Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Thank you for standing by. Welcome and thank you for joining the Green Hydrogen Systems Trading Statement Q3 2022. Throughout today's recorded presentation, all participants will be in a listen-only mode. The presentation will be followed by a question-and-answer session. If you would like to ask a question, you may press star followed by one. If you wish to remove yourself from the question queue, you may press star followed by two. Please press the star key followed by zero for operator assistance. It's my pleasure, and I would now like to turn the conference over to Sebastian Koks Andreassen, CEO. Please go ahead, sir. Thank you very much, operator, and good morning, all. Thank you very much for spending time with us this morning. This is the team from Green Hydrogen Systems, pleased to present for you our trading statement for quarter 3 of 2022. Firstly, before we go to the real content, I want to make you aware that this presentation will include forward-looking statements, and that we kindly refer to the overview of risk factors in our annual report 2021, which is available at our corporate website, greenhydrogen.dk. Today's participants, including myself, Sebastian, the CEO of the company, will be our CFO, Ole, my colleague, and also Jens, our head of investor relations. We will cover the ground with you today. As introduced by the operator, this presentation will be followed by a Q&A session at the very end. The ground we would like to cover with you today includes an executive summary of quarter three. It will include a brief update on our business, our product, and the markets that we are active in. That will be followed by some closing remarks before we open up for any Q&A at the very end of the presentation. Firstly, on the executive summary, we are reporting here on a quarter where we have been very pleased to note that we have continued delivery of our A-Series electrolyzers to our customer sites. That includes additional electrolyzers that are now with our customers undergoing final test and validation, which will bring the equipment up until meeting the revenue recognition criteria for the equipment, which expectedly will start taking place towards the end of quarter four. The units we delivered already back in quarter two of this year, they continue to show positive test data, and that includes hydrogen production, which is in line with our expected specifications, which is again a corner component in the scaling of this equipment with our customers and ultimately meeting the revenue recognition criteria of the equipment. Product scale is absolutely paramount for us, and that goes as well for scaling our production facilities. We're also very pleased to report that on that note, on our current factory facility in Kolding, Denmark, we have continued the scaling of our existing facility to become a plus 400 MW electrolyzer capacity by 2023-2024. That is ahead of plan and it is according to our budget, even in a tight market. This expansion will enable our scalable serial production of electrolyzers and that goes both for the current A-Series and also for the future X-Series that we are currently working on in a prototype version. Altogether, extremely pleased to report that things are well ahead of plan there, and we expect commissioning of the factory by next year and already moving into parts of the new facilities by the end of next month in December. We continue assembling of our X-Series prototype. It is progressing, as we reported, by the end of quarter two, progressing according to plan and with a target delivery time on customer side by first quarter of next year. Lastly, also as a new event of today's report is that we are very pleased to announce that we have entered into a partnership for the installation of the first X-Series prototype with the GreenHyScale project, which I will come back to a bit later on in the presentation. Turning our attention to business products and markets. Firstly, on the A-Series, we would like to provide you with a couple of more comments on how that is progressing. During the quarter that we report on today, we have delivered additional A-Series electrolyzer units to our customers. You may recall that we are working from a current order backlog of 1,313 megawatts of electrolysis equipment. We continue to target up to 5 megawatts of delivery of this equipment within this calendar year, and residual 8 megawatts to be delivered during the first quarters of next year. Delivering the electrolyzers to undergo tests with our customers is the important step to achieve the acceptance test and ultimately the revenue recognition criteria. I will get back to that in further detail when we come to the financial guidance for 2022, which is kept in the range that we put forward in relation to our quarter two announcement in August. The electrolyzers we have delivered continue to show positive initial test data, which is a good thing, and what is expectedly between now and ultimately revenue recognition is further test data and ultimately the final validation and compliance work, verification work that is needed for these first electrolyzers with our customers. As said, the residual part of the order backlog is expected to be delivered in first half of 2023, which is another focus for us, obviously, that we are also building the order pipeline for a delivery later in quarter three and quarter four of next year. We have come now out of a period where we had suspended our issuing of new binding offers to customers, and we have now picked up doing that again. We expect the results from these binding offers in the