Okay, I wish you welcome to this quarterly presentation by the Chief Executive Officer. Present at the headquarters is myself, Carsten Dybevig. I'm Communication VP. We have the Chief Executive Officer, Sven Ombudstvedt. We have the Chief Financial Officer, Rune Sollie, the Investor Relations Manager, Even Lund, and Tord Steinset Torvund, and he is group business analyst. I give the word to Sven Ombudstvedt. Good morning, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to this short presentation and Q&A session in connection with Norske Skog's fourth quarter 2021 results. Just to start us off, we remind you all about what we're trying to do. Obviously we still have our base publication paper business, which we will come back to the results in a minute. The packaging projects are ongoing and indeed on time and budget, where we are expecting the startup of the Bruck containerboard online in the fourth quarter of 2022. Before that, on the energy side, waste-to-energy at Bruck is now in the commissioning phase, and we expect to take this over from Valmet, our supplier, in the second quarter of the year. Finally at the top, the three Cs, CEBINA, CEBICO, and Circa, where we are constantly developing this into commercial projects. If we then move on to the results briefly, we have normalized the revenues now, having suffered six quarters of sort of sub-average revenues because of the COVID pandemic and the impact on our markets. The corresponding EBITDA have been very low since the second quarter of 2020, and we are now back on more normalized levels, which we also saw pre-COVID. On the right-hand side you see the cash earnings that, for over the last six quarters, this has been unsustainably low, and we are now back on more normalized levels, which is needed to run this type of operations. Very briefly on the quarter, we have then seen price increases in the fourth quarter and into 2022, completely necessary because of the energy and other raw material cost increases, but also possible because the market is tight given the closures that has happened. Indeed, there's also now announcements for 2022 and 2023, so we expect the market to remain relatively tight and the capacity utilization to be high for the near-term future. The EBITDA at 2022 is, as I said, we are now stabilizing the earnings, and we are back in sort of a more normalized EBITDA margin territory. CO2 allowances are important now, and we've sold, received and sold all the 2021 allowances booked in the fourth quarter, which also gave a positive impetus to the cash flow in the quarter. The compensation, the CO2 compensation for 2021 has been booked but is then expected to be received in cash during the first half of this year, hopefully even towards the end of the first quarter. You're probably all aware of our credit facilities to finance the packaging paper projects and EUR 265 million were secured with adequate maturities and competitive rates also finalized in the fourth quarter. Finally, towards the end of the quarter and into January, we entered an agreement to sell our Nature's Flame pellets business for a total consideration of around NZD 48 million, which would give a reasonable book gain of somewhere between NOK 150million and NOK 200 million. On the liquidity side, we illustrate the effects here on the right-hand side of the bar chart where we see our end cash balance. We've added an illustration of what the Nature's Flame proceeds will be and also the CO2 compensation, which is booked but not yet received. All in all, a significant liquidity chest now of almost half a billion euros, which is then more than enough to finance the strategic projects and even excluding further cash earnings. Obviously we will generate cash also in the project period. Segment financials, a couple of points to note here is that the utilization in Europe was high. This is practically full utilization in the fourth quarter. We did not have any voluntary downtime to speak of. In Australia, we now only operate the Boyer Mill, so the fourth quarter here is the result of the Boyer Mill and the associated marketing activities, which now generates an EBITDA margin of about 10%. This is also an illustration that the Boyer Mill can and should indeed, given the present setup in Australia, should be able to generate quite some cash. I think that's these are the main points for. We will then very, very briefly go to the outlook before we open up for Q&A, which we do think that there is all reasons to believe that 2022 will still see high operating rates. However, the price increases into 2022 from the end of 2021 is needed too because of the high energy prices which we see still now in the wintertime. We expect also the first quarter to have high prices. Obviously we will see them through the quarter. Price increases indeed will cover the variable costs. We will obviously remain a reliable supplier. We have been that through 2021. I think this is becoming a unique point almost at this stage where a lot of people have either left the segment totally or have stopped production for various reasons, mainly probably energy cost related in the fourth quarter and into the first quarter. The strategic shift is ongoing. As I mentioned, the projects are on time and on budget in terms of containerboard. Waste to energy is coming and the commercialization of CEBINA, CEBICO is continuing, where