Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. I'm Pentti Karkkainen, the Chair of the Board of Directors of NuVista Energy, and it's my pleasure to welcome you to NuVista's 2024 Annual and Special Meeting of Shareholders. This year's meeting will be held in a hybrid format to allow shareholders to attend and participate at the meeting in person or through live audio webcast. We hope that by hosting this meeting in a hybrid format, the majority of our shareholders will be able to attend and participate. The Lumi platform allows registered shareholders or duly appointed proxy holders to vote and to submit questions to the moderator. If you have a question, simply click on the messaging icon and type your question in the box at the bottom of the messaging screen, then click the Send button. Questions should be of interest to all shareholders and be relevant to the business of the meeting. When asking a question, please include your name and whether you are a shareholder or a registered proxy holder. I encourage you to submit your questions early. They will be put in the queue and addressed at the appropriate time during the meeting. For those shareholders attending in person, there will be a question and answer period following the presentation portion of this meeting. We look forward to getting your feedback and answering your questions, and thank you for your participation at today's meeting and your support of NuVista. With me today are Jonathan Wright, Chief Executive Officer; Mike Lawford, President and Chief Operating Officer; and Ivan Condic, Vice President, Finance and Chief Financial Officer. Following the formal portion of the meeting, Jonathan will make some brief remarks. I have asked Ivan to act as Secretary of the meeting and representatives of Odyssey Trust Company to act as scrutineers. For meeting efficiency, I have also asked certain shareholders to move and second motions proposed at this meeting. This is not intended to limit discussion or to suggest that other shareholders and proxy holders are not able to move or second motions. Before beginning the meeting, I would like to acknowledge the Indigenous peoples of all the lands that we are on today. I would like to acknowledge the importance of the lands which we each call home. We do this to reaffirm our commitment and responsibility in improving relationships with Canada's Indigenous peoples, and to improving our own understanding of local Indigenous peoples and their cultures. From coast to coast to coast, we acknowledge the ancestral and unceded territory of all Indigenous peoples that call this land home. On behalf of the board, I would like to express our sincere, sincere thanks to the NuVista management team, our employees, and our contractors for their extraordinary efforts and performance in 2023. The past year, NuVista was able to achieve record-setting reserves and production. The 2023 operational and financial results underscore the quality and predictability of NuVista's assets and the ability of our team to generate returns, maintain capital discipline, and return capital to shareholders. The company has achieved significant success in meeting our ESG goals, surpassing several of its five-year targets ahead of schedule, and responded proactively to elevated injury rates, with many new people entering the contract workforce of our industry. NuVista is well positioned to continue to deliver long-term, sustainable value, growth in a manner consistent with our core values and mission. I would also like to recognize my colleagues on the board for your stewardship and sound counsel in helping guide NuVista through what has been an ever-changing landscape. Thank you. On behalf of the NuVista board and management, I would also like to thank you, our shareholders, for your continued support and confidence in NuVista. And with that, we'll move on to the formal part of the proceedings. In accordance with our bylaws, I will chair today's meeting, and I now call the meeting to order. I have received confirmation from Odyssey Trust Company as to the mailing of the meeting materials. I direct that this confirmation, together with copies of the documents mailed to the shareholders, be kept by the secretary with the minutes of this meeting. Business may be transacted at this meeting if two or more persons are present, holding or representing by proxy, not less than 25% of the shares entitled to vote at the meeting. The scrutineers' report has now been received, and it shows that there is a quorum of shareholders present at the meeting. I now declare the meeting is regularly called and properly constituted for the transaction of business. We will conduct each vote by way of an in-person ballot, or by way of vote cast on the Lumi platform, and those submitted by proxy. I understand that the scrutineers have tabulated all the votes received prior to voting cutoff. Thank you to all our shareholders who have voted in