market to yield in actual contracts over the next quarters to come. A reminder of our order backlog of, as said, 13 megawatts of electrolysis equipment. These are some selected European projects. I will not go through that in detail. In addition to this list of shown projects, is also customer orders outside Europe, in fact, in Australia and in South America. You will see across these 15 end-to-end use cases that it does include a number of different countries. We expect upon final delivery of the current order backlog to have installed equipment in nine different countries. Which is a great step forward for us, also for building up our service and maintenance business with our customers. You will see a number of different end use cases across these selected European projects, ranging all the way from methanol production, and predominantly actually, hydrogen for refueling, which our hydrogen produced on GHS equipment is specifically well suited for, as it is at fuel-cell grade. Great expectation and excitement around now starting to push our equipment towards these end use cases and different geographies across Europe. An important undertaking in our scaling of Green Hydrogen Systems is, of course, the product development. We have a number of times before talked about the X-Series development, which is the addition and a more powerful version compared to our current A-Series. Each of these X-Series modules are targeting 6 MW of electrolysis capacity. The prototype version, which is indeed the first version of this product, is expected to be delivered on site in Skive, Denmark, by quarter one of next year. This prototype is playing a role in the much larger GreenHyScale project, which is a consortium of partners of which we are electrolyzer OEM to. This may develop into a total scope of the project of 100 MW of installed capacity over the next couple of years. First focus for us is to land the prototype in a successful manner by quarter one of next year. This is also where we have taken the important step forward and entered into a partnership with Burmeister & Wain Scandinavian Contractor, also known as BWSC, for the specific installation and commissioning work related to this first X-Series prototype. As we have talked about a number of times with our investors and analysts, partnerships are an important element in scaling of our OEM business. We are seeing a number of end use cases that are actually asking us as the OEM to deliver a more complete turnkey solution around installation commissioning as well. This first step into the partnership arena with the BWSC is really exciting for us, and we are very pleased to report that at today's call. At our product side, you can see here a brief overview of the current A-Series on the graphics on the left-hand side, and the future X-Series on the graphics on the right-hand side. These are indeed the two main products that we expect to be the basis for our scaling of commercial traction in our business. The A-Series, which is competitive in project sizes of the smaller pilot and demonstration projects, between 1 up to 5, potentially 10 megawatts. For the future also, the X-Series, which on a standardized and modular basis can be used in whatever number desired to scale electrolysis plant capacity to up to 100 and beyond megawatts of electrolysis capacity. Definitely our product to compete in the future is the X-Series, however, supported with a base load of commercial traction from the A-Series also in the years to come. We are working on presenting a number of features around our technology, including the list on the left-hand side, which clearly includes high efficiency, which is our ability to convert electrons to hydrogen in the most efficient and cost-efficient manner, bringing down the Levelized Cost of Hydrogen. Modularity, an important aspect for us. Pressurized alkaline, which is our technology, clearly providing cost savings also for the customer's end use cases. Dynamic operations, the ability of the equipment to work with the intermittent nature of renewable electricity sources. One important aspect as well, which is the small footprint, which we really see as one of the competitive factors, going forward as well. If you think about the future integration of electrolysis equipment into other installations, for example, offshore wind turbines, small footprint will be a key competitive parameter. I already alluded to factory expansion and how that goes. We are here expanding our current 75 nameplate capacity production capacity towards 400 and beyond 400 MW. It is important for us as Green Hydrogen Systems that we make sure that there is a balance between, on the one hand, the commercial traction of the company, and the other hand, how much capacity we actually commission. We find this number, given where we are, given where the market are, as a good number for us. We have clear visibility to scaling this 400 to up to and beyond 1 gigawatts on the current premises in Kolding, if that proves to be the need and the case. We can also use this factory blueprint for scaling outside Denmark, as we also expect production and manufacturing of our equipment to take place outside of Denmark in the years to come. All this is going ahead of plan and on budget, which we're also very pleased to report. As said in the beginning, we expect commissioning of the first part of these facilities already by next month in December, which is well ahead of plan. Really pleased to report that today. A competitive product, production facility, and a competent organization are three main factors to make sure that we position well towards the significant scale up of electrolysis