it. That makes perfect sense. The power requirements are interesting because, of course, you're presumably at risk of pumping carbon into the atmosphere to capture carbon from the atmosphere. So I'm guessing that you've solved that one.
Speaker 2:Yes, yes, exactly. So obviously the capture process has to use green power number one, right, so? And it has to use, ideally, which is freely available so that you can scale it. In other words, you want to operate in countries where the grid isn't under pressure, right For supplying industry or other things. So the first deployment of our system will be in Canada, for example, and they have a very low cost of power there about 5 cents a kilowatt hour, so about maybe a third or a quarter of the UK's cost of power.
Speaker 2:And they also have the other essential ingredient that you need to make this whole cycle work, and that is that they have very suitable mineral sands which we can pump the CO2 into and it turns into a calcite, in other words, you can turn it back into rock. So you think about it. The beauty of direct air capture is you can place your plant anywhere on the planet, because the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere is the same everywhere in the planet. So you can place your plant anywhere on the planet. So obviously you're going to place it in a country which has good permitting, good knowledge of mining, good infrastructure and compliance regulations, low cost of power and then the geological formations necessary to turn the CO2 back into rock or to mineralize it, what we call mineralizing.
Speaker 1:I was wondering what happened to the byproduct.
Speaker 2:So our focus is, on very large scale, dac farms direct air capture farms which we want to deploy into suitable locations worldwide, and Canada is the first country that we're doing that in Other countries that are suitable are Iceland, who have similar characteristics of low power costs, good geological formations and so on, and also Oman, in the Persian Gulf. It has similar characteristics as well. So there will be many different places around the world which will be perfect for capturing the carbon and then turning it into rock, so that you don't suffer from all the leakages of other systems, you don't suffer from the problem of trying to move the co2 on pipelines, put it on ships, take it offshore, pump it underground, go through all of that stuff. Even though they are options that that are available, the the actual gold standard is is to capture it and mineralize it on site, never move it again. So take it straight out of the air and put it straight underground.
Speaker 1:Okay, and your customers? Who are you aiming to take this technology up? Is it government level?
Speaker 2:So there are two groups of customers that are the big DAC farm developers, the people who are developing direct air capture farms, and they're all just beginning. So this industry is brand new, it's just starting. But in the future you will have very large developers of DAC farms all over the world who are well capitalized we're talking about billions of pounds to develop these farms. So you're looking at companies with very big resources and they will be buying systems to enable them establish these farms and we will be providing these systems to the DAC farm developers. So that is one category of customer. Within that category, by the way, you have two classifications. You have, let's call them, the speculative DAC farm developers, who build DAC farms to sell the carbon credits, and you have the second type, which is the industrial DAC farm, where you have an emitter who's building DAC farms in order to reach net zero in their own manufacturing or process operation. So they're the two types of developments that you have in the business that you have in the business.
Speaker 1:So basically your market is the requirement to reduce CO2 and the government's kind of global pressure to actually get on with it.
Speaker 2:Yes, exactly. And then you have another category of customer, which is the customers who use CO2. So, for example, you will have a very big market for what are known as SAFs sustainable aviation fuels. They are now being mandated for use in Britain and in the EU and in other countries in the world, and what this means is that you no longer be able to use fossil fuels to make jet fuel. You will have to use SAFs sustainable aviation fuels and they're made from combining hydrogen and CO2. And so you get a pure fuel which you burn and then, with the net zero concept, the circular economy you capture the CO2 again and you regenerate it, and so on. So that's quite a large market, but that again is only just starting.
Speaker 1:Understood, understood. So to our interest, I think you said that we're at 442 parts per million of CO2. Where are we supposed to be?
Speaker 2:Well, 350 ideally, 350 ideally. But let's face it, the reality is that we're going to go 422 to probably 550. Nobody knows actually how far it's going to go. There's an awful lot of work going on, an awful lot of studies going on, but in the end of the day, it comes down to action by industry to reduce emissions and action by governments to encourage or carrot and stick, you know, encourage or penalise industry if they don't reduce their emissions.
Speaker 1:Instant. So we talk about the IP, of course. So you mentioned you have a pending patent application. Do you have any more or are you building your portfolio at the moment?
