Welcome to the Alussa Energy Freyr Capital Markets update call. For the first part of this call, all participants will be in listen-only mode. Afterwards, there'll be a question and answer session. You can join the question and answer session on your phone by dialing zero one. Alternatively, you can type these questions via the questions section below the video on the webcast. Today, I'm pleased to present Chi Chow, Strategy and Investor Relations at Alussa Energy Acquisition Corp. Please begin. Thank you, Mark. Good morning and good afternoon to everyone joining us today. On behalf of Alussa Energy and Freyr, we welcome you to the call. My name is Chi Chow, Head of Strategy and Investor Relations for Alussa Energy. Before we proceed, I'd like to first remind everyone that this call may contain forward-looking statements, including but not limited to, Freyr and Alussa Energy's expectations or predictions of financial and business performance and conditions, expectations and/or assumptions as to completion of the proposed transaction between the parties, product development and performance, including but not limited to the timing of the development milestones, competitive and industry outlook, and the timing and completion of the transaction. Forward-looking statements are inherently subject to risks, uncertainties, and assumptions. They are not guaranteed of performance. I encourage you to read Alussa Energy and FREYR Battery filings with the SEC for a discussion of the risks that can affect the business combination, Freyr's business, and the business of the combined company after completion of the proposed combination. Alussa Energy and Freyr are under no obligation and expressly disclaim any obligation to update, alter, or otherwise revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events, or otherwise, except for required by law. Okay. With that, let me introduce our speakers for the call today. We have first Daniel Barcelo, CEO of Alussa Energy, Tom Jensen, CEO of Freyr, and our special guest, Jarand Rystad, CEO of Rystad Energy, a leading independent research and business intelligence company that focuses on analytics and consulting services across the global energy markets. Mark, if you could turn to page three of the presentation. Thanks. Our agenda today will include an update on the business combination transaction by Daniel Barcelo, a discussion by Jarand Rystad on his firm's view on the battery industry and its role as a catalyst for the global energy transition, an update by Tom on Freyr's business since our transaction announcement in January, and finally, a Q&A session to close. If you'd like a copy of the slides today, we have posted the presentations to the investor section of both Alussa Energy and Freyr's websites. With that, I'll turn the call over now to Alussa Energy CEO, Mr. Daniel Barcelo. Thanks, Chi. Good afternoon and good morning. I'm Daniel Barcelo, CEO of Alussa Energy. Thank you for your time today, and we look forward to sharing a compelling update from Freyr Battery and a global battery sector outlook from Rystad Energy. If you go to the next slide, please. Next one. Less than two years ago, we created Alussa Energy with veteran global energy execs, institutional investors, sell-side analysts, and Encompass Capital, a leading energy and energy transition hedge fund from New York City. Our focus was about creating shareholder value through a SPAC business combination by identifying the right opportunity with the right team and an attractive valuation. We believe we found such opportunity in Freyr Battery, which provides an early-stage opportunity to invest in one of the world's cleanest, most advanced battery cell manufacturers at an attractive valuation. Our SPAC structure also democratizes access to such investments for retail and institutional investors that often don't have the access to the early elite private equity financing rounds. Next slide, please. As veteran energy investors, we understood the urgency for energy transition and the growth opportunities unlocked as global markets decarbonize transportation and energy systems and urgently prioritize cleaner air and water. Batteries are at the vanguard of this transition given the combination of performance, market-based cost competitiveness, and an existing globally developed electricity grid. A sustainability focus also means that such batteries need to be manufactured with minimal carbon and other water, air, and environmental impacts all too often associated with extractive industries and in countries with less stringent environmental regulations. Our technology access with U.S.-developed 24M semi-solid lithium-ion battery technology also provides speed to market and compatibility with known chemistries. This month, such urgency was further underpinned by President Biden's executive order to support U.S. supply chains for advanced batteries and backed with up to $17 billion in financing. FREYR Battery's commitment to clean, fully sustainable battery cell production of 43 GWh expected by 2025 in Norway, and potentially a further 50 GWh in a North American JV, aligns with meeting market demand for sustainably produced batteries and supply chains in Europe and the U.S. Turning to a business combination transaction update. Alussa Energy, with $290 million cash in trust, will merge with Freyr, combining to build gigafactories. The transaction includes a $600 million fully committed PIPE backed by strategic investors like Koch Strategic Platforms, Glencore, and institutional investors including Encompass Capital, Fidelity, Franklin Templeton, Sylebra, and VanEck. 100% of Freyr's existing shares will roll over into the combined company. The transaction implies a post-transaction enterprise value of $544 million and an equity value of $1.4 billion, assuming no redemptions, which we consider highly attractive relative to battery peer group metrics. Freyr will trade on the New York Stock Exchange under the ticker symbol FREY, replacing current ticker of ALUS. Next slide, please. The timeline to transaction close includes Alussa Energy record date of April 30th, the FREYR Battery S-4 effective date of June 14th, the Alussa Energy extraordinary general meeting for stockholder vote of approval of June 30th, and that's to be followed by the Cayman and Norway mergers, and transaction closing in early July. In summary, we encourage Alussa Energy Acquisition Corp. shareholders to vote for the transaction, and we thank you for your interest in the company. Thank you for your interest again, and on behalf of ourselves and Freyr, we'd like to now turn over the presentation to Jarand Rystad, CEO of Rystad Energy and advisor to Alussa Energy, for a macro market overview of the battery sector, which again, will be followed by Tom Jensen, CEO of FREYR Battery. Jarand. Thank you, Dan. Yes, we are now waking up after COVID to a new energy reality. Basically, everything has changed in the energy market over the last 18 months. Every estimate that was made before that has to be redone. First, we have cut a sliver of the global energy market through COVID that will never come back. Also, we have seen that due to policies and due to technologies, the energy transition has speeded up during COVID. It will be a lot of substitution in this energy system. The main trend will be the substitution from molecules to electrons. To understand that substitution and to calculate and to estimate future energy demand precisely, we have to look at a very integrated system. This is the quite complex slide you just see now. Very briefly, from the left-hand side on the slide, you see the primary energy. Actually not very useful energy. We have to convert that to molecules you can use through refining or electrons you can use through power generation. This energy has then to be distributed to the end users that you see on the right-hand side now, which is buildings, transport, and industry. With intermittent energy that is coming from the green energy from renewable power, you also have to store the energy, which is what you see in the middle here, and battery will be the key way to store this energy. Basically, this is a system we are analyzing. We have quantified all of the elements there. The total emission of the system is around 38 gigaton of carbon dioxide. We have also actually in our calculations, including methane emissions and all the other greenhouse gas emissions, so that's why we have also included the food and agricultural sector as you see on the bottom. The targets for the policymakers are clearly to get these carbon dioxide emissions down to close to zero by 2050, with the support also from carbon capture and storage. Let's take a closer look at the emissions. Here you see this 38 gigaton, and you see on the inner side here how this is distributed between the power generation sector, the transportation sector, and the industrial sector, and also some land use changes. Looking at the three enabling technologies that we see, which is hydrogen, it's carbon capture and storage, and it's batteries. We actually see that batteries has the largest scope to address these emission reductions, either directly, that we can do in the transportation sector from completely removing fossil fuel and rather use batteries as the way to move vehicles forward. Also, indirectly in the power generation sector, because with the intermittency of the renewables, you really need some backup to store the energy. With the lower battery cost, batteries are actually becoming the cheapest and best way to store energy in the grid. Also, batteries could have some potential in the industrial sector to back up close to the end users on the energy side. Basically, this is what we are now focusing on in this presentation is the battery. Batteries are, of these three technologies, the most mature technology. Batteries have been developing and growing fast over the last five years. We are quite certain that this technology is working and is scaling as we speak. Hydrogen electrolyzers and also blue hydrogen and also CCS is lagging somewhat. It will be a lot of growth, but still there is more uncertain technology elements there. Let's then look first to one