demands in the European and global market. We have, as part of this presentation today, included this market view, where the graphics on the left-hand side compares to how we considered the European market approximately a year ago, and how that compares to the current view of the European market potential. As you will note from the graphics here, we are working from an installed base of electrolysis capacity by 2021 of approximately zero or potentially 0.2 gigawatts in total. That is expected according to the European Green Deal, to grow to around 6 gigawatts already by 2024-25. A year ago, Europe expected out of a total amount of 80 gigawatts to have installed capacity by 40 gigawatts ourselves here by 2030. That number has increased meanwhile significantly to now be around 110 gigawatts, seems to be the consensus, or even higher than that. This looks even more dramatic on a positive note, when you look towards three decades out towards 2050, where a year ago, numbers of 225 have more than doubled. We see a strong political momentum building up around the industry. We see a strong will also to make sure that the regulatory and financial environment around the industry is also matured in the same way. On a quite unfortunate background with the war in Europe, we also see a new priority around security of energy supply across states and nations building up, unfortunately. Altogether, a positive circumstance for green hydrogen and the energy transition. Most recently, we also picked up, in addition to the REPowerEU program and intentions, the US Inflation Reduction Act that was announced earlier this quarter, that will provide a significant stimulation of electrolysis and green hydrogen build up on the US market. Clearly this has, the latter point, really added the US also for us as one additional focus market to the focus markets we already looked at around Asia-Pacific, South America and Europe. By that comment on markets, we mean to conclude on the business, product and market section. I would then like to confirm that the updated guidance that we put forward by the end of August this year, which was a renewed guidance following the period of suspended guidance, that remains our target for the year. That includes a revenue line still in a relatively broad range between DKK 1 million and DKK 19 million. The 19 million reflecting the reasonable and realizable target of the revenue value of the approximately 5 MW that we're targeting delivering of this year. The 1 million reflects the embedded uncertainty in working on delivery towards the calendar year end, which may cause some of this revenue to slip into 2023. Altogether, a revenue range kept around DKK 1 million-DKK 19 million, for now. Gross profit expectedly negative, given the circumstances on additional costs and penalties, between DKK 20 million and DKK 50 million negative. EBITDA in the range of DKK 235 million to DKK 255 million negative. A negative EBIT of DKK 270 million to DKK 290 million negative. Altogether, CapEx investment of between DKK 310 million and DKK 350 million of investment. These EBITDA numbers, EBIT numbers, and CapEx numbers by design reflect our continued investment in production capacity in our product and also in scaling our organizations. Altogether, guidance for 2022 kept at the same level as we issued it back in August of this year. As a matter of closing remarks and really recapping, today's content. Firstly, as said, delivery of 8 A-Series units to customer sites continue. These 8 electrolyzer units are planned to undergo final acceptance tests now prior to the event where we can revenue recognize of this, which we are really keen and very excited to get across that important point for us. The X-Series prototype is targeting Q1 2023 delivery of the first prototype. This has been strongly supported by also the partnership with BWSC that we have entered into around installation and commissioning. We continue to see our pressurized alkaline electrolysis technology as very well positioned and one of the preferred technologies for the larger projects going forward and in the future. Lastly, as rounded off just a second ago, we see a continued and very positive momentum and outlook for the overall green hydrogen market, supported by both investors and across industry players and governments globally. That means to conclude the presentation of today, and I'm pleased now to hand back to the operator for any Q&A that you may have, please. Ladies and gentlemen, at this time, we will begin the question-and-answer session. Anyone who wishes to ask a question may press star followed by one. If you wish to remove yourself from the question queue, you may press star followed by two. Anyone who has a question may press star followed by one at this time. One moment for the first question, please. We have the first question from Dan Conrad from Carnegie. Please go ahead, sir. Yes, hi, Dan from Carnegie here. Nice to hear that you are making progress on the delivery of the A eries here. I also understand you are now making site acceptance tests with the clients. From where you are now, can you give some color here? What can potentially go wrong? Are you so say close to finalizing or is there still a large amount of tests ahead of you before you can actually revenue recognize these versions? That would be the first question. Thank you, Dan, and good morning. We are undergoing these deliveries for final site acceptance tests. We expect to spend a bit more time on that for these first electrolyzers delivered to customers than we will over time. We are undertaking not only tests but also final verification and compliance work, as we