Okay. Hi, everyone, and after a small switch to our room for the chemicals track, thank you for joining us for the Green Plains Fireside Chat. Today, we have actually a brand new management team for the company versus the past few years, CEO Chris Osowski, and recently joined CFO, Ann Reis. So thank you personally, both for coming here. I know you were busy coming from Orlando for another commitment. I want to start a little bit with the big picture. Again, the management team has seen a big turnover, I think other members, like general counsel, et cetera. Now that you're in this seat, what has changed in the way Green Plains is managed versus the past one to three years? It's a great question, Sal. First thanks for inviting us and giving us the opportunity to talk about what we're doing here at Green Plains. You know, if I think back, what has changed? You know, it starts with really a year ago, we welcomed three new directors to our board of directors. You know, at the same time, we've set up new committees with those directors that are focused on risk management and then also on strategic planning. You know, a year ago, we set out and we laid out some new expectations for our employees and how we're going to work. We've built new processing models for each of our facilities to outline the financial impacts of all the different ways we could run those plants, and then which options have the best value for the overall company. We've also set up a sales and operations planning process, where we have cross-functional involvement from finance, operations, and the commercial teams to get involved in the day-to-day running of the business to make sure we're making data-driven decisions. Perfect. Anne, from your perspective, I know you joined more recently, but I think it's been a couple of months now that you're on this position. Yeah. You came from another ethanol producer, so any views so far? I think the company is on the right path for sure. Ethanol is in an exciting time with lots of opportunities it's an industry I have a lot of passion for, so I was excited to just be able to join Green Plains and continue down that path and help them with Green Plains 2.0. Perfect. let's go to the biggest topic, which is carbon credits and 45Z. You obviously have discussed that this year you should make over $180 million EBITDA. We hosted ADM yesterday, and they're guiding officially to $100 million as a starting point for them. In your scenario, in your case, I believe when this discussion and the investment started, the number was quite smaller. I think it was around $100 million. What has changed over the past year, whether it's regulatory-wise, what the company is doing specifically, that has allowed you to boost these numbers so significantly? F irst, we do appreciate the guidance that we received here recently about the 45Z. We view that that guidance is really only positive to what we had expected. A couple of things that have changed and that we've built into those numbers. Number one, first and foremost, we've got the Advantage Nebraska project fully operational, capturing carbon at high recovery rates. We're very pleased on how that project has performed. On top of that, the indirect land use removal from the CI calculation has benefited all of our locations, and all of our plants are qualifying for 45Z credits. At the same time improved efficiency in sites, driving operational excellence, in all of our plants, improving ethanol yields, is definitely helping us monetize 45Z. At the same time the opportunity to buy renewable energy credits against our electrical consumption helps drive those CI scores even further lower. Yeah. Okay, perfect. I would say $188 million, I think, is this year's guidance. That's as a starting point, I believe you've mentioned, and could go higher. What could we expect? I'm not sure if it's for next year or further out, but what could be a target or, and what leverage do you have to actually move your EBITDA from carbon credits over that, over this year's guidance? T here are two things. You know, first and foremost, we still need the plants to run and perform well. W ith respect to operational excellence, we always want to be improving that ethanol yield, key driver. At the same time, we always want to reduce our energy inputs to the plants and really make sure that the base business improves in terms of profitability outside of the carbon opportunity that we've got. A couple of things we're working on. We've talked about before a handful of very fast-returning projects, capital projects, that reduce energy inputs and help us put more carbon in the pipe, so to speak. Those are very exciting for us. Another part of the guidance is with respect to the farm practices impact on the CI score associated with corn. While we don't know exactly what that is gonna equate to, we are focused on improving our grain storage and our receiving infrastructure and plants to help drive up the percentage of farmer-originated corn. We are in a good position to take advantage of that when we get that further guidance. Perfect, that was actually my next question. My understanding is that farmer practices are now in consideration. Has this been finalized or is still in the final stages, firstly? When it comes to that, what other options do you have? I believe there's another