sector, which is the transportation sector that is quite well known, that this will be subject to a complete transition from gasoline and diesel on the road to batteries, basically. I think already the battle between hydrogen and batteries is lost for hydrogen, and batteries has won in terms of private cars. It's still a battle ongoing, but still I think road transportation will be dominated by batteries going forward. In shipping and in aviation, hydrogen or maybe hydrogen in the form of ammonia might be also important the important fuel going forward, as you see this green sliver on the top. Most likely, and according to our main scenario now, we see that the battery will increase to 70% of the total consumption as you see, and 70% is road traffic, about 7% is aviation, 7% is shipping, 7% is construction machinery, and then the last part is trains and subways and city systems for transportation. Clearly there will be a steep drop. Is this actually going to happen? Can we trust this? Let's look at the very fresh figures for electric vehicle as a part of the new sales. On the right-hand side, you see from the situation we are used to in Norway, that we over the last 10 years have had a gradual growth of electric vehicles. Now we are close to this 80% of new sales is actually either battery electric or plug-in electric, but more and higher share of battery electric. Almost all other countries has been lagging. There's been questions whether this will happen or not, or whether this is a Norwegian phenomenon. Just looking now at the first quarter figures, it's astonishing a fast growth. Both in Sweden, in April, it was actually almost half of the cars sold was either battery electric or plug-in electric. The first quarter, as you see, is about 30%. A similar trend is seen in France, in Germany, which is a very big market, also U.K., in Italy, and in China. We see actually an even faster growth of EVs in these countries than we saw in the early days of Norway. Of course, in Norway, this was supported by government incentives because it was not really competitive at that time. Now the EV is very competitive like for like, so of course it's exploding. Looking at what we think is the most likely penetration going forward, and also which is consistent with the 1.5-degree scenario that is clearly on the agenda for all the leaders of the world, we see that we could see a growth to 72% of new car sales in 2030 could be electric, as you see here. Flat and approaching 90s in the end of the 2030s, and being almost completely electric in the 2040s as you see here. We also have a slightly more conservative case, which is not giving us as fast transition, but what we call the Rystad Energy 1.9 degree scenario, which is on the add-on side here. We see so much happening now in terms of, for example, innovation. We see that while ICE cars have stepped down in innovation and some R&D departments are shut down, we see a lot of new features implemented in the electric vehicles, like one pedal driving, like entertainment systems, like self-driving. All of this is now rapidly growing in the EVs, which means that you will be lagging if you are still on the ICE platform. That's why we expect a very quick transition here. Okay, this was the transportation side. Let's now look to the power sector. The revolution that has happened there over the last 10 years is that renewable cost has come down with a factor of 80% for solar and some 30% for wind power. Now solar and wind is approaching, is already the cheapest source of electricity if you look at the full life cycle. Now it's even approaching the marginal cost of fossil fuel, with the full life cycle cost of solar and wind. Clearly you will see no new construction of fossil fuel power plants going forward, and you will gradually see a shutdown of existing fossil fuel power plants also as the cost is coming down to between $25 and $50 per megawatt over full cycle. Of course, you have the issue with the intermittency. What do you need? Well, you need some storage in the system. Let's look into that. If you look at solar and wind, they are actually very good complements to each other. Because of course you have sun only in the middle of the day, while the wind is often blowing more in the evening. Also seasonally, you have more wind in the winter and more sun in the summer. This will require quite heavy grid and transmission line upgrades to smooth out this. We have seen that it's lengthy processes to get all the approvals needed to build all these transmission lines. We think, actually, in Rystad Energy, that batteries will sneak in and take a lot of this market rather than seeing the development of all these new transmission lines. We will see the batteries coming in at all stages and all levels in the grid as you see here. It's a good business case to integrate batteries with the solar PV farms, basically because the owners will then achieve a much better average price, because you can avoid to sell all the power in the middle of the day where it's very, very low prices. You can sell it in the afternoon and the evening and the afternoon and evening peaks, or the morning peaks. The grid operators have incentives to use batteries, not only for frequency stabilization, which is very well suited for, but also for short and medium-term storage, talking about minutes and hours. Up to 12 hours, it's extremely good business case to use batteries. Also on the consumption side, for hospitals, for factories, for big building complex, for many other applications, it is a good business case to install batteries to be able to optimize your own purchase of power from the grid and maybe sell back into the grid when it suits you. Also in the homes, it will be a good business case to combine maybe solar generation from the rooftop with batteries also. We see this broad implementation of batteries. It will be many different sizes and forms of batteries. It could be high power, low energy, or it could also be low power, high energy batteries implemented in the grid. We think actually that this is the way that we will see that will be the key enabler of renewables in the energy system. Looking then at one example, this is from California. Here you see some base load from nuclear and from hydropower. We look at in the future what the solar will be the key part of the generation. Of course, then you need to have battery capacity corresponding to about twice the capacity you have on the peak production for the solar. That will be sufficient to store energy from the daytime and to consume it in the afternoon. Of course, especially with solar that has 365 cycles per year, you get a very low capital cost of the batteries because you have so many cycle times. It could be more than 10,000. Then you will have a very low capital cost. Maybe the cost of solar, if that is then, let's say, $25 or $30 per megawatt-hour, the battery cost added will only add another $10 to $20 per megawatt. Still, even solar plus batteries could be cheaper than at least the marginal cost of the highest part of the fossil fuel systems today. You need to upgrade those. Of course, clearly there will be a very weak business case to do that. This is just an indication of how batteries will take over. We are already seeing the cost coming down. All of this on the left-hand side is named projects for new grid storage applications. On the right-hand side, we have stacked this on top of each other in terms of known investments, in terms of gigawatt power capacity installed. Of course, you have the additional energy element also. These named projects, we think is only the beginning. We know it's a lot of projects planned now, so we expect this to grow much faster going forward. Just looking at further into the future, all the way to 2050. We have made a 1.5-degree compliant global energy overview. We presented that the first time in the beginning of May, two weeks before the IEA, it's surprisingly similar actually to the IEA case. However, we are even more bullish on the solar side. With that, we see actually that it will be 74% renewable energy by 2050. If you're looking at the energy carrier, how this will be carried to the end users, it also here you see it will be growth of 23% to 73% will be electricity. We will electrify the entire society. 35% of that globally need to be from storage due to the intermittency of the renewable energy sources. Also as a part of this, you need some molecules as a part of this energy mix. We also see a growth of hydrogen, of course, as you see here with 9%. Looking at America only, taking President Biden's ambitions seriously, this is a similar effort we have done for the American energy system. The primary energy has already been declining for almost 15 years in the United States. We expect it to further be declining going forward. The main reason is that when you are using the brown energy, the fossil fuel, you're losing two-thirds of the energy than you are basically converting it to work. For electrons, you're only using like 20%. It's possible to actually keep a stable energy consumption after losses, as the blue line is indicating here. In terms of total energy in 2050, even more of that will be green in the U.S. than average globally when you are including Africa, India, Indonesia, China, all the other countries. The part of electrification part will be approximately similar, and also here we need around 35% of the energy to be flexible from storage. To summarize the total market we see for battery. Yes, we see a big growth of the global battery market used for transportation driven by the personal cars. But also some buses and heavy duty cars. A large market is actually coming to come from batteries used in the grid, energy storage systems in the grid. We need not only one or two or three new battery factories globally. We need at least 200 of the largest scale battery factories we can think about. With that, I think I will summarize here again with a few points, that the current policies that is happening in both U.S. and EU to decarbonize, they will generate this accelerated shift to renewables. We will see, like we see for EV, as big market for in the grid. In total, we see this