call it. We have a third-party independent party supporting us in making sure that our own certification is made according to standards. We're very comfortable with the progress on that. Without deep diving, which may turn into a more theoretical response on what can theoretically go wrong from here, I can let you know that we have seen no systems or functions issues compared to what we announced earlier this year. We have not seen that in the recent quarter. We are comfortable that we are working from a much more robust basis when going into these site acceptance tests. In terms of what can go wrong, I see it more like, if anything, a delay aspect and a time aspect than a technology aspect. Mm-hmm. That altogether is also the basis for us maintaining our revenue guidance expectation, for the year where we can see ourselves in a situation where we have successfully delivered, the first 5 of the 13 megawatts in our order backlog. At the Q2, you mentioned, you know, cooling, pressure, also production, or output. Which one of these has been the most challenging actually to fix, so to say? What are the additional costs involved in doing that? Does it mean that you know you need to readdress how you price the product, or is it just you know a matter of you making small tweaks and then we are home free, basically? Let me try to answer the different aspects of the question then. Firstly, we did embark upon a significant challenge in April, which was also the basis for us suspending our revenue guidance disappointingly. We did that because we saw a number of issues related to systems and functions with our equipment. You mentioned some of them. Cooling has been brought to a solution with a heavy involvement of our sub-supplier in question. We had some pressure issues due to a wrong design of pipe valves in total that we have changed, and that has again allowed us to deliver north of 30 bars, which is a very important competitive factor of our equipment. We had a backlog on our software, which we have worked on bringing down to a comfortable level now. That altogether makes us very comfortable now that we have the technology systems and components issues under control. We have on that basis started delivering the equipment to customers, which is also a testimony to our comfort in the systems actually working. What we have now in front of us, as I'm repeating myself here, is undergoing these final tests with our customers at their sites. This has proven to be a more costly step for us than we had expected. It is all included in the guidance for 2022. The cost increases we have seen on this is reflected in our gross profits, and for that matter, the EBITDA level of the company, that we are putting forward today. Obviously, when we have cleaned out these first units of the order backlog carrying a negative gross profit, we will be back on the expected levels on positive margins, on the new and fresh equipment that we will progress and process on new contracts, going forward. In terms of total cost base, if I noted that question correctly, are we reassessing the costing of the equipment? We are at all times making sure that the cost of manufacturing the equipment is kept to a minimum here at the OEM, and we also make sure that we land at the highest possible sales price point with our customers. We have seen some cost also due to some more tight supply chains. We are also seeing a net positive effect on bringing the underlying cost base down, given what we work on, cost out initiatives, with our suppliers. At net/net, we are comfortable on the track we are having on our customer price points, delivering the margins that we originally expected, on the fresh equipment, from next year. A question on the market, because you mentioned that demand for green hydrogen continues to grow, to be, to cite you perfectly, basically. What do you mean by demand? Is that the orders booked by the market? I mean, you haven't really booked orders, Q2, Q3 at least. Just to get an understanding of how big is the market right now? What is actually being ordered compared to, let's say, last year? Because we are seeing the exact opposite in other renewable markets, like wind, in particular, where market is significantly down year-over-year. Just to understand the dynamics here and how big the market is and how much of a share you currently have with your 13 megawatt of order bookings. Yeah, fully noted. I think it's worth distinguishing when answering between what is demand potential and what is actually order backlog. Exactly. To start with the latter, you are correct in noting that we're delivering a flat order backlog from quarter two to quarter three of this year. Part of that explanation is that we have by choice suspended issuing of firm and binding orders from us until we had visibility of the technical solutions to our issues. We have now actually in the beginning of quarter three restarted issuing of binding offers to our customers, and we expect that to yield new customer contracts over the next period of time and in the next quarters. Altogether, we are standing on par on the 13 MW order backlog, and clearly something we are working very hard on pushing upwards at the same time that we are, of course, delivering from that order backlog to existing customers. Now, switching from that real-time view of the factory and the broader market comments I made, I think it's worth distinguishing between what is demand potential and what is real markets. Real market defined by an established supply chain, technologies, end-use cases, regulatory support, and a stable framework around that. I will not claim, at least this is our view, that