advance. If you have previously voted, you do not need to vote again. By voting again, you will revoke any previous vote made prior to voting cutoff. We will now open the online voting for all of the resolutions. If you are attending virtually, you should see voting choices displayed on screen. If you are attending the meeting in person, you should have completed your ballot when you entered the meeting. If you have not yet submitted your ballot, please provide it to the scrutineers now. Particulars of the votes cast on all matters may be obtained from the secretary after the meeting. I direct that the scrutineers' report on all matters be annexed to the minutes of this meeting as a schedule. We will now commence with the business of the meeting. The agenda is as set forth in the notice of meeting, being the presentation of financial statements, fixing the number of directors to be elected, the election of directors, the appointment of auditors, the advisory vote on NuVista's approach to executive compensation, and the approval of the amended and restated stock option plan. Let's begin with the first item of business, the consolidated financial statements of NuVista for the year ended December 31, 2023. Management's discussion and analysis, and the auditor's report thereon, have been provided to shareholders. They are available on our website, on NuVista's SEDAR+ profile, and on the Lumi dashboard page. No action is required by shareholders on this item. The next item of business is fixing the number of directors. Mr. Chair, my name is Carrie Walker, I am a shareholder. I move the number of directors to be elected at this meeting be fixed at nine members. Mr. Chair, my name is Tanya Dickinson. I'm a shareholder, and I second the motion. Thank you, Carrie and Tanya. Ivan, is there any discussion or questions submitted from any registered shareholder or proxy holder on the motion? Mr. Chair, there are no questions on that motion. Thank you, Ivan. In accordance with NuVista's advance notice bylaw, the only individuals entitled to be nominated as directors at this meeting are the persons named as nominees in NuVista's information circular. Therefore, as directed by the board, and in accordance with the information circular, Ronald J. Eckhardt, K.L. Kate Hulsizer, Pentti Karkkainen, Mary Ellen Lutey, Keith A. MacPhail, Ronald J. Pelzer, Deborah S. Stein, Jonathan Wright, and Grant A. Zawalsky are nominated as directors of NuVista to hold office until the next annual election of directors, or until their successors are elected or appointed, subject to the provisions of the Business Corporations Act of Alberta and the bylaws of NuVista. On behalf of the company and its shareholders, I'd like to thank all the directors for their commitment to NuVista. The next item of business is the appointment of auditors. Mr. Chair, my name is Kelly Fisher. I am a shareholder, and I move that KPMG LLP be appointed auditors of NuVista until the next annual meeting, or until their successors appointed, and that the remuneration as such be fixed by the board of directors. Mr. Chair, my name is Hung Nguyen. I'm a shareholder, and I second. Thank you, Kelly and Hung. Ivan, is there any discussion or questions submitted from any registered shareholder or proxy holder on the motion? Mr. Chair, there are no questions on that motion. Thank you. The next item of business is to approve a non-binding advisory resolution concerning NuVista's approach to executive compensation. Mr. Chair, my name is Carrie Walker. I am a shareholder, and I move that the non-binding advisory resolution on page 12 of the information circular of NuVista, dated March twenty-second, twenty twenty-four, be approved. Mr. Chair, my name is Leslie Willis Smith. I am a shareholder, and I second the motion. Thank you, Carrie and Leslie. Ivan, is there any discussion or questions submitted from any registered shareholder or proxy holder? Mr. Chair, there are no questions on that motion. The next item of business is to approve the amended and restated stock option plan, including increasing the maximum number of common shares reserved for issuance under the plan from 10,444,445 common shares to 12,945,000 common shares. Mr. Chair, my name is Kelly Fisher. I am a shareholder, and I move that the resolution approving the amended and restated stock option plan set forth on page 13 of the information circular of NuVista, dated March 22, 2024, be approved. Mr. Chair, my name is Hung Nguyen. I'm a shareholder, and I second. Thank you, Kelly and Hung. Ivan, is there any discussion or questions submitted from any registered shareholder or proxy holder? Mr. Chair, there are no questions on that motion. Ivan, are there any additional questions submitted on the formal business of the meeting? Mr. Chair, there are no questions on the formal business of the meeting. The chair would entertain a motion to terminate the meeting. Mr. Chair, my name is Tanya Dickinson. I'm a