market grow with exponential growth, and there will be basically a high demand for batteries going forward. With that, I give the word back to you, Chi. Thank you all. Thank you, Jarand. That was fantastic. Thank you for that quickly very comprehensive perspective on the potential impacts the battery industry could have on driving the energy transition. It's great you highlight the opportunities in energy storage. It feels like that's, at this point, a very underappreciated and underestimated part of the market. We appreciate you being with us here today. For everyone online, please check out Rystad Energy if you're interested in energy macro work. Jarand Rystad and his team do fantastic work. Okay. Let me reintroduce Tom Jensen, CEO of FREYR. There's been a lot going on in the company over the last few months since our transaction announcement, and Tom will provide an update on the business. Tom, over to you. Thank you, Chi. Thank you, Daniel. Thank you, Jarand, for a very interesting perspective, one we share deeply. Welcome, of course, to all our legacy investors in the PIPE transaction. I'm saying "our" because we are soon to be merged with Alussa Energy and change the ticker to FREY on the New York Stock Exchange. I'll share some perspectives and updates from the company on where we are. I also welcome, of course, new investors into this. I'll also talk about the value proposition and why we fundamentally believe that we offer a very compelling opportunity to existing and new investors in FREYR. If you move to the next slide, please. Let me just start by sort of reminding you from the investor presentation we gave to a broad variety of interested parties back in December and January, what FREYR is all about. At the outset, as Jarand has been pointing out, it is a very urgent decarbonization that needs to happen if the world is going to stay compliant within the Paris Agreement ambitions of a 1.5 degree sort of limit in terms of climate change. That will require a fundamental change in how we produce energy and use energy globally. We need to cut CO2 emissions in half by 2030, which is a daunting task. I just want to say it is impossible to do without the fundamental rollout of battery and electric solutions. What FREYR is doing in that context is that we want to be a catalyst for accelerating the decarbonization of transportation and energy systems globally. We want to do that by actually offering decarbonized batteries. If batteries can play an as important role as Alussa Energy has been articulating, they should be decarbonized at the outset. That's really what we do. We started out our journey back in 2017, 2018 with sort of three core strategic beliefs. To actually succeed in this business, you need to build at scale to have economies of scale in the business, and I'll get back to that, how do you sort of get to that point. You need to be fast, so you need to move at pace and have speed in your execution. Therefore, we've chosen business models and, let's say, choices along the value chain that allows us to move very quickly. Sustainability is the third sort of part of this equation. Ultimately, it's about decarbonizing systems, and by decarbonizing systems, you will also create shareholder value. That's probably the fourth S that we're preoccupied with is how to create value for our shareholders. Scale, speed, and sustainability will deliver superior returns for our shareholders, and we're fundamentally on track to delivering on a very exciting proposition. Next, please. This is a timeline of what we've been doing since the idea was conceived back in 2017 and the incorporation of the company early 2018. We have developed gradually strengths in delivering towards our ambition. On January 29th, 2021, we announced the business combination with Alussa, and announced that we'd raised $600 million in the PIPE transaction combined with the $290 million in trust, giving us $850 million of growth capital to deliver on our objectives. This follows in the wake of a gradual increase in partnerships along the value chain. We have now signed up more than 30 relationships across the entire value chain. We have a very strong and increasing customer pipeline, which I'll come back to. We have very strong support from the Norwegian government. We keep adding momentum around the development of our production pipeline, and we are now close to closing out the business combination and going public on the most sophisticated capital market in the world, which gives us both speed and scale in delivering on our objectives. If you move to the next, please. In the previous investor presentation, we took quite a lot of time talking about the demand forecasts the world was estimating in terms of demand for batteries. We took that through a new lens. We said technology innovation is going to continue and government regulation is going to continue, so costs are going to go down and government regulation is going to go up. That sort of led to us believing in a 5.3 terawatt-hour demand by 2030, which was at the time 2x higher than most analysts were predicting, including the IEA. Now you see that a number of forecasts through COVID and basically taking on board the need for accelerated decarbonization, that demand forecasts are even now surpassing our estimates. Equally interesting is that it's not just in the commercial vehicle and electric vehicle space, it's also in energy system storage and other sort of demand segments. Our opinion is that the only way is up in a way, in the context of demand for batteries and the need for developing sustainable supply chains in this area is just increasing. The fundamental backdrop for what we are aiming to do is increasingly positive. Next, please. In that context, we actually hired Rystad Energy to do a study of what would the most pronounced market in terms of energy system storage require of installed capacity by 2030. That analysis sort of showed us some very interesting things. First and foremost, renewable energy generation, as Jarand has been through, is required to increase significantly. That will basically replace fossil fuels, but also place a lot of strain on the energy system in the U.S. The cost of implementing this is now so competitive that it will be implemented in an accelerated fashion. With the cost of battery systems also going rapidly down, the combination of the two will be a very powerful, let's say, solution to offset and replace fossil-based generation. It will also place pressure on grids and infrastructure and batteries, again, have an important role to play there. All of this taken into consideration means that you will see a need for establishing a minimum of 900 GWh of installed battery capacity in the U.S. by 2030 to basically be in line with the scenarios that have been predicted. You could furthermore say that if you want to be compliant with the Biden administration's ambition, you probably need to double that installed capacity by 2030. The only way to be able to do that is to have cost competitive and sustainable battery solutions. In that context, Freyr fits like hand in glove. Next, please. Freyr's ambition is to have the lowest carbon footprint of battery cell production in the world. I'm going to get back to how we're going to get to that point. We've done a fairly deep study on what a fully localized and decarbonized supply chain when producing batteries at scale would mean in terms of CO2 footprint per kilowatt hour of battery produced. Here you see an estimate by a globally leading consultancy firm that have put up sort of a carbon curve on where we would place, presuming we build our targeted 43 GWh of battery cell capacity and sourcing raw materials into that from a Norwegian or Nordic realm. We will actually have the lowest carbon footprint of all battery cell producers in the world, which is what is triggering a lot of interest in Freyr's offering from a broad variety and increasing number of customers because we are offering a decarbonized solution to a decarbonizing agenda. If you then move to the next, I am going to show a breakdown of that. The first and most important aspect of this is to actually be able to produce batteries in a low carbon energy environment. Norway has abundant, renewable, low-cost energy, which can be used for battery cell production. Equally important, we can also host active material production in Norway and the Nordics and additional supply of critical input factors into battery cell manufacturing, all of which are extremely energy intensive industries. Finally, packaging and recycling, which is a core aspect and sort of a leading industrial, let's say, tenet of Norwegian and Nordic societies are already way ahead of global average battery cell producing entities in the world today. Combining all of those elements will allow us to reduce CO2 footprint compared to global average by more than 80%. This is a fundamentally important offering that we are offering now to our clients, and we are very positively encouraged to see that this is an increasingly important decision-making factor for customers when they are deciding on long-term strategic supply of batteries. Next, please. Freyr don't want to stop there. We want to move further from an 80% reduction to a net zero ambition. All of this is going to be possible by electrifying the currently harder to abate parts of the sector. We've looked into how batteries can play a role across a broad variety of these segments and also Rystad Energy pointed out it is totally possible to envisage a net zero carbon environment and batteries have, again, the most fundamentally important role to play in that. Therefore, producing batteries and establishing production footprint of decarbonized batteries in the most advantaged location is, in our opinion, a very strong value proposition. This is all driven by Norway's superior advantage in terms of power generation. Norway has an abundance of hydroelectric power generation. It's often referred to as the battery of Europe, given the highly flexible nature of the hydropower that we have. In addition to that, we are now seeing increasing developments of onshore wind, and over time, also offshore wind, which will