Speaker 2:Yes, we have another one pending. Another patent pending. Yes, we have another one pending. Another patent pending because we've made another discovery which is quite revolutionary. So, if you think about it, in the last five years we have built three generations of system generation one, two and three Each one progressively more efficient than the other. And the generation three technology, which we're currently testing in Waterford, will be much more efficient than, obviously, the previous two generations, but that will be the subject of a new patent which we will submit in the coming month.
Speaker 4:So, hey, we know from the Earthshot nomination that you're working with Claire Rutherford at Definition IP. How important is IP to the project right now?
Speaker 2:Well, claire actually was very important to helping us hone that patent. She put a lot of work into it and it is crucial to the future protection of the intellectual property of the business and gives us a unique position in the marketplace.
Speaker 1:Are you finding that it's an attractant for investment and third parties putting money into you?
Speaker 2:It's absolutely essential for investors You're right Particularly in a highly competitive space like this.
Speaker 1:As much as you're able to share. We always love to hear about the funding side, because it's the reality of the IP system. It's not just having an idea, it's bringing it to market. That involves a lot of people and a lot of investment. How's that going? How have you played it?
Speaker 2:yeah, well, so far, all of the investors are private investors, people friends of mine, people who are concerned about climate change, people who want to to make a difference with their investments and their what we call impact investors, and so far, they're the people behind the company. We are talking to a couple of trade investors and we're, of course, talking to the big funds as well, and we continue that dialogue at the moment. You know which is going on at the present time.
Speaker 1:It sounds like you've got proof of concept, so you can you know this is a going concern. This is something that really works.
Speaker 2:Correct, correct, yeah. And in Waterford we can show investors and customers precisely how the technology works and see it in action, so to speak.
Speaker 1:And the story behind that. As you said, you started off as a research project at Trinity. Yeah, and it's been quite a long journey. So do you still work closely with the university in all of this? How's that relationship?
Speaker 2:Well, our technology director was previously the professor of chemical engineering in University College Dublin. So we have strong contacts still with all of the universities in Ireland and we work with University of Limerick, for example, on the material science side, and we work with the Southeastern Technology University, which is the one next door to us in Waterford, and so on, mainly because if you're working in the material science area you need access to research all the time. One of our people, andre, actually is full-time researching what is happening in material sciences worldwide. So we research everything that's happening around the globe in materials that could be used for carbon capture and then we make those materials, test them, verify them and so on. So we have a very high affinity with the academic community, not just in Ireland but actually around the world.
Speaker 4:Sorry to butt in Gwilym, but did I take from that Ray that there might be? So, rather than in the future mineralising it for storage, you might be mineralising.
Speaker 2:I can't even get my tongue around that word mineralising it for products that might have other uses? Yeah, well, that would be superb. That would be superb. So maybe if I roll back and just say in 2014, when we started recruiting postdocs for this project in Trinity, at that point in time, in 2014, there were two centers in the world doing CO2 research. One was Arizona State University and the other was in South Korea. Which you believe? Two centers in the world.
Speaker 2:Almost no research being done in carbon capture research and almost no research being done in the application of CO2 to materials. This is a long answer to your question. So there is an enormous amount of research work to be done in carbon capture and also in the uses of carbon, because the ideal thing I mean what we're doing is capturing it, turning it into rock. That's fine, it's put away for all time, but if we could generate products out of it, that would be a great result. One of the projects that we're working on is capturing the CO2 and injecting it into concrete. So that way, we strengthen the concrete, reduce the amount of concrete needed to perform its task right and we also fix the CO2 for all time. So that type of application is something we're very keen to explore with many partners, as we can.
Speaker 4:And I guess the sort of like the where my mind was going was is there a sort of market in industrial diamonds or anything like that? Could you ever get to the stage where you're making something that advanced, or is that just too far away?
Speaker 2:It's possible. It's possible, but a lot of this is going to come out of the research community. A lot of this is going to come out of the research community, and what I would say is and we notice this when we're recruiting our engineers and our chemists and so on we notice that there are very few people coming with experience. So this is a very young industry and most of the engineers and scientists get mopped up by the life science and chemical industry, right yeah, so the hard science work that we're doing is sort of rare breed at the moment and we would like to see a lot more research done to feed into this developing industry, whereas at the moment, most of the research is life science based and med tech based and all of that, and, of course, it based and AI and all of that stuff. But we would like to see governments around the world focus more of their research dollars on pushing into the carbon capture and utilisation space, the area you're talking about. We think that's very first-up requirement.