shareholder, and I move that this meeting be terminated. Mr. Chair, my name is Leslie Willis Smith. I am a shareholder, and I second the motion. The meeting operator is activating a poll to vote on the termination of the meeting. For those attending the meeting in person, please signify by raising your right hand. I've received confirmation that the motion to terminate the meeting has been carried. I, therefore, declare this meeting terminated and invite our CEO, Jonathan Wright, to deliver his remarks. Thank you. Thanks, Pentti. Thank you, Pentti. Hi, everybody. Thank you for joining us today. Certainly want to welcome all of our staff. Thank you for coming. We're gonna talk about results. These are your results. You're the ones that deliver them, and it's 75 strong here in Calgary and 75 strong out in the field, just for those that don't, don't recall, and that's who delivers all these results. And then, of course, the many folks that work on the rigs and the pipeline crews that support us beyond even that. Couldn't do it without all of you. Also want to invite anyone that's still standing to feel free to sit down if you want to. We're pretty informal around here, so whatever, whatever you like to do there. All right, so... Oh, oh, I want to say one more thing, too. I want to thank, I notice a number of our legal and audit and financial partners and supporters here today, and I appreciate that. You're all very busy people, I know that, and taking the time to come here today and support us is very much appreciated. So, I'm gonna go through our corporate presentation. Certainly not every single slide, but it's worth dwelling on a couple of things, because things for this company are going extremely well, and the results continue to be very repeatable and highly valuable. I forgot to ask Brian, just that one. Okay, thanks, Logan. Here we go.. Looks like it's working. Okay, so just a few minutes ago, our press release crossed the wires and put out our Q1 results. We're very pleased with those results, and obviously, you can read through them in detail. We've, we've put a little bit of a summary on this slide here, just to give you an idea. Q1 came in, just over the top of our guidance range, which was 77,000-80,000 BOEs per day. We were just over that, and, we've set our Q2 guidance, as you can see here, for 80,000-83,000 BOEs per day. We certainly expect to be passing through and above 90,000 BOEs per day during the second half of the year on the strength of the many new wells that are coming on stream as we speak. Things are going extremely well. We continue to spend less than cash flow on an annualized basis, and as a result, we have significant excess free cash flow, and we use that to buy back shares. So far, since 2022, you'll see at the bottom of the slide there, we've already bought back over 30 million shares for approximately CAD 360 million of cash returned to shareholders. So things continue to go really well. We're happy with the, the growth, and of course, our debt remains far, far below our soft debt ceiling of CAD 350 million. I'll skip ahead here 'cause I think many of you know the story quite well. But it's worth just touching on our reserves. We did put these out at year-end, and but typically, we keep this slide in our deck until our AGM, because it is an AGM, and we think it's worth just sort of recapping the year. This is a fantastic result. I'm very proud of all the results that all of you have turned in here. You can see we continue to drill anywhere from 2-4 benches, 4 in many cases now, and you can kind of see on the map there, we've got reserves, contingent resources, and wells covering a large part of our land base, and yet still lots of room to continue adding wells in. And as you can see here, 25 years of development booked at this point, with 1,180 locations, and you can see the breakdown there. It's about 340 in 2P reserves, and then well over 800 in contingent resources. When we get to our growth slide, we've committed to growing to 105,000 BOEs per day and beyond, and we continue to work on the beyond part because we don't even need two-thirds of these wells in order to grow to that 105,000 plan. So we continue to add to that and do the work to get the downstream contracts and all the other things in place to provide for that reliable growth beyond our current commitment of 105. And it's on the back of these reserves, which are deep and long. We always talk about growing to a plateau such that as a minimum, we could keep it flat for 10-15 years once we get there. But as our engineers and geologists continue to find more wells to drill, that plateau has to keep going up into the future with a longer growth runway. Now, you don't just add reserves, you have to add them with great value, and you can see here, this is the value slide that goes with that. Tremendous value being added. We added 14% to our PDP reserves. That's the on-production reserves, and on a