ethanol player that's talking about working towards farmers making low-carbon corn that will eventually make low-carbon ethanol. Is it something you're looking at? W hat we have right now from the USDA is a beta version of the calculator, which has five elements, essentially, that the farmers can get credit for. P reviously, under some of the other USDA guidance, there was really a laundry list of items, like cover crops and all of that. They've narrowed it down, so it's mostly focused on no-till, strip-till, and different fertilizer applications, including the use of manure. A gain, we're thinking that's what the final calculator from the USDA is gonna look like, we don't know for sure. They haven't released the final version. That has to tie into the DOE 45Z GREET calculator. Until we have that, they said it would be at some time in 2026, really haven't given us any specific guidance as to when that's gonna be released. W e don't know exactly for sure, we do know to your point the guidance that we gave around the $188 million, we did not assume that we were gonna be able to use farming practices when we came out with that number. This is definitely an opportunity, and we've done some pilots in the past to work with farmers. I n our area, in the Nebraska and Iowa space using no-till or strip-till and different fertilizer applications have been in practice for a long time because they realized that the quality of the soil is better, it's more drought resistant, it's more pest resistant, and less pesticides have to be used throughout the years or applications for disease and things like that on the corn. T hese are not uncommon practices where our facilities are located, so we feel like we're positioned well to be able to take advantage of what seems to be coming down the pipeline here. Until we get the absolute final guidance, we won't be able to really put a number to it yet. S ince these parts are already used, actually, is this more of an opportunity or a disadvantage? I'm not sure where things are standing right now, but I believe initially the idea with improved farm practices was they'll have to measure them against your benchmark, meaning that if you are a no-till farmer, that's your benchmark, so continuous no-till will not actually give you a better CI score. That was what was discussed one to two years ago. Right. T hat was how it was historically done. There's been changes over the years. I think what they realized with doing it that way was they were incentivizing farmers that have been capturing carbon in their land to go and till it up the next year. That they can get credit for it, and it's not the behavior that they want to incentivize. W e don't believe that that's how the final guidance is gonna come out. It's really gonna be about what is your current year practices for that tax credit year. It's really gonna be a matter of us collecting the data, getting the farmer attestations, and getting the documentation together to be able to prove the scores. Perfect. Another opportunity that used to be discussed is the Summit pipeline. Can you give us an update, or where does it stand? I know historically, Green Plains never provided all the details, but our understanding for Green Plains, and I think over all the Summit agreements, was that Summit puts all the CapEx, including carbon capture, they get all the credits. At the time, it was only 45Q to be received, and the benefit for the other companies was the low carbon ethanol that could get a premium in the market. Is this still the idea with 45Z? You know, there's a lot more credits to be had. That is how Summit has structured their agreements which is different than obviously our agreements with Tallgrass that we have on the Advantage Nebraska. F rom how Summit is operating and what looks in the future for them, there are two main legislation pieces that are going through the Iowa House and Senate right now. One proposal within the House is that it completely would eliminate. You cannot use eminent domain for any CO2 pipelines. That would be very detrimental to Summit trying to get their project going. The other one that's being proposed within the Senate is that it's the eminent domain would be the last resort. There's other things that need to be proven first before they would go to that last resort of eminent domain. That really depends on how these legislative sessions turn out, and what Summit's next steps are, depending on the legislation. Okay. still facing the hurdles, I guess, are there any other pipelines out there that you're seeing potentially being developed? The only one, Tallgrass, was an existing one, which made it much easier to take place. I think the other, theoretical pipeline we're investigating is opportunities for either truck or rail movement of liquid CO2 to a sequestration site. We're evaluating some potential opportunities, in our non-pipeline plants that have the potential to come to fruition. Okay, that would be a testament to how attractive 45Z is, because railing liquid CO2 would sound quite expensive, right? Compared to the traditional model, but still could make money for you. C oming back to some of the organizational focuses being a data-driven company, evaluating all the opportunities that we have with respect to capital and free cash flow, leads us to look at all of the