complement a very strong hydropower base. We have today somewhere between 10 and 20 terawatt-hours of surplus power. We are connected to many European countries and the continent through various cables, but we also have very strong power island characteristics of the hydropower that we have, in particular in the area we are going to produce batteries, which gives us an intrinsic and fundamental cost advantage in electricity, which again, is the core cost component along the battery value chain, and therefore, it's a very fundamentally strong starting point. Next, please. As also pointed out by Jarand, Norway has been leading the charge, pun intended, in terms of electrification. We started adopting electric vehicles well helped by the Norwegian government more than 10 years ago. Which means that we know institutionally and we have gained institutional knowledge in Norway on what happens to a society when you deeply electrify it. More than 90% of all vehicles on a monthly basis now sold are electric. We know how to establish charging stations, range anxiety, how to deal with that, and how to figure out how you live in a society where all the cars around you are more and more electric, and that is driving development of the society. Marine sectors are being electrified. The domestic aviation grid we want to have fully electric by 2040. Norway is well advanced and in the forefront of the electric revolution, if you like. That is also triggering development of upstream raw material providers and downstream system providers who all today are buying battery cells from Asia. All of them are interested in buying battery cells produced in Norway and the Nordic region. On top of this, Norway and the Nordic region also hosts large amounts of deposits of critical elements that you need for battery cell production. It's not only deposits, it's being converted into raw material production. In Finland, lithium, cobalt are being produced today. Copper, nickel, and other products are being produced in Norway and Sweden, and there are huge deposits of additional elements like this also offshore in Norway, where the concentration of these minerals are 10 times higher than what you find on land. The main point with all of this is that you will see the emergence of a very strong battery belt in the Nordic region, and Norway could be at the absolute forefront of this. Therefore you see a number of initiatives following in the wake of Freyr's initiative, and we're super excited about being the leader in the Norwegian battery ecosystem and driving the development along our compatriots and competitors in the Norwegian space. Next, please. We have paid deep attention to developing a very strong supply chain because raw materials is the name of the game. I'll talk about towards the end the cost breakdown of that entire value chain and why energy is so important, and why some of these household names in the industry want to team up with Freyr. We're very excited to have very strong supply chain partners already signed up in partnerships with Freyr, and there's a lot more to come. We have very active dialogues with the leading brands in the world on everything from raw material sourcing through to electrolyte production, anode material production, cathode material production, separator production, copper foil production. Anything and everything you can think of that is important to go into the battery value chain, we are partnering with them. The core reason is we have access to renewable energy, and we are an industrial scaling partner of choice, and therefore we want to partner upstream from cell production to ensure that we can capture the value that is embedded upstream from battery cell production. Next, please. We decided early on to move at pace. Speed and scale and sustainability are the three tenets of our strategy. One of the core reasons of looking for a technology to take to scale is that we didn't want to develop our own technology because it takes too long time. 24M is, in our opinion, the best available disruptive technology out there that has already been commercially introduced. It was started out of MIT as a spinoff back in 2010, so it has more than 10 years of heavy R&D behind it. It is commercially introduced by some leading companies in Asia. We are the first adopter of this technology in Europe, and we have deep exclusivity protection for the technology, in particular for the ESS opportunity of the technology. We will be taking it to scale in Europe, and we have strong protection not only in the Nordic region, but also across the European Economic Area. Let me spend a couple of minutes talking about the benefits of the technology. If we move to the next slide, please. Without going into too much detail of this technology, the main attribute of the technology, which we really found very compelling, is that it's innovation both on the cell design itself, but most importantly on the production process. You see the thin layers versus few and thick layers representation at the middle of the slide. Conventional lithium-ion battery production, which is the top part of this illustration, shows you these multiple repeating layer cake structures that have a number of, let's say, layers in them that are non-energy carrying material. What 24M has done is that they've basically enabled very thick electrode creation by basically mixing the electrolyte with the active materials upfront. The fact that they're doing that gives two very distinct advantages. The first advantage is that you can put more energy-carrying material into the same volumetric unit of cell, and you can remove all the production steps in electrode creation that is required to remove solvents and binders, which basically the electrolyte replaces in the production process. What this means for the layman is that production steps are reduced from 15 to five. That's a 67% reduction in number of complicated producing steps, which translates into more than a 50% reduction in capital expenditure, more than a 50% reduction in footprint, more than a 40% reduction in energy consumption, more than a 40% reduction in labor costs. All of this can be implemented in the existing lithium-ion battery paradigm. On the left on the slide, you see that we can use any cathode material, any anode material, and any electrolyte and separator material into the production of these cells. The semi-solid structure, as it's conventionally called, speaks actually to the thick structure of the mix of the electrolyte and the active material, but it also offers a bridge into solid-state batteries because it's a dual electrolyte system and 24M is already working with the DOE and ARPA-E on lithium-metal anodes. Therefore, you can easily imagine that over time, as we approach more solid-state structures, that this technology can also be a bridge into that. We are very excited about the 24M structure. If we then move to the next, let me talk about a little bit why this technology platform will always be better than conventional solutions. Let's start at the left of this slide where you have thicker electrodes. As I explained, the mix of the electrolyte together with the active material allows you to create really thick electrodes, having a lot of energy-carrying material in the same volumetric unit as conventional solutions have. In that structure, you both have more energy-carrying material inside the cell, which has an economic benefit, and you have the cost structure advantage of reducing the number of production steps. Relative to any other existing solution, 24M-based technology will be fundamentally much stronger. As you then move to more thinner electrodes, which you need for faster charging applications, as for instance, automotive applications would require, the benefit of the thicker electrodes diminish. You will always have the structural advantage of an improved production process, and therefore, as we develop the 24M solution for an increasing number of market applications, we will always have a structural cost advantage, which of course, in the race towards lower costs and higher energy densities, is a very strong situation and position to be in. That coupled with producing those batteries in a very advantaged location with fundamentally lower energy costs and a localized supply chain will give a very strong opportunity to capture very large market shares in increasing number of market segments. Next, please. Here are some of the products that we are now starting to market and are in active dialogues with customers. On the left, you see the commercialization journey of two of the Asian licensees, and on the right you see our initial product specifications for the ESS market, which is growing quite rapidly and we saw that early and therefore we targeted this technology specifically for that as it's ready for mass production and already in commercial production in Asia for that purpose. We're also now advancing quite fast on developing solutions for the EV space with the requirements that the large auto OEMs require in this regard. We're super excited about the opportunity to be the first commercializer of a fundamentally disruptive technology, commercially introduced and ready to be taken to scale in an advantaged location. Next, please. To give some additional updates on this, we are, as we have mentioned in previous investor conversations, targeting to build 43 GWh of capacity in Norway, predominantly using the 24M technology. We have strengthened continuously our relationship with 24M. They have strengthened their own financial position, and we have also developed additional relationships, very strong with the Asian licensees to basically exchange ideas on how to mutually benefit updates and improvements between each other. The agreement we have with 24M is a very strong licensing and services agreement, multi-year evergreen license, where we can produce products anywhere in the world. We can sell them anywhere in the world with temporary restrictions in Japan and Thailand, but those restrictions are gone once we are at commercial scale with our commercial facilities. We have progressed on developing our customer qualification plant, which will be online next