Okay. Thank you for joining this call. Good morning or good afternoon. My name is Peter Oster. I am the CFO of Aviara.
So a quick summary is that we report 13% higher deliveries despite the Truck Striker in Brazil, which led to a 90% drop in deliveries in Brazil standalone. However, The underlying EBITDA was 5% lower, primarily driven by higher energy costs than Q1 sorry, Q2 last year. So the operating environment, primarily, again, driven by the higher gas costs, is quite tough at the moment and will probably be tough for some time yet. There is some improvement in the market balance coming gradually. And some of it happening in 'eighteen, but then over time, improving even more.
This. For Realtek, we remain focused on the things we can control, which is primarily our improvement program, which delivered $310,000,000 this quarter. That's measured by 2015 prices. And if you measure it by current prices and costs. It's equivalent of about $300,000,000 so far.
So with that, I open for questions.
Operator, could you please open for questions?
Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, we will now begin the question and answer First question comes from the line of Joel Jackson from BMO Capital Markets. Your line is open. Please go ahead.
Hi. This is Robin on for Joel. Would you be able to elaborate on the logistical situation in Brazil at the moment? More specifically, Who's covering the higher freight costs? How will it impact margins in the business overall in Brazil in the near term?
And when do you expect things to begin to improve? Thanks.
Yes. Hi, this is Tor Yeber, Head of Investor Relations. Very briefly, I mean, the situation from our side, as you saw in the results, we had roughly $15,000,000 negative effect in the Q2, and we indicate that we have expect a similar magnitude negative effect in the Q3. Beyond that, we aren't expecting a further impact to our business. You could say the a bit between the lines there is that we think that this extra cost as it stands now will be passed through in the market, although of course it takes a bit of time and hence we have some short term negative effects.
As you are probably aware, there is a possibility that There could be a change or reversal or a change to this minimum freight tariff, but it's unclear if and when that will happen. But as I say, we think that even if nothing happens to the tariff, It's a fairly high likelihood that ultimately this can be passed through the whole value chain.
Great. And just one more. How do you think the trade war environment will impact different regions?
Yes. That's hard to judge how this might develop in total. But I Yes. From a long term fundamental picture, I guess it's the food consumption and the food consumption patterns that we kind of decide because if you need a certain million certain number of 1,000,000 tons of food that has to be produced that Even if it's then should be produced less optimally, let's say, it wouldn't negatively affect nitrogen or fertilizer consumption. You can even see the scenario for the opposite in the case of soya beans are targeted, for instance, that any kind of shifts away from proteins in the form of soybean to protein in other forms, probably be positive for nitrogen.
So in our opinion, there can be short term effect like financial investors shying away from agriculture, commodity market, etcetera. But that will be the long term effect of such moves. We obviously kind of make this situation even worse further down the road. So I'd say as long as crude consumption patterns are not affected greatly, then it's hard to CEO of this to deal in the long term effect, the neutral consumption also. And I guess if you assume that this.
This trade effect will kind of the prime effect will be higher prices in China and lower prices elsewhere. For instance, Then it's positive, elsewhere, but will then food consumption be affected in China. I would say probably less likely. But so for us, I think this. So far, I think it's hard to see much fundamental effects.
Great. Thanks.
Thank you. And your next question comes from the line of Thomas Wrigglesworth. Your line is open. Please go ahead.
This. Good afternoon, gentlemen, and thank you very much. A couple of questions, if I may. The first one is With regards to the kind of price versus costs in the second half, energy costs We're actually beaten by prices in your first half bridge. You've obviously guided to $170,000,000 of higher energy costs In the second half, at today's prices, noting that you've obviously announced some aggressive increases in nitrate pricing And just taking commodity nitrogen at spot.
At today's prices, have you covered all of those energy costs for the second half? And a second question, if I may, just a confirmation. I think you said on the call this morning that The $150,000,000 incremental EBITDA that we're expecting from M and A and new projects was now $90,000,000 I just wanted to confirm that, That was the number now for 2018. And Andy, could you remind me what the number what we should expect for 2019 on that basis as well? Thank you very
much. Yes. Thanks, Tom. Hi, this is Thor again. I can take the first one.
I think and then we may we can, if needed, follow-up on this after the call. But I think if you start with the Page 7 in our presentation with the nitrogen margins. I mean, You can basically plot in or if you like on a cash cost basis the current gas costs and the current urea prices, nitrate prices and so on. I would suspect just from the line of your question that you are expecting the net to actually be positive. I think that is quite likely, but happy to kind of run through the exact numbers after the call.