options for developing our network of plants, and putting our focus on where we have the most return capital. Okay, perfect. That brings us to the other question, which is: What is your view on 45Z in terms of post-2029. I think the expiration 2029, I don't know if you have a view, it may be too early, but also, if it does expire, can you go back to 45Q, or is it theoretically you used already 45Z, there's no other option anymore? No. 45Q is absolutely an option. It runs from 12 years of when the carbon sequestration begins operations, but you can't stack it. Yeah. You can't use 45Z and 45Q at the same time. If 45Z ends in 2029, then we'll move into collecting the 45Q for those three Nebraska facilities where we have carbon capture. T here is legislation that's being proposed out there to extend the 45Z to 2033 along with adding an additional benefit for SAF development and SAF credits. You know, we're staying in touch with all of that and just looking to see where everything goes. We definitely have a few options, and 45Q is one of them. The SAF credit, would that be on top of the current? Because the SAF credit is higher, right? Several times. They reduced it in the recent 45Z guidance, so it had been at $1.75. Now and then it was reduced to $1. That's the new legislation is trying to get back up to $1.75. Yeah, like, we would not be able to collect the Z and sell the ethanol to a company that then would collect the SAF credit. That's historically how they've been constructed. Yeah. Until that legislation gets passed, we're you don't know for sure. Perfect. We'll be talking about the financials for this year, the guidance specifically, that $880 million EBITDA. My understanding is this. Firstly, where do you stand actually on the credit sales? Because right now, you have to monetize them through this, through this version, this approach. Are you progressing on some of the firm agreements? Secondly, how should we think about the cash flow itself? Because my understanding is there are some delay, well, not necessarily delays, but the structure doesn't provide you the cash as you realize the income, right? Last year, I think your income, your EBITDA was around $45 million from 45Z, but the cash you pulled was $14 million, with the rest coming, I assume, this year. We have marketed all the credits produced in 2025 and have taken some of the cash associated with those tax credit sales back last year and are actively marketing the 2026 credits right now. We're actually, we feel very positive about the interest that we're seeing for those tax credits and look forward to making further announcements about that here in the near future. I think there is a potential upside based on numbers we've talked about and getting more guidance around opportunities on farm practices to lower CI scores in plants, along with some of the current capital products we're working on to help further lower CI scores in plants. Perfect. Switching to ethanol. Firstly, can you provide us an update or we're two months into the quarter, how are margins for ethanol so far? How are they versus your initial expectations, roughly two, three weeks ago, when you provided your earnings updates? W e're pleased with our position in Q1, and where our current crush margins on a consolidated basis sit, especially relative to same quarter previous year, on the back of what has been record corn yields and corn supply in the Midwest. On top of that, we're seeing more strength in the ethanol market at the same time here domestically. You know, plants are producing at strong rates, but we're not seeing the inventory stack up like we would have initially anticipated that. That's been positive for us. At the same time, DCO values have strengthened through the first quarter, and our plants are running well and got through the cold spell we had here earlier in Q1, and we're looking pretty healthy right now. Great. Additionally we're entering into spring maintenance season, right? There's all of the facilities run 24/7, and majority of the year. In the springtime, everybody shuts down to clean and get it ready to run for another 360 days. We're gonna see production numbers. It's just a seasonal event that happens every year, we're gonna see that happen. Also the increase over the summer months with the increase in the driving, people going on vacations, things like that. Yeah. We're pleased with where everything is going and how we're headed into Q2. Perfect. You know, as you said, margins look to be still better year-over-year for, given the seasonality component. Demand doesn't seem to be great domestically, but what has been really helping is the export market. Can you do a broad overview in some of the key end markets, key countries that are pulling U.S. ethanol, and if you're familiar with some of the more specific mandates and quotas some of the countries or provinces, say, in Canada may have? yeah, I mean, we feel positive about demand, especially on the export side of things. Just coming from the National Ethanol Conference here earlier this week the mantra wasn't about export growth, it was export acceleration, was the term used. So that's primarily going into Canada with, what? 30-35% of the export volume going there. Canada's production volume is able to achieve, like, 40% of their domestic demand, so that a lot of that