per share basis, because we're buying back shares, that's 20% on a per share basis. The recycle ratio, you'll know, is netback divided by F&D. So that's what's the value of these reserves we're finding divided by the cost to find them. A very healthy number for a corporation is 1.5 times. You can see here in the last three years, we've been 2.7-5 times. Absolutely tremendous results, and that's why the cash flow continues to recycle very quickly back from the drill bit. Down at the bottom left, you can see the intrinsic value of our 1P and 2P reserves. From a BTAX point of view, you're talking, approaching CAD 30, certainly well over CAD 20, when you talk about, after-tax type numbers. So I won't dwell on too many of those, but it's very important that the economics of those reserves shine through. Here's another way of looking at that. This is our Pipestone area. We've only just begun to scratch the surface, as you can see, drilling pads right beside known pads, getting highly reliable and repeatable results with very high value. You can see on the top right, most of the time we've been drilling these wells, we've had $85 oil and $4 gas, and we've been returning 1.5-3 times the cost of a pad in the first 12 months alone. So you spend $50 million on a pad, you get back $50 to $100 to $150 million in the first 12 months alone. Obviously, prices are down a bit now, so you can take about three-quarters to one turn off of that, but still fantastic, fantastic results, which is why we haven't changed our capital program. We continue on with $500 million of spending, and I'll talk a little bit about that later. You can see from looking at the map, we can do this for many, many years into the future, and we'll be approaching 60,000 BOEs per day in the very close future here, just from the Pipestone property alone. I'll skip ahead here. So looking south of the river at our Wapiti properties, where we've been drilling for actually over 13 years now, and you can see here, we're getting excellent results as well. Not quite as strong as our flagship, which is Pipestone, but these are still tremendous results. You can see sort of 1.25-2 times our money back in the first 12 months. So again, tremendous returns, and very soon, this area is gonna be pressing 50,000 BOEs per day. Of course, we continue to work on pushing beyond that. Highly repeatable, highly valuable results. A big part of the reserves increase in the extra locations coming in has been Gold Creek, shown in blue here. And the big part of that is pushing north into the area where we never claimed any reserves prior, and then also the Lower Montney layer, which ourselves and some of our nearby competitors, including Paramount, have been turning in some tremendous results, and we're well delineated now. And, in fact, the best pad we've ever drilled in Gold Creek is the last one we drilled here, and you can see that green line. You know, it's hard to get from a graph sometimes, but you look at that far right-hand side, that cumulative condensate green line is twice as good as all of the other pads. That is, that is huge for economics. Not only is the future looking voluminous in terms of numbers of wells to drill, but highly valuable. It's important to manage our costs, and I, I want to commend everyone in the room and out in the field for doing so. We've done a tremendous job structurally reducing our costs, drilling faster, fracking with less water and less time, higher pumping hours per day. All the things that you do, which means that even if we have inflation, we're still either managing our costs or driving them down. And this has been a tremendous result. I won't go through the details of this, but you can see even in Gold Creek, most recently here, we're down to 12 and 10 days per well drilled. These are the things that drive the time downwards, and time is money when you're working on a drilling or a frac rig. So if you really look at bundling it up in the bottom right-hand side there, you can see that in 2024 here, we're actually still drilling our wells for less than what it cost in 2019 before all the post-pandemic inflation kicked in, and I don't think there are any companies that can say that. So it's tremendous, and it's really good for the economics. I'm going to skip the type curves 'cause I've already shown you the actuals, which are better. So I'm going to go here to. This is the growth slide I referred to. So, you know, we currently are locking and loading the capacity. The folks are out in the field installing the equipment right now as we speak, and we're going to be increasing our capacity, as we have done many times in the prior decade. In this case, reaching 105,000 BOEs per day, which implies a run rate of around 100,000, because you never run right on the pin 24/7. So that's all happening sort of in three tranches now through the first quarter of next year, and of course, we're already working on the next tranches beyond