we will also look into capacity expansions during 2022. On that note, Carsten, I will open up for Q&A. Thank you, Sven. You can see the entire webcast on our homepage. On the front page, you will find a button you can click on, and you can see the entire webcast. Now we open for questions, and if you raise your hand in the, in the Teams, use the Team function, raise hands, you will get the word. You can also send in chat questions through the chat function. First one asking questions is Kenneth Sivertsen. Welcome, Kenneth. All right. Okay, Sven. Congratulations with a tremendous, strong quarter. If looking into the first quarter of 2022 and first quarter now, if you just include the prices you have announced and all the on the energy cost, that will probably add some increase. Should we expect EBITDA to increase from Q4 level, or is it will costs take off? I think in general, Kenneth, that the energy situation that we see now and obviously we're now in February, we still have the bulk of February and March to go, but I would not dare to think that energy costs will go down significantly during the quarter. That means that the cost increases will probably eat most, if not all, of the price increases. A fair assumption would be a fairly flattish compared to Q4? We will obviously do all we can to improve on it, but I think realistically, the energy pricing is at a level where we cannot guide to more than a flat quarter. No, I understand, but I'm just trying to be smart here. On the waste to energy, when will you receive gate fee revenue from? Is it from Q4, Q1 or Q2? The good news is that we have started to receive the RDF now. There will be some small revenues in the first quarter. Full operations is from some time in the second quarter onwards. If you just can remind us on ramp up, expected ramp up time, when you start operating here? Yeah. The waste to energy plant has started. It has what they call the first warm fire. That means that it has been ignited, and it has also burned RDF. This is still under Valmet's commissioning period. We will take it over in the second quarter, providing them satisfactory tests, which we have all reasons to believe will happen then early in the second quarter. After that, it's not really a ramp-up period. When it runs, it runs, in a sense. As opposed to the containerboard, where there's a long ramp-up, there is very little ramp-up here. From the second quarter onwards, we should have full operations on the board. Okay. Thank you, Kenneth. The next one is Martin Melbye, y ou're welcome. Yes. Good morning. I guess that's very different levels of profitability now for the Norwegian mills compared to the mills in Europe. Of that margin now of 15% EBITDA in Q4, could you indicate what is the margin in Norway compared to in Europe? I can indicate at least that you are right and particularly the Bruck mill, which is still then gas-fired, has a very poor 2021 and a poor fourth quarter. I'm not going to give you the exact numbers, but I think you're absolutely right. We are suffering most in Austria. France is somewhat better with the French energy systems, but still not sort of fantastic. Then the Norwegian mills are, relatively speaking, more competitive, given the energy situation. Maybe a very difficult question, maybe you have to guess. If you had already been there, that you made Testliner now, with the current input costs that you're seeing across Europe, what kind of margins would you be seeing on Testliner? We don't have a very precise answer. I've said before, Martin, in the autumn of last year that probably the indicated EBITDA of EUR 70 million-EUR 80 million with the conditions that was existing in the quarter, we would probably have at least double the EBITDA compared to the long-term guiding. What we have not talked a lot about is obviously that the energy situation for this market is also important. A lot of people are here suffering because of high gas costs. As you know, we will have a different energy supply situation compared to the average of the industry. Let's say high gas cost is good for the conversion project. Probably just now we will probably have even a higher margin, but since we don't have a lot of production, I'm not going to speculate too much about them. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Thank you, Martin. The next one is Johannes Grunselius, y ou're welcome. Yes. Hi, everyone. It's Johannes here. Just wanna come back to the first question here from Kenneth, because you indicated to us flat margins Q1 versus Q4, but presumably you will have a lot higher sales in Q1. Giving flat margins, could you indicate if you think that EBITDA will be higher sequentially in the Q1? There's not that much more volumes. We were still running flat out in the fourth quarter, and there's very little inventory anywhere in the value chain now, so I don't think that there will be a lot more volumes in the first quarter. Okay. That means that there is, I think presently there's that it's difficult to give a different guidance than a rather flat development. Yep. Fair enough. I was also thinking about these exceptional market times. Did you manage to take some high-margin orders, for example, overseas shipments? Did you implement any sort of surcharges on top of your pricing in the fourth quarter that presumably will go away when the market becomes a bit more