year. We have just concluded our tendering process and will be announcing this in short order and into the building you see on the slide here, we will be implementing Norway's first large-scale lithium-ion battery facility with expected startup of production next year. We have also quite aggressively expanded our technology team build-out, and I am very positively encouraged by the amount of interest we get from Asian experts and European experts across the entire value chain to join us in our team. We have top people from the Japanese Battery Society, from the Korean Battery Society, and from the Chinese Battery Society, experts with strong networks that allow us to populate our critical positions with top experts from around the world. Multiple Japanese, multiple Korean, and multiple Chinese people now joining the FREYR team, and we're complementing that with European stakeholders and of course, also supporting the build-out of a Norwegian competence development with the science universities and the research organizations in the country. We're super excited about starting up the customer qualification plant, which will be a fundamentally important catalyst for the customer journey that we're on. Next, please. Now, on the customer side, we are in an extremely positive situation. As I've tried to articulate the opportunity to market decarbonized, low cost, high energy density batteries to an exponentially growing market segment and exponentially growing number of segments, I should say, that are in electrification and decarbonization, provides us with a unique opportunity to basically optimize our customer portfolio. We had, during the investor presentation, we were in some 40 customer acquisition processes. That number is well in the 60s. We have put here of active dialogues with unmet demand in the ESS commercial mobility space and in the electric vehicle space. We actually do see that relative to the capacity that we are targeting for the ESS segment and for the EV segment, that there is a multiple higher demand for the offering that we have, than what we are able to produce. Of course, we aren't intending to deliver on all of this demand, but this is actually driving us towards considering to expand our production footprint also in other jurisdictions. With that, let me move to the next slide. Here you see where we're going to roll out our initial production facilities. This is in the mid part of Norway, Mo i Rana, to be specific. It's 470 km west-northwest of where Northvolt, our Swedish friends and brothers, are building their facilities in Skellefteå just a little bit east, southeast of where we are. In Mo i Rana, which is Norway's fourth largest ice-free port and one of the most advanced industrial towns in Norway and hosts one of the more modern industrial parks in the country, we have secured more than 200,000 sq m of land. Down on the K there, you will see the customer qualification plant that I showed on the previous slide. Now, in this acreage, given the space effectiveness of the 24M technology, we will be able to produce up to 35 GWh worth of 24M-based solutions. We're right now looking into whether we can increase those numbers further in the same acreage because of the effectiveness and efficiency of the technology. It is absolutely possible to envisage to drive up speeds in how to produce this from the fundamentally simpler production process, allows you to basically speed up how you produce the batteries. In our discussions and engagements with our equipment manufacturers, we've actually seen opportunities to optimize this further. To start with, 35 GWh is a good start, and we're well advanced in terms of rolling this out. If you then move to the next. We are now, in our 60+ customer dialogues, seeing the potential need to actually accelerate Gigafactory 2 to start up at the same time as Gigafactory 1. We're looking into how to optimize Gigafactory 1 and 2 in one joint development sooner than what we have originally anticipated. Then we will gradually look into to what extent we can accelerate also subsequent developments. The way in which this will be done is that in each of these gigafactories, we will have a number of production lines. Right now we're optimizing the different customer engagements we have relative to each of these production lines so that we can ensure that we have maximum up time, maximum yield, lowest possible scrap rates in production, all core aspects of being proficient in the battery space. All of that is made much simpler with the 24M technology. We are in this fairly fortunate position, I would say, to actually be selecting a little bit the customer engagements we have to match with our ever-expanding production footprint. We are targeting 83 GWh of capacity by 2028. We also are making strong progress in terms of joint ventures, which we, in our investor presentation, articulated as a complementary strategy that we're having on top of the disruptive technology approach with 24M. Here we are basically in advanced discussions with some of the top-tier Asian producers, to capitalize on the Norwegian and Nordic, let's say, ecosystem, both in terms of renewable energy, but also the presence and availability of a decarbonized supply chain, which we are catalyzing through our partnerships with household names upstream from battery cell manufacturing. 83 GWh in 2028. We aspire to between 100 GWh-150 GWh in 2030, and we want to become, and are well on track to becoming a global champion in the battery cell manufacturing space with increasing attention across, as mentioned, multiple customer segments. We move to the next, please. We also did disclose, leading up to our transaction close, that we are in advanced discussions and negotiations with a major multinational industrial conglomerate in the U.S. We definitely do see that we can replicate what we are now well advanced in doing in Norway, in the North American realm. Given the very exciting prospects of the ESS market, coupled with the structural advantages for ESS applications for the 24M technology in the very near term, we believe that we can capture a minimum of 50 GWh in the U.S. market by 2030. We obviously have already a very strong platform and relationship with 24M in this regard, and adding this industrial muscle to that rollout capability is something that we're super excited about. We're also moving upstream, or downstream, I should say, from battery cell manufacturing into modules and packs, which is increasingly important, of course, if you're going into the ESS space. Therefore, we're delighted to have been partnering with Eguana, one of many discussions we're also having downstream from cell production, and you should expect a lot more news from Freyr in this area in the weeks and months to come to basically showcase to the world that we are leading the charge, so to speak, in terms of the ESS segment. Next, please. Finally, talking a little bit about the relative cost advantages of our proposition. This is also an illustration from the investor presentation we gave earlier. What I've tried to articulate here is that Freyr will, on a relative basis, as long as we produce that scale, always have a structural cost advantage by using the 24M technology on raw materials. The reason for this is that we're putting more energy-carrying material into the same unit of cell. More importantly, what will really determine the winners in this industry is your ability to convert those raw materials, again at scale, to a finished product. That's where production process and business model plays in. As you can see, the production process improvement from the 24M technology showing a 50% reduction from the lower capital expenditure, the lower energy consumption, the lower labor consumption, the lower footprint, as well as our business model of partnering upstream and not having a deep R&D unit inside will allow us to be superiorly effective in terms of conversion of the raw materials to finished product. All of that allows us to sort of have a very strong confidence that we will, on average, be 20% cheaper than conventional solutions because we are, one, tapping into more energy-dense material into one volumetric unit of cell and having structural advantages in the production process and a business model and location that allows us to capitalize on that in a much greater extent. Let's move to the next, please. That will allow us again to be on the left-hand side of the cost curve, which we're super excited about. Of course, this is again based on long-term average price forecasts that were made before Christmas. Of course, these raw materials will fluctuate up and down. The most important thing for us is, one, we want to build that scale. We want to do that fast. If we do that with the right technology in the right location, we will always have a cost advantage relative to conventional solutions from the structural advantages of the 24M technology. Next, please. To do this, we need a very capable team, and that's something that we've been really focused on in the early days of the development of the company to really attract the best and brightest into this development. From the founder and chairman of the company through to leading top professionals from the Norwegian energy-intensive, and process-intensive industries in terms of project execution, having built and delivered multibillion-dollar complicated facilities all over the world, many of them in sequence and in parallel, also attracting very strong operational excellence-centric teams, then coupling that with, as mentioned, an increasing array of Asian battery experts, is creating a very strong, agile, versatile, and diversified, I should say, execution team to deliver on multiple projects in parallel in multiple geographical jurisdictions. Next, please. We've also got a very capable board in the new company, which we're extremely excited and proud to have assembled with very strong participants from the Norwegian industrial and financial realm, including our very strong friends in Alussa Energy, and very happy to also have Koch Strategic Platforms on board, in addition to very experienced people from Tenaris to basically complement the