that. It's important to have flexibility, so the pencil-thin blue line is our minimum volume commitment. You have to reserve space with midstreamers. That's what we did. The top of the gray is the space available to us, and then the sort of blue bars is our plan, which, not surprisingly, is meant to be cushioned nicely in between those two lines. Allows us lots of flexibility as we continue to grow. And how are we going to pay for that? Well, we're going to pay for that with less than cash flow. So about CAD 500 million a year is our capital budget on the right-hand side, and on the left-hand side, obviously, we've got a soft gas price year this year. But if you return to just sort of mid-cycle type pricing, which I should have brought my glasses, but I believe that's 75 dollar oil and 3.50 gas. Someone can probably read that. Thank you. So that's kind of more like mid-cycle pricing, and you can see the free cash flow after spending the capital is in that sort of CAD 250-350 million per year and growing as production continues to grow, as we spend less than cash flow. So, I think I'll skip ahead here. I already talked about our debt. There's a graphic on the left-hand side there, and it basically shows you we don't have very much of it. It's fantastic. That's by design, and we're going to continue to be very prudent with our balance sheet. And on the right-hand side, what that shows is we've got a lot of cushion. In other words, if we did need to borrow a lot of money, we could. We're very bankable right now, and I thank the bankers that are in the room. But, actually, we're not a large draw at all by design. Obviously, if you take what I said about the financial metrics for the company, there's no need to run a high debt level. So I'll just take this slide to remind all of you that, you know, two-thirds of our production is nice, clean, Canadian natural gas, but that's only one-third of our cash flow, and one-third of our production, of course, is condensate. I think you all know that's a very light form of oil, and it's mixed with heavy oil in order to make it less viscous and pump it down the pipeline. So the market is in Alberta, and it's a tremendous profit center because we don't have to ship it outside of Alberta. We're making it here, and we're using it here. And so, as a result, we get a premium price for it. So that's 1/3 of our production, but that's 2/3 of our cash flow, and that is the linchpin to NuVista's economics. So this slide is that other 2/3 of our production, which is natural gas. Now, even though it's only a third of our cash flow, we want premium price for it, and I would say for our size, we are the most diversified natural gas seller. We sell to what we call the Five Points of North America. I'll remind you, and they're all shown there in colors, but it's basically we keep a little bit in AECO, typically less than 15%, 'cause for flexibility reasons, and also we can have cold winters here from time to time. Also, we ship to Malin, California, Dawn, Ontario, Chicago, and the U.S. Gulf Coast, and that's why we're able to connect to the various markets. You never know who's going to have a cold winter or a hot summer and get that premium price spike, and we've benefited from that each time it's happened in the various locations. And that's why we not only get a diversified price, but we tend to average far more than the AECO realized price, in just about every quarter for the last, as long as I can remember. Okay, one quick word on ESG. We've worked very hard to do practical projects, reducing our emissions as we grow, and I'm very proud of the progress that our team has done here. Obviously, this is something that's in the press a lot, but, you know, the numbers speak for themselves for NuVista. 65% reduction since 2012 on our emissions per BOE, that's CO2 equivalent emissions. That's a huge reduction on a per BOE basis, and then you can see, the other results are shown there in writing in terms of reductions since 2020. But the other thing is the zero methane pads, and a lot of the other efforts we've done on methane, which is the biggest greenhouse gas contributor, have shown tremendous results, and we're something like 57, I think it says 57% reduction in absolute methane, even as we've grown, and in fact, that means we've got about a roughly 85% reduction in intensity per BOE for methane. So these are tremendous results, and we haven't had to sell the farm to do this. This is good, practical engineering projects and hard work in operations, for surveillance, to increase efficiencies and reduce emissions, and I'm very proud of what the company's done. I'm very proud of what Canada continues to do in this area. Which brings me to this. So I want to say a few words about our industry and Canada in general. So, I think I'll call this a town hall for energy citizens, because I think we all need to really sit down and think about some of the rhetoric and the misguided