normal? Well, we haven't done a lot of that, but obviously the European price increases are driven by energy. They are in effect energy surcharges what we have put on top. That is sort of part of the market picture. The only place where we have certain surcharges which may go away is for international shipping because of the container rates, which are, as you know, exceptionally high. Some shipments longer distance we have applied that, which will then, if the container rates come down, will disappear again, but it's relatively marginal. Okay. The share for your on your volumes going overseas is pretty small, right? Sounds like that. It is not enormous, and we, as everyone else, have sort of scaled back exports because of both the sort of difficulty of securing freight, but also because of general European demand. Our main customers are here and in Australia, so we obviously have to supply our base customers first. Yeah, just a final question, and that's more on the pricing contracts for 2022. Is it the usual way that most of your contracts is annual based, or any changes there? And can you remind us how the contract structure looks like for 2022? Yeah. In principle, the contract structure is maybe slightly shorter than it normally is. I think most of the business is now done on either three- or six-month basis, which we are also. We have also indicated to our customers that we don't necessarily want too long contracts. We've been through a few months now with extreme volatility on the cost side. I think it's probably prudent for everyone that the contract length is a bit shorter than it normally is. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Johannes. The next one on the list is Ole-Petter Sjøvold, y ou're welcome. Hello, and good morning. I have one question. The main reason for the deviation between our EBITDA estimates compared to the one you reported is that you reported a decrease in fixed cost of NOK 28 million quarter-over-quarter, while we estimated an increase for a quarter. What is the reason for this reduction? Is it driven by the sale of Tasman? In other words, can we expect this somewhat lower level of fixed cost going forward, or is this a one-off for a quarter? No, there's a few sort of revision of provisions, et cetera. I think the best sort of indication is that the fixed cost has been relatively flat from the third to the fourth quarter. Going forward into next year, I think you will see some fixed cost increases, everything else equal, because there is inflationary pressures on services we buy on maintenance and other things. There's probably also with sort of a high operating rate, there is normally a little bit of additional costs in order to ensure that the mills are running. If you just look on the fixed cost line, I would expect a slight increase in 2023 compared to 2021. All right. Thanks. Thank you, Ole-Petter Sjøvold. The next one is Cole Hathorn, y ou're welcome. Morning? Thanks for taking my question. I just wanted to ask on how the newsprint index prices should work from here as energy surcharges roll over. Should we expect those index prices to kind of come down as those energy surcharges roll through the year? Just to understand that dynamic. The second question is around your conversion projects into the future. It's very good that they remain on time and on budget. I'd just like to hear what you're hearing in the market about similar projects. I know there are delays in other areas of the market, so I'm just wondering what you're doing to manage those risks here. Mm. Then also on the conversion project for containerboard, how are you looking for initial orders and interest from customers? Do you have any good news on potential offtake agreements for some of those volumes out into the start of 2023, or any positives you can share there? Thank you. Yeah, let's take them in order. The newsprint pricing is. This is the market price. The market price in general has increased into the first quarter. Again, it will be driven by supply and demand. However, the marginal cost has certainly increased. The supply has been more restricted. I think what you can see as always is that if there is more capacity coming on, if the costs are coming down, then you may see a price movement down. It's not really directly linked to energy per se. Again, it's a traditional supply and demand with the traditional cost curve. Right now the market is tight, and there is no indication that will change. We have obviously the benefit now that capacity will come out with the conversion projects being announced both in 2022 and in 2023. We are sort of cautiously optimistic on the market balance. When it comes to the projects and the on time, on delivery question, this is indeed there is definitely a pressure on everyone who is constructing anything for the moment in terms of inflationary pressures, in terms of delays, et cetera. We are certainly aware of that. The Bruck project is quite advanced with construction ongoing on site. We've obviously done the contracting and everything a little bit prior to the worst inflationary pressures. In Golbey, also there, the main contractors are on site and doing their work. This is probably the main reason that the main suppliers were contracted early enough to be able to both keep time and cost pressures a little bit at bay. On the market side for containerboard, indeed