But I mean to everyone else on the call, standard cash cost calculator that would work here. Actually, Doug Suter may could be adding to this now. No, I'm just looking at one way of maybe translating this $170,000,000 into something that's easier to kind of Related to Bertone, because I'm looking at Page 33 in the presentation where we show our historic gas costs. And then there we see that we have we reported SEK 5.7 billion for Q3 last year and SEK 6.6 billion for Q4. So on average, for the second half of the year, a little bit above 6%, while the current forward market is, let's say, around 7 point high or maybe slightly higher than 7.5 today.
So you have an extra cost per 1,000,000 BTU of, of, let's say, somewhere between well, maybe close to $1.5 per 1,000,000 BTU. That would then typically then first, if you just use the consumption factor, that would then translate into, let's say, a urea. You need a urea price increase of $30 to $35 or thereabouts, I guess, to cover that extra gas costs, something like that. So that means that's one way of maybe that's an easy way of the new then, yes, you said, when you'll observe prices today, Urea prices and also on nitrate prices that maybe give you kind of an at least an angle to see what kind of Rachel who we are talking about. On Slide 49 in the presentation, you can see the Egypt price in the Q3 last year was 234.
So I guess, I'm sorry, just as a follow-up to that. Because there's some debate in the market as to whether urea prices will now fall back to their summer price, as it were, given that we've obviously had this late season and demand kind of extended, We started to see U. S. Prices soften certainly last week. Is it your expectations that kind of we won't See, we won't now see Urea go back to the summer lows.
I mean, that's probably not a very Good term. But we'll actually just stay flat here and then kind of pick up for the October more seasonal demand season.
Obviously, we don't give forecasts ourselves on this. But let's say that as we said in the presentation also that we expect relatively tough market conditions also for a while. And let me just say that Given that it's market balance, it's fragile in the sense that there is almost 0 trade with China, right? So the difference between an export pricing logic from China and an import pricing logic to China is quite the there are little small shifts in the main factors in demand, in production, in, say, based on new plants that are relatively small shifts in these balances create quite strong price volatility as we have seen. So that's Societe.
Understood. Thank you. And could I just ask for that clarification point on the M and A and New Concept and the new projects.
Yes. So the clarification is, and it is better. Those SEK 150,000,000 that was based again on the 2015 prices and costs. And the NOK 90,000,000, that's with the 2nd quarter prices and costs. So if prices and costs remain as they are today.
Then you should expect over the year $90,000,000 from these acquisitions and new builds.
Okay. Just
as a comment, Tom, additional to that, I mean that you might sort of get the wonder about the relationship because we also mentioned today, for example, on the improvement program that is at today's prices is very close to 2015 prices. There's, I think, a significant mix difference between the improvement program and the 2018 growth pipeline, and that is we have the Freeport ammonia plant in the 2018 mix. And of course, right now, ammonia margins are significantly lower than in 2015. So if you look at our business as a whole and the wider growth portfolio and the improvement program, We get much more of a benefit on higher fertilizer prices as such, whereas in 2018 on the growth, the lower ammonia price way more heavily.
Okay. That's very helpful. Thank you, gentlemen. Thanks very much.
Thank you. And your next question comes from the line of Christian Faitz. Your line is open. Please go ahead.
Yes. Good afternoon, gentlemen. Thanks for taking my two questions. First of all, aside from the strike situation, can you please elucidate Current demand situation in Brazil a bit. What are your people on the ground saying about current business conditions going into crop season?
And then second, in your view, how much of a price push in corn, for example, would we need to incentivize farmers again to apply Suppression levels.
Yes. Christian, maybe We didn't we're not sure if we caught all the questions. You can maybe repeat the second one in a minute. I think the first one was on Brazil again and whether we see any sort of potential for demand disruption ultimately this year. I think the we can't, of course, fully predict this, but I think within the answer I gave earlier is that we overall, we think that this The industry and the value chain will work through this and without, in the end, any big effects overall.
But could you maybe repeat the second question because we didn't really capture it?
Yes. I guess just a very general question. I mean, As you know, agricultural commodity prices continue to be rather low. How much of a price push would we need in your view going into 2019, let's say, to advise farmers again to apply sufficient nutrition levels.