Norwegian contingent into the board. I'm very happy with this. They're a board that challenges me every time I meet them, but also supports and sort of drives the development of the company on a very active basis, and really looking forward to having them made the formal board of the new Freyr post-transaction close. Next, please. Now, we're expanding our presence upstream and downstream. We are increasing the, let's say, footprint of Freyr from cell to also include packs and modules. We're also very actively discussing recycling opportunities, which oftentimes is linked to active materials and mining and refining, and a broad variety of very strong propositions are happening in this space, so you should expect strong news in this regard in the weeks and months to come. Let me then go to the final slide to summarize. Now, here you see a very interesting summary of what I've been trying to tell you. First, you see the breakdown of the value chain from extraction to active material production and the cell production. Then on the right, you see the breakdown of the total cost structure along that value chain. As you can see, more than 44% of the total cost of cell production comes from energy. It's broken down into different parts of the value chain. This tells you why the interest of teaming up with Freyr in a low-cost green energy environment is as strong as it is. If you then move to the other cost components, you see why Freyr is doing its technology selection as we've done. We want lower CapEx, we want more efficient conversion technologies. We want to be able to drive down conversion costs and drive down energy costs so that we can really end up with a superior value proposition. All of this in combination allows us to deliver the best possible battery solutions at scale, at speed, with a very sustainable footprint, and we're super excited about the opportunity. Next, please. We also provided you with our pro forma financial projections. Zooming in on 2025, we're targeting $2.9 billion of revenue with a 25% EBITDA margin, generating some $700 million in EBITDA in 2025. We intend to grow beyond that point, of course. Free cash flow, $1.6 billion upon completion of this rollout plan will allow us to grow way beyond 2025. If you then move to the next slide, you will see the multiples, which as Daniel Barcelo articulated at the beginning of the conference call, very strong multiple environment relative to peers. We're very excited about coming into a listed environment so that we can start delivering against our objectives and showing to our legacy investors and new investors that investing in Freyr is a very strong proposition. Next slide and final slide. What I've been trying to tell you is that the decarbonization agenda is fundamentally what is driving the energy transition. Having decarbonized batteries to deliver against that agenda is a very solid value proposition. That is resonating with an increased number of customers across an increased number of market segments, all in an increasing way requiring batteries for the urgent decarbonization that is happening all around us. It's all been helped to a large extent by the post-COVID fog clearing. We're super excited about the opportunity. We really look forward to having the shareholder vote of the Alussa general meeting behind us and start delivering against our objectives. With that, I'll turn it back to the operator or to Chi to open up for Q&A. Thank you for your attention. Thank you. If you wish to ask a question, you have two options. You can either dial 01 on your telephone keypad to ask your question verbally, or you can type your questions in the Q&A section at the bottom of the webcast. So far, we have one question on the phone, a couple more coming through now. Our first question comes from the line of Maheep Mandloi of Credit Suisse. Please go ahead. Your line is open. Hey. Good morning or good afternoon over there. Thanks for taking the questions. Thanks for the detailed presentation on this. Maybe if you could just probably talk about the relationship with 24M here and the exclusivity you have with them for this technology, and I just wanted to learn more about how your peers in Asia have, or how much capacity have to build, and what lessons have you learned from them for the first factories to be built next year? Thanks. Well, thank you for that question. In terms of the licensing and services agreement that we have with 24M, it's a deep partnership-based approach. That's point number one. It's an evergreen license, as long as 24M has a valid claim in the market, we have rights to all existing and all future improvements of the technology. The way the licensing agreement is structured is that 24M owns all improvements that all its licensees developed with their technology, and that accrues back to 24M, and that is then distributed back out to the other licensees. That is, in a way, a very effective outsourced way of improving the technology. Now, Kyocera and GPSC in Japan and Thailand respectively, have already taken the 24M technology to mass production scale. There is additional licensee in China, which is about to establish a gigawatt-hour scale with 24M technology for the automotive space. We have already connected with our Asian, let's say, sister and brother licensees with very strong initial dialogue in terms of collaboration on cell design, supporting each other in terms of learnings of getting up to speed, debottlenecking production facilities, and all of those things. In terms of the exclusivity protection, we have exclusivity protection for up to 10 years for the production of 24M based batteries for the ESS market in the Nordic region, and we're one out of only two potential companies that can produce that in the entire European Economic Area. We are the only licensee so far in Europe, so right now we are the only licensee for the 24M technology in Europe. Going forward, especially for the ESS market, we will have a very strong, let's say, vantage point and starting point, especially in this exponentially growing energy system storage market. Thanks, Tom. Thanks for the explanation. Maybe if we could just talk about exclusivity in terms of competition across other regions. I think you said you could pretty much compete in most of the regions or potentially produce also in most of the regions. I think that's why you're also exploring the U.S. market over here, right? I think if you're probably going to touch upon that exclusivity for the end market. This is a production exclusivity, which we believe is ultimately important. We do believe, of course, that the locational advantages of Norway with low-cost green electricity in a world that is increasingly decarbonizing and presumably placing an increasing price on carbon, which, by the way, is an additional benefit that we haven't catered for in our financial projections. We believe that, let's say, locational advantage and exclusivity from that point of view into a market segment which is now growing much faster than previously assumed, is a very strong starting point. Coupled with that, we are establishing a strong value chain approach and partnership-based approach in the upstream part of the value chain. Our ambition is really to export that complete value chain approach into new markets. The world needs to build 200 of these large facilities, as per Rystad's overview, in quite short order, and therefore you need to establish very robust, strong value chains that can replicate fast, and therefore the interest to do that together with Freyr, with the large industrial conglomerate in the U.S., is something that we're super excited about. The opportunity to go beyond that, obviously, is also there, and we're contemplating that, of course, in multiple jurisdictions. We're also mindful that we need to focus on delivering on our objectives in a stepwise and stage-gated manner. The opportunity to expand our horizon and grow with industrially savvy partners is very strong, and we have a partnership-based approach. We like the opportunity a lot. Thank you. Just one last one from me, then I'll jump back in the queue. In terms of the ESS and EV battery capacity, I think you spoke about 13 GW and 30 GW for those two by 2025. High level, just want to understand that, are the lines interchangeable? Can you move from ESS to EV or EV to ESS, or do the chemistries or the exclusive agreements kind of lock you down between those two technologies? Thanks. Thank you. An important question. One of the beauties and additional beauty of the 24M technology is that it's extremely flexible and versatile, so we can swap between cathode chemistries and anode chemistries literally within a day. We can also change the size of the electrode structure and, of course, then the thickness and so on of it. The short answer to your question is yes, we can change the production system to gear it more for different market segments if we so desire. Having said that, we want to earmark as much as possible the production lines for the various market segments because that makes more industrial sense. You don't need to have turnaround and changeover situations in your industrial system, which inevitably creates delays in production. Yes, we are targeting the first two gigafactories, and the second one we are, as mentioned now, considering to accelerate and start up earlier. That will be dedicated to a large extent to the ESS, and let's call it mobility market, the markets where thick electrodes will basically have this very strong advantage. The two latter gigafactories by 2025 will to a larger extent be dedicated to the EV market. The joint venture approach is to a very large extent dedicated to the EV market then, and the Asian tier one or top-tier battery cell producer relationships we have typically go hand-in-hand also with large OEM discussions. We're quite excited about that opportunity. Relative to the flexibility on the technology, there's no limitation on us selling into any market segment. We can sell our batteries into any market segment in the world. The only temporary restrictions we have is in Japan and Thailand, and that's due to the fact that Kyocera and GPSC are licensees of the 24M technology. That exclusivity expires before we are in commercial production with our facilities. Hopefully that answers your question. Yep. No, yeah. Thanks for taking the questions. Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Sean Milligan of Williams Trading. Please go ahead. Your line is open. Hey, guys. Thank you for the call today and taking the questions. There is a slide where you talk about the hurdle rates for starting new factories in terms of the offtake agreements. Can you spend two minutes talking about what your hurdle rates are specifically for starting new factories, and then what kind of protection is being built into the offtake agreements? Should we think of those as take or pay type of agreements or just your visibility into what your buyer needs are? Okay. Great question. Typically in this industry, as many might be aware, and this is of course, there's a lot of nuance around this. Typically you see reasonably long offtake agreements to the tune of five-seven years, for a very large fraction of the capacity. The reason for this, of course, is in part for financing reasons. You need to have secured offtake and bankable offtake to basically get the leverage you need to make the value proposition economically viable. With a technology that has more than 50% reduced CapEx and a much more efficient, let's say, production system, our need in this regard and also opens up the opportunity to build smaller facilities, so it's sort of less capital intensive, allows us to have a much more flexible approach in this regard. Our hurdle rate in this regard is we would like to see at least three years of the capacity that we want to build, signed up for at least three years, for 50% of that capacity, I mean. 50% for three years is what we would ideally like to see. What we are then thinking or looking into in terms of combining Gigafactory 2 with Gigafactory 1, in each of these factories, we will probably have four production lines. What we will do is we will gradually sort of start up these production lines to meet customer demand. To actually invest in one larger facility as opposed to two smaller ones obviously makes more economic sense. Right now we're seeing probably more customer demand than what we had anticipated. Assuming that we sign up the right offtake agreements with the right value contribution to the company, which of course, given the exponential growth in the ESS market is fairly strong, we see an opportunity to basically roll out and start the gradual build-out of those eight production lines reasonably quickly. And that will go into the ESS market first with mobility, commercial sort of mobility coupled with that. Yeah, that's kind of some reflections around that, I should say. Okay, great. Thank you. In terms of the fast charging EV opportunity and the battery cell being delivered 2023, 2024, is that something that you're actively working with 24M on, or is that something that 24M is working on on their own? Can you just talk about that relationship regarding specifically the EV opportunity? As mentioned, we have a deep licensing and services agreement with 24M, and it's a deep partnership-based approach. We'd like to sort of look upon ourselves as one team in the way in which we're working on this. Clearly the EV space and the automotive space is an important one also for Freyr. In that regard, fast charge capability for the 24M technology is important. We are, in addition to supporting 24M in their efforts that they are doing on their own through expert advice and leveraging our Asian experts into that, we are also targeting select, let's say, improvement programs and fast charge investigations to ensure that we can complement whatever activities 24M is doing in this regard. Principally, you can solve the fast charge problem through two pathways. First, you can create thinner electrodes, as illustrated in one of the slides. If you do that, you will still have the structural cost advantage of the simplified production process. You can also optimize the mix between the active materials and the electrolyte, basically improving the internal resistance in the thick electrode, which will then allow you to improve the C-rates while maintaining some of the thick electrode benefits. Right now, there are a number of different development tracks ongoing to basically find the optimum solution and the most cost-optimized solution. We don't think it's a question of whether we will have fast charge capability with this technology. It's a question of the best way to do it, meaning the most cost optimal way. The sort of least cost optimal way will be one where we have very thin electrodes and changes to the production system. A more cost optimized way is one where we have thicker electrodes through a better mix of electrolyte and active materials. Great. Thank you. I'll go back in the queue. Thank you. The next question comes from the line of Arthur Chan at Wells Fargo. Please go ahead. Your line is open. Okay. Yes, good morning, people. Many investors see Freyr as a foreign company with a European platform listed on New York Stock Exchange. What I'd like to hear from you guys this morning is, can you share a little bit more about your U.S. strategy, especially with your JV partner, and how you plan to maximize your U.S. business and exposure with U.S. investors? Thank you. First and foremost, the reason why we were very compelled by the business combination opportunity with Alussa Energy, was that it gave us access to the most sophisticated and largest capital market in the world. As mentioned, our tenets are speed, scale and sustainability. To basically build at scale, in a very capital-intensive business, you need access to the most sophisticated capital markets in the world. On top of that, Alussa Energy was willing to move very fast at what we believe is a fair valuation, and that's why we sort of rapidly moved into partnership with them. On that note, we also saw, while entering more deeply into the American realm, so to speak, that there is deep interest across the United States, across the value chain, I should say, both in terms of partnering with Freyr in Norway and in the United States for both development of processed materials and raw materials into battery cell production. Also downstream from cell production and cell production itself, and not least on the customer side. Our targeted or anticipated industrialization partner, which we're not at liberty to disclose at this point, is, as mentioned in our previous releases, a very strong industrial conglomerate in the United States who see very deep benefit in being part of the energy transition and teaming up with Freyr in this regard. We will, of course, be announcing more details to these plans when we have progressed and finalized these discussions more deeply. What you should expect us to do is to basically replicate and build upon the experiences that we have in Norway. We aim to establish very strong value chains with supply chain partners and strong systems with operational excellence for battery cell production, deep, strong partnerships on module and packing facilities, and then basically take all of that and replicate that as quickly as possible in the U.S. market. It will be centered around, at least to a large extent, the 24M technology platform, because it's a very strong platform, in particular for the ESS market, where the U.S. market is the largest one in the world and exponentially growing. We're very excited about the opportunity to coming to America, as we would say here. Okay. Can you also discuss a little bit more about your solid-state and semi-solid-state lithium batteries? Yes. The 24M technology is labeled semi-solid structure. As I've tried to say, semi-solid structure does not sort of pertain really to the solid-state nature of solid-state batteries, but it pertains to the structure of the mix of the electrolyte and the active material. It's almost like a clay-like structure. It's almost like paste that you sort of cast onto the current collectors as opposed to coat it in conventional production, hence the word semi-solid. We do believe that the production platform, which is also a dual electrolyte platform, think about it as the anode and the cathode coming together like this. Therefore, we can develop, and 24M is developing articulation or formulations on lithium-metal anodes, for instance, on the anode side, which is, of course, a big step forward towards the ultimate objective of solid-state batteries. Now, we are beyond 24M, we are a technology, in a way, agnostic company. We like to look upon ourselves as a industrial scaling partner of choice who understand how to take complicated technology into an industrial setting and scale it efficiently. Therefore, the 18-month process that led us to selecting 24M has obviously also allowed us to investigate and enter into dialogues with a number of other technology companies. We're keeping our finger on the pulse in that regard. Obviously, we'll be moving quite rapidly forward, with potential other technology companies when we see that they are ready to go to commercial scale. We think that solid-state is a very interesting opportunity, but we still think there are fundamental R&D items that need to be solved before you can start to think about scaling the supply chain to actually get the economies of scale into such solutions as well. We are keeping our finger on the pulse and, in the meantime, the 24M technology is commercially introduced today. It is better than conventional technology when produced at scale, and it offers a bridge into the solid-state future, and therefore, we believe it's a very solid value proposition, and again, by producing it in the most favorable location with ultra-low cost, 100% clean electricity. Okay. One final question. I'm just wondering, how do you guys plan to market yourselves to institutional investors and retail investors in the U.S. at this point? We will be establishing and have already recruited a very strong investor relation capacity in the United States that come from, let's say, the institutionalized investor community in the U.S. We will have deep physical presence through investor