rhetoric that's going on around us versus some of the facts that are out there. So I think a reckoning is coming. In the area of climate change, as in life, there is a difference between aspiration, realistic action, and clicking your heels together to wish for something to happen. Unfortunately, the world has been clicking their heels together when it comes to energy transition, and now reality is fast starting to set in. In the 2019 period, the world reached what I heard someone recently call Peak Greta, and for the short time, they were right. The COVID pandemic hit in 2020, and the world was shut down with the help of global communication and coordination, something that has never happened before in the 4.5 billion-year history of the Earth. Nobody actually did need our oil and gas products for a while, or as much. Oil consumption dropped about 9%, 9% on an annualized basis, but the world did not enjoy it very much, did they? Now, as we come back to normal, energy consumption and production of all forms is hitting record highs. Yes, record highs from each form of energy, and I'm gonna show you a graph on that. So it's important to kind of stare at this graph for a minute. This is since 1850, and you can see back in 1850, it was mostly wood products, and then along came coal. That's the next line to come up around 1900. And then along came oil, and then along came natural gas, and then came nuclear, and you can see, as you go on down the list here. A couple of things, if you really stare at this graph for a minute, first of all, each new energy product took off hugely and became very popular. Secondly, it took 50-75 years for each new one to become a fully established product. 50-75 years. The third thing we should realize is, can anyone see a single line on this graph that goes down when the other energy product comes in? I don't think so. It doesn't go down, it goes up because the world continues to grow and demand more energy. Perspective is everything, so if we take a look at perspective by stacking all these graphs on top of each other, as Vaclav Smil and many others do, these are energy experts, that's what it looks like from 1800. And I think if you look at the very tiny top there... See if I can point to it. Right there. The shake of my hand is exactly the amplitude I'm looking for there. Okay? It amplifies when you've got distance. But, that is what renewables have been able do, to do with $4 trillion over the last few years. $4 trillion of investment. This isn't a speech about not going after renewables. I think it's great. The world is going after renewables and needs to continue and will, but primary energy is more than 80% supplied by fossil fuels today. Not a single energy source has ever gone down in the history of mankind. And we think we're gonna replace all of that by tomorrow, if you listen to the detractors of our industry. It's just not realistic at all, and the physics and the economics simply do not support it. It will not come to pass. So what about that? Politicians aspire to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in our energy mix, and in the absence of settled science, it is worth trying. It's the unreality of the pace of this that is ridiculous, and there is a serious lack of honesty from politicians on what it's going to cost. Whether it's nuclear, which the world hasn't even embraced yet, or solar and wind, which has 50-150 times less energy density than oil and gas, or spending extra money on carbon capture and sequestration for oil and gas, all forms of energy are going to cost far, far more. In areas like the UK, Germany, and California, the extra zero on the energy bills at times will become more chronic in more countries, and citizens will increasingly ask harder questions about the cost and the rotating blackouts. We are now routinely complacent about that the pumps will have gasoline for us, and the light switch and the thermostat will do their thing at the flick of a finger. I talked about energy density, and this is a graph. Now, I still have to do a little more research. This researcher said gas is even more energy-dense than nuclear. I have to think about that one. I, that's not intuitive for me, but certainly the rest of it is. You can see solar... Well, you can't really see solar or wind, compared to natural gas, so that's that energy density. When we talk about the diffusivity of energy for solar and wind, it is a real physics and economics challenge that the world is working on. But it is not going to replace oil and gas anywhere in the timeframes that we've talked about. So Vaclav Smil and many other fact and science-based authors have demonstrated that affordable and reliable energy isn't just helpful for economic development and lifting societies out of poverty, energy is economic development, period. Prematurely handicapping and shutting down our oil and gas industry, even as people continue to use our products every single