I guess that's a gradual. I think kind of an one off I mean, an improvement is, of course, positive. And back to the Brazil situation. Also, we can also mention that the Vale, of course, is very disruptive. It happened with the transport side because the right there is a quite optimistic attitude in general because of Yes.
So I think price is being quite good in Brazil. I mean, they're more depressed than the U. S. So the gap there has widened considerably. So and also with the currency, making their exports by competitive.
So and in Europe, for Europe, it's very stable. I mean, CEO. You seldom see very much very high demand volatility even because social mature. So it's hard it is going quite to went up. So some more, I'm not sure that Europe will be the place that is sort of larger to think.
Okay. Thanks. Very helpful. Thank you. And your next question comes from the line of Patrick Lambert.
This. Sorry, guys. All my questions have been answered. It was all about Brazil season. Thank you.
Again, trying to get a view of how disruptive that strike could be in terms of deliveries into this. Q3, can they catch up? I think you answered that. So sorry. Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you. Next question comes from the line of Mr. Paul Walsh from Morgan Stanley. Your line is open.
Yes. Hi, guys. Thanks very much for taking my questions. My first question is just on China. What are you seeing in China?
What are your guys on the ground telling you about the capacity situation Around the Blue Sky reforms, is capacity just sitting there waiting for higher prices? Or do you think there have been real capacity reductions on the ground? That's my first question. Maybe I'll let the answer come through on that, and I can ask a second, please.
Yes. No, I think it is highly interesting that main prices in China, they are not bad. They are in the $300 urea prices. And it kind of I think it opens up quite a lot of questions along the lines that you are hinting at because the supply curve In China, it's quite steep now. Those modern producers that have conveyed their production on non problem call, normal call.
They are doing excellent and making a lot of money. It's those that are emphasized based, probably the non integrated ones that are struggling the most with the margins. And we also see that the gas based sector is also struggling to Yes, get up there. Utilization rate. So the production has been very it's very stable, very stable from month to month.
It's around the same level as last year, Which means that they are producing somewhere between $50,000,000 and 55,000,000 tons. That's almost $20,000,000 tons less than 2 years ago. And I seem to be mostly concerned with covering their own domestic demand. So it's a good question. It's kind of what's happened to those 20,000,000 tons that is lost and how much, as you say, might come up again.
And Some of it is anthracite based, but there are others also. So it seems like the environmental concerns and increased attention on that is also just keeping production down. And I don't know to speculate, but even just today's Urea prices in China. I think it's very supportive and positive that not much has happened on the production side.
And can I just ask, when I look at Slide 6 of your presentation and I look at the year on year delta in Q2 on volumes, Asia is the 2nd largest delta? Is that China? Or what's going on in that delta in Asia To make it look so large, is it just weather related? Is it something more structural? Can you help me out?
Or is it just the acquisition?
The majority of that effect comes from the acquisition in India.
Fine. Okay. Okay. My second question was just more broadly around the demand picture. We've obviously seen some distortions Q1 to Q2 driven by weather.
We're obviously seeing distortions in Brazil now, which has been talked about a lot. Where do you fundamentally see volume growth rates as we move through the year in a sort of underlying On an underlying basis, if you sort of ex out some of these distortions, are markets growing low single digits? Are you seeing Lower prices incentivized, higher demand. What's the general view on aggregate volumes? And the reason I ask is the drop through from volumes looks fairly modest to me on your EBITDA bridge for the Q2, right, in terms of $20,000,000 volumes despite the fact that you had very significantly higher deliveries.
So that's the origin of my question.
When it comes to the market in total, of course, I mean, we thought that happened now in June. There's been a kind of an obvious pickup in demand. And you can, of course, also speculate whether that's just a phasing issue or something more fundamental. And because it seems to be that there is kind of General. Across the world, a little bit more activity in our opinion.
That's quite, of course, be linked to the fact that grain prices and food prices have improved a little bit through
the year and
stocks Sign our report from USDA, it's inclusive line actually quite significantly outside China for the coming year linked to the on lease, let's say, for some production problems in Europe, FSU, Australia, etcetera. So it's I would say it seems like the kind of the sentiment is
a little bit more positive across the
globe, I would say. How it will affect our deliveries in Particularly, I guess that's a little bit of a different story. But because of course, we do our job the SB at goodasik trials on our OPC to allocate around to the best markets and so forth. But It's more Karl Cortez Vencelorg. Availability also.