that is a market for green hydrogen that we see today. We are absolutely confident that this is the market that we will see in a couple of years from now. Right now, when talking about political sentiment and the potential, this is very much on the needs of green hydrogen in our future energy system as it is put forward in the numbers I mentioned on the prior slide. We will see over the next couple of years a need of tying those elements together, demand potential and real market, and making sure, and this is not only for us, but overall, that the industry will establish itself around a more established supply chain, capital for projects and real demand for our equipment. Our view remains the same, that this is likely to be a demand outrunning supply market dynamic for a number of years out. Okay. Understood. A question on the financials. The small revenue that you actually do book, is that just grants or what is that relating to? Yes. It is a small revenue on grants and a relatively small service business that we are running on installed base today. Okay, good. I'm still finished here. They made some comments or some color on B&W and the partnership you make here. What is their experience with hydrogen projects? Why do you choose B&W? What do they bring to the table, and what do you hope this to develop to in the end? Yeah, thank you. Firstly, looking overall, and we have done quite some work until we landed here with BWSC on broad market scanning. It's our view that and also related to the relatively modest installed base of hydrogen equipment overall, there is no very deep EPC experience within the hydrogen industry. That goes for most of the EPCs that we look at. On the other hand, we see a number of EPCs, and BWSC is clearly one of them, that brings in a very strong legacy experience from either highly technical power plants, pressurized equipment, it could be offshore industry and the like. BWSC, as they will here for us, handle the site installation and engineering and installation of key connections, power sources, utilities, et cetera. That is BWSC benefiting from their experience in the past on this. BWSC is a reputable and very well experienced EPC business. It is not a business with a strong and long legacy within hydrogen, as I will claim is the case for most EPCs in the market. BWSC is, besides being Danish-based with a global outlook and reach on their project testimonies, really a strong partner for us. What we expect to get out of this, and we have said that from the very beginning, instead of entering into a paper partnership, we would like to apply a partnership on a real project. BWSC is here with us to work on successful installation and commissioning of the green HyField prototype version. Hopefully from there, we can conclude that this is successful to a degree where we can draw BWSC into other project scopes in the future as our customers would demand that. That is clearly our hope and expectation. Okay. Sounds good, Sebastian. Just one final question from my side. With the scaling up of your production site and actually being ahead of schedule moving towards the 400 megawatt, what can we expect you being able to actually push out, let's say in Q4 2023? I know it's. We can all see on the drawing board that 400 megawatt is the target, but I guess it requires a lot of the supply chain, logistics, et cetera, as well as the organization, what have you not. Just to have a sense of how much you can actually push out in reality, let's say Q4 2023. What is realistic here? Yeah. First to that, and respectful follow-up to your question, I would very much like to express the more numeric part of the answer to that in our revenue guidance for 2023, in other words, next year, when we're ready to issue that. I hope you are understanding on that. I think your question is absolutely fair to ask in terms of really digging deeper than nameplate capacity of these many capacities that are issued by OEMs and saying, "What is really here?" In terms of real delivery. We will not take one step from 75 to 400 megawatts at some point next year. We will make sure that we scale the commissioning the equipment, and also the people for these facilities in a manner where we remain capital disciplined, and we make sure at all times that there is a proper balance between real capacity and actual demand in our order backlog. As our revenue expectation of DKK 1 billion remains around 2020-25, or probably more likely 2026, we also see a significant order intake needed for that, and we expect that already to pick up during next year. This will become a 100 megawatts actual production facility over the next years to come. That is a vague answer, but I would like to get more back to the numeric part when we issue the guidance for next year then. Yeah, should fully understood. Okay. Thanks a lot. That's it from me. Thank you. Good morning. The next- Lasse Midtgaard, I'll get back to you. Yes. The next question comes from Kasper Blom, from Berenberg. Please go ahead. Thanks a lot. A couple of questions, so they're almost only follow-ups now. Starting with the partnership with B&W. I was just hoping if you'd give a little bit more flavor as to how this partnership is supposed to work. Will B&W basically be a shop supplier to you guys, and then you just pass on the bill to customers? Good morning, Kasper. Thank you. In this particular case, the latter that you expressed is actually the situation. The scope that BWSC in this particular case is helping us to deliver and support is a responsibility of ours towards the GreenHyScale project. That, for the specific case, is correct what you're saying. BWSC is actually