Speaker 4:And that makes absolute sense to me. And what does that mean in terms of future business models? For negate, because presumably I mean there are a number of things you can do, aren't there? You could. This could be something where you're building a massive international business, um, or you could be building something where it exists through licensing, so you're encouraging others to come on board. What's what's at the moment in terms of the early stage of your journey on what's the future look like?
Speaker 2:yeah. So very good question, because in a new industry the business model evolves very quickly. You know, you try this, you try that, and so it evolves. So also the technology and the way you approach the deployment of technology evolves. So our experience to date has been that for the initial deployments of systems we have to deploy the entire system Right. So there's so little expertise out there, so you have to do the whole thing. But in fact in a carbon capture system there are an awful lot of standard elements right. So the secret source is in the absorber right, which is the piece of the system which contains the materials right, and the substrate that it is attached to. That's the secret source. So what we want to do long-term is just make the absorbers right and we will sell the design of our system to the big developers. They can build all of the infrastructure and then they buy the absorbers from us. That's the way we want to go, even though in the initial stages we will provide full systems yeah, they get that sense.
Speaker 4:So you, you're providing components.
Speaker 2:Future industry yes, yes, we're, we're providing, like the intel inside, we're providing the, the, the absorber, to the system, which is the key component to capture the CO2. And all the rest of the stuff will leave to the developers to make. And because you can't really scale unless you have an enormous amount of capital, which we don't have and we're unlikely ever to have right, you can't scale the establishment of 100 parks, each one capturing 10 million tons of CO2 each per year. So I can't see a point that we can capitalize that. So we take the bit we can supply and we can manufacture that in volume and ship it at low cost for integration into these big farms that the developers make.
Speaker 4:Yeah, I guess it doesn't. It doesn't say my simple mind. It doesn't matter where these farms are, because I imagine if you've taken CO2 out of the environment in Canada, co2 will find its way there, won't it't? You don't need, you don't need fans to blow it back over again, it's no it sorts itself out.
Speaker 2:Yeah no, it does, you're absolutely right. Yeah, no, you're absolutely right. So so you can you? You know, globally, you can see a situation where countries and and industries will be offsetting carbon emissions in one country for plants which are operating in another, and the reason why they will do that is because the other country is much more suitable for carbon capture and mineralisation, for example.
Speaker 4:Can we talk a wee bit about F-Shot, Because we mentioned it at the beginning but we've not really gone back to that. What does it mean to be nominated?
Speaker 2:I think it's been probably the most important bit of publicity that we've got so far in our journey, because it's recognition. It's recognition that these guys have something special. That's what the Earthshot nomination means, so it's very important to us.
Speaker 4:I think we hear that a lot. We've had other Earthshot nominees on and it's almost. I mean, whilst it would be lovely to win a million pounds, wouldn't it? And I'll ask you in a moment what that might do for the business, so think about that one. But we hear a lot from nominees that actually just the exposure, just the media profile. The interest is that what you're finding?
Speaker 2:yes, but it's the recognition, it's the fact that that you qualify for a nomination, that's the key thing, and then there's a lot of publicity generated out of that. But it carries a lot of weight in the community, in the, in the customer community and the investor community. It's recognised as a serious award and therefore a nomination is considered serious.
Speaker 4:Gotcha. So there's a financial spin-off there as well, in that it makes you more attractive to investors because you've got that recognition. Absolutely Cool. What would a million pound mean? What are you going to use a million pound on when you win it?
Speaker 2:well, uh, the million pound would help us build the first 6 000 ton generation 3 system, and that will be tremendously welcome. It would help us on our journey to build that system. And 6,000 tons is the standard unit that we want to provide to the developers of DAC farms. So up until now, most of the carbon capture systems are operating in hundreds of tons. We want to have a standard deployment block, so to speak, like Lego, you know of 6,000 tons and then you can populate as many of these.
Speaker 4:Help me understand that. In my simple brain, lego works for me. Actually, I understand Lego. You link stuff together. But what does 6,000 tons mean? Is that a kind of overtime capacity?
Speaker 2:That's the annual capture rate of the module.
Speaker 4:So a single unit is taking 6,000 ton of CO2 out of the atmosphere in a year. Exactly Got it.