extra volume will come from the United States. Also, we saw the Netherlands year-over-year increase a significant portion of that imported ethanol. With the EU as a whole and India increasing their volumes we expect that trend to continue. Perfect. Do you participate directly in the export market? Are you familiar with what's the export ethanol price or net back differential versus the domestic one? Well, to a very limited extent. You know, we do have a facility in northern Minnesota, where we do export roughly 15% of that plant's volume into Canada. We play in that, in that part at a small extent, but we're also very actually interested in the uptake rate of E15 going into California. You know, thinking about the entire decarbonized ethanol volume of Nebraska being able to find its way into that market at some point in the future. That's probably more where we're focused at the moment. Okay, perfect. We'll touch base on that a little bit later. Staying on the theme of the supply and demand, firstly, what are you seeing for U.S. supply from the standpoint of, you know I think POET announced a new plant recently, the first, I think, greenfield in many, many years. Is this something that we should see the start of a new wave of additions driven by 45Z and export demand, or do you think that's a one-off? Well, I think we're referring to expansion, possibly, of plans? It could be. I think there's. Yeah. In general, there's interest in that. You know, from the Green Plains perspective, we wanna be very disciplined with respect to increasing volume. I mean, we expect to see that demand continue to grow as the export volumes increase and as the country continues to push for year-round E15. We wanna grow in a very responsible way and make sure that we measure twice and cut once, and focus on improving, first and foremost, the efficiency of our existing plant infrastructure, and making sure our base business is strong outside of tax credit opportunities. Okay. Then globally, are you seeing anything in Canada, which is something I'm not as familiar. You just mentioned they cover 40% of the demand, but particularly, Brazil, that is something where we've paid more attention to. We actually went to Brazil in December, and there is a very big wave of corn ethanol mills now. Obviously, the U.S. being a half of the global capacity, Brazil can add a lot of local supply and still may not be a huge amount from a global number, but I do believe it's probably mid-single digits or a bit more of the global supply. Is this something that worries you? Is it something you expect to continue? Well, it's definitely something we pay attention to. You know, the majority of the world's supply of ethanol coming from Brazil and the United States, it's important to keep an eye on what's going on in Brazil. You know, as sugarcane plants add corn processing capabilities and switch volume away from sweeteners into the fuel market, that's an important impact to the global ethanol S&D. At the same time, we have to remember that Brazil has been running on E30 for years and are working towards E40. I think that they have the opportunity to manage the S&D in Brazil to some extent. That'll help take some pressure off of that global export. Okay, perfect. Well, do you have any specific expectations from the sugarcane ethanol supply? I believe last year, last season, which was almost a year ago now, sugarcane plants ended up producing a lot more sugar versus ethanol versus expectations. We recently learned that the reason was they had committed to producing this sugar, even though by the time of the crush, the economics had shifted. I think the crush season starts now or in the next couple of months, what are your expectations there, potentially? Well, I think we expect that the volume out of Brazil to increase, like a 10%-15% type range. I think we're, like, in a wait-and-watch type phase at the moment. But we're connected to what's going on in Brazil, so we have line of sight to the changes that are happening with respect to volumes of sugarcane-based products. You know, as things change and evolve, we'll be on top of it. With the 45Z, right? I mean, the guidance specifically out there, it states it has to be domestic, right? Mm-hmm. The feedstock has to come from Canada or Mexico. Yeah. I mean, that also has an impact, right, on where the feedstock that the ethanol that is able to qualify for 45Z can come from. Perfect. Last component of the supply is, as you mentioned before, the industry has been running pretty hard. I believe I lost track of, with some exceptions, how many weeks it's been at over 1.1 million barrels a day. Why have we seen, I think it's roughly a 10% step up from 2 years ago, without obviously, new nameplate capacity coming online? Why have we seen this big step up, and is it tied back to the 45Z? Well, I gotta believe there is some pact, impact, associated with 45Z on current production rates. We got to remember that the wintertime plants run well when it's cold outside, due to the ability to cool the process, easier, as opposed to hot summer months. You know, we've had, for the most part, outside of a couple of events, a pretty mild winter. There hasn't been as many opportunities for freeze-ups to happen in plants that would negatively impact total production rates. As Anne mentioned earlier