day, before the alternatives have been developed to replace it, is short-sighted lunacy by people who simply have not done the math. So if we go back to this same graph, a couple of things I'll just point out here. Actually, I skipped ahead in my notes, and I'm not gonna repeat myself. So, what I say about, these numbers is, those that are against our industry, I strongly implore them to find some balance. Don't let perfect be the enemy of good. If you truly believe we can transition off of all fossil fuels with the snap of a finger, then I guess you advocate for all green energy and no more fossil fuels, not even natural gas. But if you're wrong, what happens? If you fail to get there, you've missed out on decades of greenhouse gas emissions reductions. I showed you NuVista's numbers versus status quo that could have taken place by growing Canadian natural gas production to back out coal, which is double the greenhouse gas emissions or more, compared to natural gas. Canada's LNG industry, if allowed to grow, can supply natural gas to displace the coal-burning world, while hugely building Canada's economy and reducing emissions worldwide with zero government subsidies required. Private industry would, and can, and will fund it. 15% of Canada's GDP is from the natural resource sector, one in ten jobs, and half of that is from oil and gas. We have among the best governance and human rights standards in the world, and we have among the best greenhouse gas and methane emissions and reductions in the world. These are CAPP stats now, not NuVista stats, and you can pretty much read them for yourself. We have total conventional oil and natural gas production increased 21%, okay? We've had a total Scope 1 emissions reduction of 24% and methane emissions reducing 34%. This is from 2012, and these are absolute numbers, not per BOE. Here's another stat. As you can see here, the natural gas side of the industry alone, natural gas production went up 35%, methane emissions went down 38%, and Canada was already in good standing before we started against the world. You can reduce greenhouse gas emissions while supplying the energy that the world needs. Yet, Canada's GDP per person has continued to fail to grow, despite the riches of our natural resources, while other G7 countries, including the USA, continue to outpace us. Indeed, Canada has now fallen to 56% of real GDP per person compared to the USA. Foreign investment in Canada is at all-time lows. Why is this? Many reasons, including federal anti-business policy and also regulations, which have made it much harder and longer to get resource and oil and gas projects built. Now, don't worry, I'm done soon. In 2022, oil and gas generated CAD 997 per hour worked in Canada for the Canadian economy, and as opposed to the average for all sectors, which was CAD 61 per hour worked. Our industry in Canada has made these great gains on emissions reductions by doing common sense and/or economic projects to get there, the low-hanging fruit. But the Ottawa proposed 2030 emissions cap is a whole other level, which makes no sense and promises to destroy Canada's economy. We must push back, and that's why I'm entreating you to this, diatribe. And we have to get this story beyond to our echo chamber in Alberta. Alberta is an echo chamber on this topic, so tell your friends and families, and especially those in Ottawa with unrealistic ideals about extinguishing emissions by tomorrow, even as they drive home in their hydrocarbon-fueled cars to their hydrocarbon-heated homes. "Do we think we can wish this all away?" you should ask them. Or, "If oil and gas have a much longer worldwide life, worldwide life, shouldn't we get it from places like Canada, where we continue to re-reduce the emissions that come from it, unlike other places?" Let's give solar, wind, and nuclear the many decades of time they will need to grow market share. Let's take away some of the polarization in the debate and bring balance to the conversations. This is a story of needing all of the above, not my energy instead of yours. We have ethically sourced coffee; we should have ethically sourced natural gas and oil from Canada with a maple leaf on it. I am immensely proud of what our industry does for Canada, and I'm immensely proud of what you do for NuVista, and I hope you are, too. Thank you! I think we're done? Sure. Any questions? Comments, please. Oh, your well costs. Could you tell me what size casing you run? Size casing? Well, we happen to have Mark Thorne sitting right here. Casing size, Mark? Sure. For a lot of our Pipestone program, we use 5.5-inch and 4.5-inch, a mixed, hybrid string. And then for the wells that are further south, we use 7-inch, intermediate and a 4.5 laterals. Part of the reason for that is we can go monobore in many of our areas, but not all of our areas, and so. Fair to say that the laterals are essentially all 4.5? Correct. Yeah. That helps to reduce the cost, I