Speaker 2:And then you just, and then that scale yeah, and then the key thing you have to achieve is you have to achieve a cost per ton capture of around somewhere between 100 and 200 euros a ton. There's the magic number that will enable the the widespread adoption, direct air capture of carbon around the world, and at the moment we can capture CO2 with the Generation 3 system at about 165 euros a tonne. And if you have waste heat, which is a huge bonus, if you have waste heat you can get that down to around 100 euros a time, maybe a little under that. And now you're talking serious opportunities for the developers.
Speaker 4:Now, I think that brings us to the end, Gwilym, unless you've got a little closer question for us.
Speaker 1:I do. My closer is always.
Speaker 4:Quite silly though I do, my clothes are always quite silly though, so let me just explain it to Ray, though first.
Speaker 1:So. So Gwilym will ask me, and then he'll ask you, ray, and then he won't realise this, but I'm going to then spring the question back on him. What Lee doesn't realise is that I've already know my answer and built the question around having a good answer to it.
Speaker 1:And I'm sure Lee's never done that to me, I've never done that to you, obviously. So so, ray, this concept obviously, uh, started through a university research project and it's leading something fantastic and world changing, hopefully as well. Um, lee, you've studied, you've got multiple degrees, as I recall, so you've studied lots. What's legacy? Not, in anything useful? Willem, I was going to say what legacy do you see from your studies that um, that you'd like you'd put your point to?
Speaker 4:oh no. So I, I already have my legacy and sorry, I'm going to be a little bit serious for a moment because I'm quite proud of my legacy. So my, my degrees, multiple degrees, as you know, we're in education, educational theory, educational leadership, and I was only reading something the other day. So I introduced, largely for teachers in further education, qualified teacher status and that was as a result of my second master. So my second master's was on teacher professional identity and one of the outcomes of that was qualified teacher, learning and skills status for teachers in further education and trainers in the workplace and the like. So, yeah, have my legacy. No one will ever remember it's me, but I do so.
Speaker 1:Yeah, it's like a serious answer god, I'm regretting asking this question now when I get to my answer, but anyway, um and and and ray, I mean you know negate is a huge um legacy. Anything else you kind of look back on through your studies and through your work and research that you're proud of, is this the thing that you really point to, something that you want to kind of think about as you go forward?
Speaker 2:Yeah, you know, the thing that drives the passion and the commitment to make something happen is the belief that science can make a difference to climate change. You know that collectively we can get together and we can actually make a difference, actually make a difference. And it's the difference between driving a car and being a passenger in a car. You know If you're driving a car at high speed, but yet it's safe, you know you're going to get there, whereas everybody else is scared in the back. So it is with climate change.
Speaker 2:If you're working with technologies that you can see will make a significant difference to global warming, even though they are still in the early days, then you don't have the fear and that deep concern that everybody I talk to has about climate change, because you know that we can make a difference and that science can make a difference to the rate of development of climate change and to global warming. So I guess, if we achieve our objective, and if we achieve the objective of helping developers build enormous stack farms who, in the end, capture billions of tons of CO2 and put it underground for all time, then I'd be a happy man and say, okay, there's a legacy, there's an achievement that was worth doing lee, before you say anything, we can either go to my really pure I'll answer or we can stop about now.
Speaker 4:No, no, there's no way you're getting away with it, because I know, I know this question came from some I. So, knowing what you did, I can't see how you're ever going to have changed the world, mate. So so what's your legacy?
Speaker 1:um, so well, obviously, lee, you've had a massive impact on the national education system, hopefully set a you know an example globally. And, ray, you're literally trying to make climate change go away and bring us back to where we should be. So I'd love to compete with that. But I didn't know where this was going when I came up with the question, and I'm just going to point to my stint as head of publicity for my college homebrew society, which I think also at the time was very impactful. A lot of people really enjoyed it. Beer wasn't great, I'm not going to lie, but good defence. But we can cut that bit, I think, and just stick on improving the world.
Speaker 4:I think that stays in.
Speaker 1:I really regret that.
Speaker 4:No, so, ray, thank you so much for coming on. Sorry that you had to suffer my learned colleagues' rubbish attempt to close a question On the next podcast. It will go back to me doing them, grill them I think okay yeah, thanks again, ray, for coming on.
Speaker 4:Thanks again for um hosting with me. Just a little shout out to our listeners. Obviously we say this every time, but if you can leave us a little review on whichever platform you listen to the podcast on, that'd be great because it helps other people find us. And, gullum, I'll see you next time.