relations for the company established in the U.S. We will be doing capital market updates like this on a regular basis. We will also be doing, of course, quarterly conference calls. Generally speaking, we'll make ourselves available for our investors. Again, back to the fourth almost tenet of our value proposition, speed, scale, and sustainability, and shareholders obviously are fundamentally important. We believe that having the right shareholders with us complementing our journey is fundamentally important so that we can actually accelerate delivering on our ambition. The only way to do that is to be available and open for dialogue and discussions with our investors. We're very happy to be on capital markets updates like this, and we will have physical, very strong presence in the United States, and we will actively engage with all of our institutional investors and also have, let's say, more broader market presentations like this to reach all of our investors as well. Thank you very much for your answers. I'll put myself in queue. Thank you. At this time, we'll take some questions from the web. I'll hand back to our speakers for these questions. Great. Thanks, Mark. We have many questions that came in on the web. Thank you all for your interest. Let me get to a few here. Actually, I'm going to throw one over to Jarand here. Jarand, you spoke to a 1.5 degrees scenario in your talk and scope for greening of the energy supply. What does Rystad Energy see as, A, the key constraints and B, the key accelerants in achieving this scenario? Well, we actually think it is possible to reach the 1.5 degree scenario and detailed that in the beginning of May. It's not easy, but it's possible. We have actually a slightly different trajectory to 1.5 degree than the IEA. We are more bullish on the solar, especially. Also, we see some more oil production and demand will actually happen over the next few years. Will go slightly slower down because IEA is actually assuming that you have to have a behavioral change, and that is more than the COVID actually towards the end of the 2020s. We don't see that as needed. Of course, a quite rapid decline of coal, oil, and gas. That could be done by replacing it primarily with solar and wind backed up by batteries and some other places you can use hydro, water pumping, and a few other also backup technologies. In the peak season, in the cold season, maybe some still natural gas power plant backup. All of this is possible. It will be a big drive from the technologies in itself with EVs, PV plants, and batteries, but you need additional policy support. We need carbon taxes, not maybe in every country globally, but at least you need it in many places. For example, EU introducing a carbon border tax would help to achieve that. We have also a 1.7 degree scenario, and what we see now is that based on the policy support, we are likely to end up closer to 1.7 degree with less policy support closer to 1.5 degree, which is 770 gigaton with 50% probability also. Maybe the most immature technologies are the scale of carbon capture and storage and the scale of hydrogen. Where the hydrogen is coming down to a cost of $1.5 per kilo, which we think is needed because you need it for in the steel production, chemical production, and aviation, and maybe shipping is really where you need the hydrogen. That is possible to scale that really in the 2030s and '40s. Of course, if you get some, what's it I say, political counterforces, this could slow down and then again, you could see $1.7 or up to $1.9 as a more likely scenario. We don't really see any complete showstoppers. We need to see the same drive from politicians towards the Glasgow meeting, and then we think it's actually likely to get down to 770 gigaton aggregated to 2100. Yeah. Happy to elaborate if there's a follow-up here. Okay, great. Thanks, Jarand. Let me get to maybe one or two more here. I know we're running out of time here. Yeah. Tom, here's one for you. Given the high number of customer discussions you've had, what would be the main hurdles for further capacity expansion to meet this demand? Are you considering other places and countries to replicate the Freyr formula in addition to the discussions you're having in the U.S.? The second part, do you think you can replicate the CO2 profile for the Freyr factory in Norway in other countries? Well, thank you. Multiple questions in there. In terms of increasing capacity in Norway, as I've mentioned, we're looking into ways in which first and foremost, you want to debottleneck and expand capacity where you are on a continuous basis. That's kind of in our industrial DNA. One of the beauties of this technology is that it's also, after our dialogue with our equipment manufacturers, we see the opportunity to increase the speed of production quite a lot relative to what we potentially believed before. That allows us to potentially increase the capacity on the same acreage relative to previously. Of course, there are other locations, not only in Norway but also in the Nordic region, where we could sort of replicate the same, and also sort of benefit from, let's say, the low carbon, low cost electricity footprint, with also a decarbonized value chain. When it then comes to sort of other geographical jurisdictions, and the U.S. is kind of a case in point, we do believe it's deeply possible to envisage a broader value chain rollout that also includes the dedicated development of renewable energy generation. As also mentioned by Rystad, and also articulated in the report that they did for us, the cost of course, solar generation and wind generation coupled with, let's say, battery storage, is now coming down to cost levels, which will allow us to also think about having a fully decarbonized power generation for complete value chain replication into such an environment. We believe this is just the start. We, again, look upon ourselves as an industrial scaling partner of choice and sort of a catalyst for the energy transition. We want to partner with the best and the brightest across the entire value chain and really sort of be the amalgamator of these different top-notch, both industrial companies and technology companies. Putting that together in this way, we believe, as Jarand articulated, that it's absolutely feasible to replicate this many times at very strong and high speeds. That requires a dedicated team that have built facilities in energy and energy-intensive and process-intensive industries before, coupled with battery expertise, which we believe we have assembled a world-class team in. We're humble to the task, but the opportunity is vast, and it keeps growing. We're trying to find the best way to pace ourselves and move into this. So far, so good. Great. Thanks, Tom. Maybe we'll finish up with another question, a two-parter, if you will, Tom. You mentioned the cost of production is highly predicated on the lower cost of energy. How could this be dampened by the higher cost of labor in Northern Europe? Could you talk more about the various parts of the cost structure and how it affects your final cost versus the market? Yeah. As I tried to articulate on the last pen ultimate slide in the deck before the financials, a big part of battery production is raw material cost. A large part of preparing those raw materials is also energy. That's why having a localized supply chain, in an area with low cost green electricity will ultimately drive down the cost of the raw materials as well. Everyone in the battery industry that is subjected to, of course, more or less the same, let's say, supply chain, some integrate upstream, some enter into long-term partnership agreements. We want to sort of do a partnership-based approach of localizing production. They're all doing it to basically drive down the cost of raw materials. We believe the offering of the lower cost electricity is something that will resonate and is resonating a lot with a number of stakeholders and a number of initiatives already ongoing in Norway and the Nordic region for development of that kind. When it comes to the conversion cost, which is the non-material aspect of the equation, basically it boils down to capital expenditures, labor as two of the large components. Labor constitutes a reasonably less amount of the cost structure. One of the reasons why we also, again, chose the 24M technology is that it offers fundamentally lower, let's say, labor requirements because it's going from 15 to five production steps. Which again, allows us to think even more deeply about automatization and digitalization of the solution, which again will allow us to speed up production even more. The reduction of two-thirds of the electrode manufacturing process is basically gone, which of course means that a lot of steel and a lot of casings and conveyor belts and whatnot is not needed. That's why CapEx is more than 50% lower. In an inflationary environment, that's obviously quite helpful relative to conventional sort of solutions. We think the choice of technology and the choice of location coupled with a value chain approach where you attract energy-intensive industries to an area where their key costs can be delivered in the area we are in at much lower cost in a partnership with a customer, that allows the whole value chain to basically be much more effective. That's really what this is about, capital efficiency. We believe our approach is a very capital efficient and sustainable one. The onus is on us to deliver on that and prove it to our shareholders. That's what we're doing 24 hours a day. Okay, great. Thanks, Tom. I think we're running long here, so I think we'll wrap it up there. Sincere thanks to everybody on the call and webcast for your interest and attention today. Both Alussa Energy and Freyr are very excited for the closing of our business combination transaction. In particular, we want to thank shareholders of both companies as well as our PIPE investors. Your support throughout our process was so very much appreciated and not taken for granted by us by any stretch. Should you have any additional questions, feel free to please reach out to me or the IR team at Freyr. Thank you, and please enjoy the rest of your day.