in our conversation, we're coming up to that season where we're going to start seeing some plants take downtime and prepare for a strong run during the summer months. We would expect to see those numbers start to taper off a little bit here going forward. Perfect. Switching to a little bit, wider subject on ethanol. You mentioned SAF. That was a much hotter topic, let's say, a couple of years ago. We actually had panels here, not just on SAF, but specifically alcohol to jet, which would be the outlet that use ethanol. Things seem to have fizzled. What do you think would ultimately happen with the industry? Is it something that you're still looking after? I believe there was a JV with Tallgrass that was in the end, shelved. Yes, that is temporarily put on hold, I mean, it's, I wouldn't say that like new technology, right? It, there's always a big buzz around it, the, we're seeing the players that have, I think, a strong presence in it, and the good technology are still expanding, and they're still working on how to make it economical, right? That's the real question: is especially in our current economic environment how much of the cost can they actually pass down to the consumers, the airlines, right? The what companies like LanzaJet or Honeywell, and there's a few others that are really continuing to make progress in this space. You know, I believe that they will be able to get there, and be able to make it economical, whether that's in 5 years or 10 years, I can't tell you for sure, from, like, a full production full-scale facility. You know, I do think it will get there. You know, the ratio of alcohol to jet, right, is so 2 gallons of ethanol to 1 gallon of sustainable aviation fuel or synthetic aviation fuel. You know, so it provides a big opportunity, when they get there. Yeah. There's also marine fuel too, so that. Mm. the marine industry is really looking at being able to use low CI ethanol, for their feedstocks. There's a number of markets that are being developed and it's an exciting time of year or time in ethanol's history to see where this all goes. I mean, SAF, from what I recall, it theoretically, if the entire US aviation industry were to go to SAF, that would require double the global ethanol capacity, and that would be nothing used for cars. That, that's calculations we did 2 years ago. Certainly, interesting area. You brought up maritime. I know Maersk has done some of their trials. We have looked into this market, methanol, ammonia, all of them are being considered. How does ethanol play there? Is it something that goes into the mix with bunker fuel? Does it need separate engines, like an ammonia vessel? How would ethanol fit into that? There's been a number of pilots, and I don't know exactly what Maersk has been working on, specifically and what their mix looks like. You know, there's been a number of really successful trials where they convert even just like diesel engines and semis that operate off of 100% ethanol. The technology is there and it exists. You know, what exactly is the right mix, to work? I'm not a chemical engineer, but I know that you know, there's a lot of promise out there and a lot of technology that is working on being able to run these large engines, even on 100% ethanol. Okay. The other growth area could be E15, right? We're seeing benefit some things like California on the state level, but an overriding, let's say, federal legislation seems to always be a little bit missing. Can you tell us, what are you seeing there? Because it looks to me that every three months I'm reading about the legislation being proposed, it doesn't go through. It was supposed to be part of the One Big Beautiful Bill. It was excluded in the end. What is the pushback specifically on this proposal? Yeah, it's been a saga and it is frustrating to get so close to having it completed. Then there's just you have a couple of loud voices in the room that get concerned about whether it be SREs or whatever the answer is. You know, there's a tremendous amount of bipartisan support around E15, I do believe they will get there. You know, it does take compromise on both ends to be able to get to a common goal. I do believe, and a majority of the industry believes that common sense will prevail. You know, where the administration has been incredibly vocal, right, about domestic energy, needing to create it here in the United States. This is the key way to do it. you know, we have the president's full support around, and he said in Iowa just a month ago, right? As soon as he wants to see it done, and as soon as that bill crosses his desk, he will sign it immediately, right? This, there is, and USDA has come out with recent, I think even just this week, right? Because the council was supposed to present the bill. you know, we've got a handful of mid-sized refiners that have some concerns around SREs, and that's really been a little bit of the linchpin that's prevented it from moving forward. I do believe that it's in the best interest of our country, and it's a bipartisan issue, and I do believe that we'll get there with a negotiated solution. On that topic, have you seen, like in states where E15 has been allowed all year and now more recently in California, have we actually been seeing the investments? Because they do require investments by gas stations, right? Have you