we are doing the commercial work. We have appointed agents in markets where we don't really have a presence, and there is absolutely no lack of interest in our product, so to speak. We are without sort of disclosing names, we would expect to deliver on contracts with basically all the big buyers. Thank you. Just potentially following up on the CapEx cost. I mean, you did order your machinery at a good time. Maybe you could give an educated guess on if you were to go to the market today and try and do these projects, what do you think someone trying to do what you're doing would cost? Would it have been an extra 15%-20% higher to do these projects? If there's any kind of ballpark estimate you could give. I'm not sure if I'm the best person to give you that, but it's probably higher than the range you indicate. I think the main problem now is the timing. Say if you start now, and you want to go in the market, I think to get into the queue of the main suppliers, you would probably look quite a long time into the future before you can see your project materialize. Thank you. Okay. Thank you, Cole. Next one on the list is Pål Holdudal, y ou're welcome. Thanks, guys. Pål Holdudal, High Yield Analyst at SpareBank 1 Markets. Can you hear me? Yes. So, um- Yes. I was just wondering, just a little more follow-up on the conversion projects. I think last time you said that, 70%-75% of the CapEx was kind of locked in. How should we think about the projects and the risk for delays and CapEx overruns are being de-risked over the next 12-month period? Yeah. I think first of all, I think you have to look at them separately. The Bruck project is advanced in terms of timing. The machine is being rebuilt or let's say the infrastructure around it is being constructed. I think in terms of the Bruck project, it's a significant de-risking in terms of both the level of contracts and the time to completion. Golbey is then sort of a year hence or a short year hence. Coming on stream in the second half of 2023. Obviously there is more time, there's more work to be done in the meantime, which there is an inherent risk in obviously. Having said all that, I think we have a good project team on site in Golbey. We have Voith on site, which is the main supplier, and we have then contracted the main equipment. I'm sort of also here reasonably confident that will happen. Clearly anything that is further into the future holds more risk. Great. Thanks. Okay. Thank you, Pål. The next one is Kristian Spetalen, y ou're welcome. Thank you. Kristian Spetalen from Arctic Securities here. I was just wondering if there's any news on the CO2 compensation for 2022. What do you expect to book in et cetera? We have an Anything on that would be helpful. We have an expert on CO2 compensation, so maybe Rune, you can. Yeah. Now we're just waiting for the formalities on how exactly to calculate this with the latest factors in the bylaw that has been around for a year by now, but I think the amount is in the presentation, and it's NOK 290 million in total for all CO2 compensation regimes we are part of, and I think the Norwegian is just below NOK 200 million of that or thereabouts. Now we're just waiting for all the formalities, the final factors to be used, and the process to get the paperwork done for 2021, and then that will also put the basis for 2022. Okay. Understand so- Thank you. This is Carsten Dybevig, Communication Manager. The Norwegian government has clearly indicated that it will support the compensation scheme, going on the next ten years, and it's just a discussion about the factors they're gonna use and the level of it. They clearly indicated that, yes. Okay. The scheme. Just to follow up on that, do you expect the like the support intensity to remain at the current level, or do you expect that to come down given the CO2 prices? Could you please remind us what the compensation for that you booked in this year was? What CO2 price was that based on? That's based on the average price for 2020, which was about 25, if I remember correctly. If all things are the same, I think the average price in 2021 is somewhere between 50 and 60. Then you can multiply it by two. Yeah ... if all is equal, and it looks that way in the bylaw that has been presented. But as you've seen in the paper, some have said that this is, of course, twice the amount, but we assume that as long as it is proposed as it is, we will be eligible to it on the same basis and with the same mechanics. Okay. If you were me, you would just multiply that with the CO2 price in the model? That's how the bylaw is formulated at the moment, here, so, unless somebody decides to change the bylaw somewhere down the road. It is also constructed with a CO2 emission factor, so the latest emission factor for the last ten years were 0.74. The new factor proposed by the Norwegian government is 0.53, so they will lower the emission factor, and we have to multiply that by the CO2 quota price. It means that it will be not automatically duplicate, you know, double the compensation. It will not be correct. Also we have a Okay. Lower energy consumption at Saugbrugs also this next coming years compared to 2020. Okay. That's helpful. I'll follow up with Even later as well. Oh. Thank you. Okay. There are no more questions or hands raised, so this concludes the webcast and the morning session, and we wish you all a nice day.