delivering a solution under our responsibility. What we clearly expect from this partnership is going forward, that they can also step in and taking a more independent and sole role in delivering solutions to a customer of ours. Okay. That is very clear. Following up a little bit on what Dan just touched on, with 2023. I understand that you are sort of now back in the market, looking for new orders. You have your 13 MW backlog. Some will be delivered this year, hopefully, and the rest next year. If one is to think about 2023, what is sort of the current lead time from you guys getting an order to actually delivering it? More to sort of get a sense as to, you know, when do we need to see orders being announced before it can also have a revenue impact in 2023? Yeah. Inevitably, pushing an order backlog of 13 MW in front of us, assuming that we can deliver 5 of them this year, leaves a residual of 8 MW next year. Per se, a significant excess capacity for next year on new orders. We expect with the current lead times, despite a challenged supply chain, et cetera, we expect orders in 2023. In other words, orders coming in next year in the calendar year 2023, that they can come in in quarter one and also into quarter two, and still be delivered as revenue impact of that calendar year. In other words, a lead time within the year of maximum up to six months, which is the usual lead time from PO contract signature to actual delivery. If I just may follow up, given the challenges that you've had with the A-Series so far, are customers asking to do sort of additional testing, due diligence, whatever you wanna call it, before actually signing orders with you? New customers, and that goes as well for repeat customers that we are talking with existing customer base as well on new contracts. They have not put forward any particular requirements for us in that manner. I can definitely share that some of our existing customers that are these days receiving equipment that we're sending to them apply a bit more scrutiny on the verification work and making sure that everything is tested well and properly, which I think is absolutely as expected and also in our interest for this first equipment. We have not seen any particular scrutiny from new customers in our dialogues with them on new contracts. Okay. Thank you. Just lastly, the slide 12 you showed, Sebastian, with the expected European hydrogen demand. It's obviously very big numbers if you look towards 2030, 2050. If one was to sort of tune in on 2025 and 30, the 6 and 110 gigawatts, what's sort of your opinion on that being physically possible? I mean, is actually getting the renewable energy generation capacity to deliver the needed electricity for this, getting the electrolyzer equipment made. I mean, are these numbers, and especially the 110, is that physically doable? I will probably come from the humble side here, Kasper, and say I don't personally have the answer on that. When we do our strategic assessments and scenario planning, we see an overall industry driven by, for example, the Paris Agreement targets. Ultimately, we are driven towards achieving CO2 abatement as these targets require to arrest the temperature increases by 2050 to 1.5 and hopefully lower degrees Celsius. That's, if you will, the macro parameter around how we see the market. To your question, there is, as I see, an inherent risk that the electrons required for this green hydrogen industry to pick up in such a rapid pace, they will come later. We have no doubt they will be there, the power capacity over time, but there is a risk of a delay. Is that ultimately a risk for our business? We don't see that. Timing is manageable. We also see that with the current demand numbers exceeding the supply capacity, even a delay in the demand will require a quite heavy pull on the supply side, which we as OEM can benefit from. Altogether, we are comfortable with the industry momentum. We do see a risk that there may be delays in expanding the renewable electricity capacity also to satisfy the power needs of green hydrogen. On the other hand, if these numbers will be true at some point, it will be a quite heavy pull on the supply side. Excellent. Thank you very much for your answers. Thank you, Kasper. Ladies and gentlemen, as a reminder, if you wish to ask a question, you may press star followed by one. The next question is from Lasse Midtgaard from Panmure Gordon. Please go ahead. Hi. Morning. Thank you, Sebastian, and team. Quite a refreshing update this morning in the sector, so thanks for that firstly. A couple of questions from me. One is a follow-up actually from, I think, Dan's first set of questions on testing. Thank you for the very helpful color on that so far. Lots of detail in there, so thank you. I just wanted to confirm that, are there certain aspects of the performance where you are more heavily testing today? I couldn't quite get that out of your answer, so some help there would be good first up, please. Yes. Good morning, Lasse. Thank you very much. We have addressed a number of issues around our technology this year and, as said and repeated now here, we're standing on a much more robust basis and comfort on that, fortunately. We have corrected a number of mechanical issues, which included, as I mentioned, valves, cooling of the equipment. There are also other aspects, and they are evergreen for a company like this, that we are working with our, for example, stack efficiency, as a core component or function of converting efficiently electrons to hydrogen. That is an area for us that we're also heavily testing, as per your question. It is also an area for us that we will continue to test