seen the investments to upgrade, or is this just not enough for them? You know, I would say that a majority at least in the Midwest, where we're from, there really isn't a lot of investment that needs to be done. The infrastructure is set and ready to be able to take E15. It's really just a signing of the pen that needs to happen to be able for that to happen year round. You know, most of the facilities within our area sell E15 within the given time frame. They've been, the EPA has been issuing summer waivers for however many years now. We've all had access. Yeah ... to year-round E15 anyway. It's not what we want to have continue. We don't want to have the EPA do this every 20 days during the summer to allow it. We want a final solution that's legislatively complete. It makes it easier for the refiners also, right? Like, they don't have to go through the blending changes. They can stick with the standard process. You know, we're seeing, and I believe the National Ethanol Conference, they just quoted that the total blend rate for the United States over at 2025 was above 10%. Yeah. It was like 10.5. You know, and in some areas, it's even getting closer to the 11%. You know, we are seeing that adoption and the cars, everything, it's been shown that there's no impact to it. It really is just a legislative issue that needs to be resolved. Great. Last topic is strategy. Firstly, you did a strategic review, you sold a few assets, you decided to not sell the company. Is this review now behind you? Does this mean no more asset sales? Does this mean the company will operate as a public company, or could that door reopen? You know, I talked about, I think a couple earnings calls ago, about the company being at an inflection point. You know, we concluded the sale of the Obion, Tennessee, location and paid off some debt overhang. You know, since then, I think we've really turned the corner as an organization. Right now, we're focused on being the low cost, low carbon biofuel producer in the Midwest. You know, with the opportunity we have in front of us for strong free cash flow in the future, we're really focused on our strong capital allocation strategy, we want to grow. We want to be a company that goes from playing defense to playing offense, we're looking forward to being in a position to do that. Well, that's actually my next question, and last for now, which is: you're going to start generating cash, probably. I haven't been covering Green Plains for that long, several years, but this will be the first time, I think, that on a full year basis, there's gonna be some decent free cash flow. What do you do with that? What are your priorities? First and foremost, like I mentioned we're gonna have a very disciplined, rigor approach to allocating capital. We have a strategic planning committee with our board that we're gonna work in lockstep with to make sure that we make the best possible decisions for our shareholders in the, in the, performance of the company. Number one, we're gonna take care of our plant assets and make sure that they maintain a high utilization rate, and they have very good yields. We want our plant assets to be in the top 25th percentile of the industry, so at best-in-class type levels. We have plenty of opportunities to either further monetize 45Z, but at the same time, improve the base business. Things like improving yields, lowering energy consumption, also improving our grains storage and receiving infrastructure. You know, that opportunity is good not only with respect to improving or increasing farmer-originated grain, which will help us on the 45Z side for the farm practices benefits, but also it'll help the base business for the long haul by giving us the opportunity to get more farmer-originated bushels, lowering our raw material costs, and improving the overall crush margins in our plant assets. We still have to keep mind of our debt, right. We have opportunities to pay down debt, potentially, or return value to shareholders, or grow the company through potential M&A. Perfect. We have a couple of minutes left. I just want to see if there are any questions from investors here. There's a mic. Hi. Can you hear me? Okay, for the alcohol to jet process you have, how do you compare the cost competitiveness of that to, like, fatty to jet or other processes out there? Can't really hear you. I can't. How do you compare your alcohol to jet process versus others? I guess you don't have one right now. We don't have one. You were exploring one. Yeah. You can talk about that. Yes. Okay. Yeah. The concept around alcohol to jet, right, is the feedstock has to be of a low CI. That is we have with our Nebraska plants in particular, we are creating ethanol that could potentially be used in that process. We do not, yeah, have an alcohol to jet facility. We would just anticipate being able to be the feedstock that could be used in one of them. Yeah, our focus is really on what's within our control right now in driving our CI scores as low as possible within our network of plants, and ultimately to be the supplier or maybe a partner, with respect to an ATJ process in the future. Okay, perfect. With that, I think we're reached at the end of our slot. Thank you very much for coming. Appreciate the opportunity, Sal. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you. Great.