presume, over 5.5. Well, it does. It's less steel, but it's. Yeah M ore complicated. Completion design. The 5.5 helps with the completion efficiency in fracking the wells faster and using less sand with more water, mostly. The 4.5 is an ideal size for our tools, but luckily, since our pressure readings, all that stuff. Good. Thank you. Yeah, one of the, I mean, there's so many things that the team have done to reduce costs. But, you know, one of the more recent ones is being able to do monobore drilling in more of our areas, and that saves you an entire casing string and the time associated with running it. So that's been one of a number of good developments that the team has done. Yeah. Thanks for the question. Any others? I think it's awesome that we got at least one question. Here's another one. Okay, I don't know how to ask this. I was wondering if, because you're so interested in, like, climate change thing, if you had actually looked at any of the climate models? So the question is, have I looked at any of the climate models out of my interest here? And the answer is no. I don't look at the models themselves. They're incredibly complex, but I do try and read as many books about this stuff as I can, and not just books that agree with what I think, but books that don't agree with what I think. And, you know, those books are from people that spend their whole life looking at climate science and looking at climate models, and the climate is incredibly complex and difficult to model, and the models are chronically overestimating the amount of temperature rise. That's not to deny that temperature rise isn't occurring. The Earth is warming, and some of that is anthropogenic cause, not all of it. But there is a lot of disagreement among the scientists on exactly to what degree. Don't do that. But what I was wondering, it seems to me that this issue with the methane is relatively recent, the more concern with methane and the effect it's having. And it made me wonder if the climate models from 10-20 years ago were only modeling, like, greenhouse gases and attributing it all to CO2 for the greenhouse effect. Because if they've decided now that methane is maybe 50% or 70% of the effect, maybe CO2 is really trivial. That's what I was wondering. I don't know if that's right. Yeah. So, I think to try and answer that would be going... You know, it would be foolhardy for me to try and pretend I'm a climate scientist. But so the question was around, maybe models 20 years ago didn't take into account methane or didn't take into account properly, and if so, are they taking into account CO2 properly today? I think the models are properly taking into account CO2 and methane. Methane is getting a lot of discussion these days because, number one, it's a low-hanging fruit, and number two, it is 30-100 times more potent as a greenhouse gas. I don't think that's new science, and I don't think there's disagreement there from what I've read. But it's all about the half-life. The reason it's 30-100 times is the half-life. Which one are you gonna use? So there's different numbers that get thrown around. There's no question it's more potent. I think the difficulty is in climate modeling, things like clouds. You know, those are a big greenhouse. Yeah, exactly. Water. Actually, clouds are a reflector, but water vapor is, is a greenhouse gas as well. So it's, you can imagine with the currents and the clouds, it's a very, very difficult thing to model. So I don't know. I think the bottom line is you're modeling something that's very, very, very difficult to model, and I think the reason it's getting a lot more airtime these days is simply because the whole climate thing has continued to amp up. You know, I wanna make sure everybody understands, like, I, in no way am I denying that the world wants and needs CO2 reduction and CO2 equivalent reduction. Methane's getting some focus because it is a lower-hanging fruit, and we've made some great gains as an industry by focusing on it. What I'm trying to argue for, hopefully came through, is realism. You can wish you can solve a problem, but that doesn't solve the problem, and if you avoid really good solutions, like natural gas instead of coal, then you can actually end up worse off. And an example of that, just in the last couple of years, is Germany, where they went too far into solar and wind, had a low wind, quarter, or actually year, and didn't have the benefit of the Russian natural gas anymore, and they actually significantly increased their emissions through coal, even though they're one of the most progressive countries on trying to reduce, CO2. So I, I don't try and get into, arguments about which model's right or isn't right. I just, I try to talk about realism on getting reductions while supplying the energy that the world demands. Last chance? Okay, look, thank you, everybody. I appreciate you being here today, and, we'll see you well, long before next year, I hope.