heavily. It is a very important research and development effort for us that we continue to bring up efficiency as high as we can. Not that it has an immediate impact on any of the current order backlog contracts. As a key competitive parameter for us, efficiency is a paramount importance for us and a very important R&D undertaking. Not sure if that provides the answer for you, but it kind of detaches the mechanical issues that we have corrected to what are the more core R&D efforts that we as an OEM are undertaking. No, no, that's really helpful. Thank you. Appreciate all of the color on this. It's good to get the detail. I think sort of leading off from that, I mean, it might be too early, but do you envision sort of that, the FAT requirement, you know, broadly being the same for the X-Series? I mean, presumably there'd be further requirements, perhaps longer time frames, given the larger scale. Is that the way to think about it? Or is it? Is there a different way to think about that? I apologize for that, but actually the line was chopped up the second where you asked for. You said a certain you specified a specific requirement, and I didn't get which one. Lasse, please go again. Oh, sorry. The FAT, so the factory acceptance testing around the X-Series. Do you think? Yeah. Did you get the rest of it or just that bit that- Yeah, I got the rest of it. Sorry. No, no. That's fine. No, thank you. I wanted to make sure that I provided an answer to a question. Actually, FAT and also SAT, which is the site acceptance test, which is typically the revenue recognition criteria for us, that is also a step, a process step in our deliverability that we are looking to optimize. We will bring down the time consumption of that step significantly, when we go from the first batch of A-Series to the future batches of A-Series. Right now we're talking weeks and months. Over time, we will talk about potentially within a day or days. There will not be any significant changes to the FAT requirements when going from the A-Series to the future X-Series. It is ultimately the same functions and safety aspects and components, process, aspects that we are testing when we do this. That will not take significantly longer, is our expectation on the future X-Series. That's really helpful. Thank you. Just moving to warranties. There's been obviously some things flagged in the sector lately. I wondered if you could give some color on how you're thinking about these for each of your products. Specifically, you know, is there a difference in the series A versus the X, again, what your provisions are on that? If you can talk to that, if you're comfortable doing that, would be helpful. Yes, absolutely. Firstly, warranties and penalties, liquidated damages, have stressed our financial numbers on the contribution margin and gross profit, as I alluded to a bit earlier on the call. We expect warranties and performance guarantees to be an embedded component in the future sales contracts as well. I think it's important to think about it as an OEM, that the bankability of the contracts for the larger scale projects going forward also for the X-Series will be a competitive parameter requiring both balance sheet competitiveness on performance, and also willingness to accept guarantees towards customers. We clearly see warranties and performance guarantees being a significant element of bankability in the contracts also going forward. We also see deliverability in terms of the timing on when we can actually deliver the equipment as being one of the competitive parameters that the industry is currently tested on, because it seems like despite many declared project sizes, a great momentum and potential, it seems like the supply of electrolysis equipment is relatively constrained for now. Thank you. That helps. Just one more. I don't know if you can give any more of a firm split on the CapEx balance outside of the production capacity increase. I think it's around DKK 200 million. If you can give any more on that. We don't choose to give more detail on the CapEx split below that. You are right, deducting the DKK 1-5 from the DKK 310-350 range will deliver quite an amount that covers all other parts of scaling the business. It covers also the elements of the expenditure on R&D projects that we choose to capitalize, which is not the R, but the D part, the development part of that. Which is a significant undertaking, and it includes other aspects not directly related to production capacity as well. aware that that is a vague answer without any numbers, but that reflects at least some of the elements that this CapEx goes to. No, I completely understood. Thank you for the clarity. Thanks again for the call. Very helpful. Please. Thank you, Lasse. There are no further questions at this time, and I hand back to Sebastian Koks Andreassen for closing comments. That is back to me and only for me to say on behalf of the team, Ole and Jens, for taking the call today and the wider Green Hydrogen Systems team that rest assured we're working very hard on pushing this equipment to our customers now, reaching hopefully revenue recognition targets within the guided framework towards the end of the year. We look very much forward to updating you meanwhile on any news flow that we have here as a company and look forward as well to get back on the Q4 full year set of numbers and guidance for 2023 in due time. Thank you very much for paying attention this morning and for listening in. Great pleasure. Have a good day. Ladies and gentlemen, the conference is now concluded and you may disconnect your telephone. Thank you very much for joining and have a pleasant day. Goodbye.