Just in case you didn't recognize the internal the OPP in Europe is owned production.
Yes, understood. Thank you. And just maybe final question. I know you guys won't comment on where consensus numbers sit and market expectations. But in terms of The two headwinds you're facing moving into the second half on gas costs and the Brazil issues, Should we be thinking about sort of similar run rate in terms of earnings for the back half of the year to the first half of the year?
Paul, I mean, we discussed maybe you heard the earlier question. I mean, at least on urea, you can sort of look at our based on our energy cost guidance that for take the Q3 then You're looking at the gas cost of about $2.5 higher. In the Q4, it's about $2 supplier and then it depends on your urea price view, which we're not going to give you. But at least compared to current pricing. I mean that looks like, as we said, for an efficient plant, $1 on gas is $20 per ton of urea.
Right now, at least The Egypt price and most other prices, I guess, are up at least as much as the gas costs are up. As you point out yourself, we don't provide the earnings guidance.
I thought as much. Okay, but that is very helpful, Thor. Thank you.
Thanks.
Thank you. And your next question comes from the line of Andrew Stott from UBS. Your line is open. Go ahead.
Yes. Good afternoon, gents. Thanks for taking the questions. I've got 3, sorry. First of all, On the math of the €90,000,000 I just wonder if you could help me.
It goes back to Thomas' question. So you did €20,000,000 from M and A EBITDA in Q2. And I was assuming with seasonality and just more months of consolidation, you'd have So north of 30 per quarter for Q3 and Q4. So clearly, if my math is right, and that's why I'm checking, You're getting 80 plus out of your M and A this year from India and from Cubatao, which means you get nothing from Your production related growth, is that correct math? That's the first question.
The second question is India. I just wondered if you had any update on the Indian tender, any thoughts on that? I see the rupee is now at an all time low at least against the dollar. I see that the tender has been delayed at least. I just wonder if you're hearing anything on the ground on that.
And then the third question was CapEx. I think I'm right in believing you've raised your CapEx guidance. Looking at your previous documentation, it's €100,000,000 this year, €100,000,000 next year and long range As much as EUR 200,000,000. I'm just checking on that as well. And if I'm right on that, why have you done that?
Thank you.
Yes. I think on the first Hyacinth tour, Andrew, on your first question, your maths in principle is right and there's a few moving parts within there. I think You know, the Propara and Cubatao earnings, I think, for the argument of that exercise, you can assume are just fairly flat from the acquisition date onwards. And then you have, as I mentioned earlier, you have the issue with Freeport. The ammonia profitability is much lower than in 2015.
So that accounts for a lot of that gap between between the value of 2015 prices and current rises. And then the remaining projects being Schloiskill and Schopen, the technical ammonium nitrate expansion, they will have a ramp up, partly a plant related ramp up and partly a market related ramp up. So they're not sort of unlike the acquisitions, you don't kind of just Push the button or take them over and then have earnings more or less from day 1. So yes, but coming back, I think Your way of thinking about this is right, but hopefully with those additional comments, you can model the fact a bit better.
Perfect. So €80,000,000 to €90,000,000 wouldn't be far addressed on M and A is what you're saying?
Yes. That's what we said that the 2018 this. As current prices is worth about €90,000,000 Okay.
Got it. Thank you. Thank you,
And the second question in our inter capital expenditure, that is from 2 sources. And one of them is that the existing project at some point in time might have some additional costs come in. And here we have, in particular, the project has some additional costs. The other thing is there is a constant stream of projects that are potentially of smaller scale that we also need to have a We look at it. When we look at the capital expenditure, it has to pass a higher hurdle, and we really scrutinize that very thoroughly.
At Same time, there are projects with very high returns and short paybacks, for example, regarding debottlenecking of existing plants that we still will do because they are very profitable to us. And this is a reflection of those. When that is said, as I mentioned, this is Petter now after the quarterly presentation. There is some, let's say, downside, certain debt, meaning we might invest a little bit less than a lot is committed, partly due to the scrutiny of CapEx, also due to the program we have to reduce CapEx and get more for the same money and also that we are looking at ways to achieve the same with less, for example, in the improvement program, which I mentioned specifically today. So although there is a slightly higher number there.
We are hoping to come in below.
And on the India tender, we don't really have any information beyond what is just said in the publications that you can even looking at the normal sales and production patterns for July August. There is a deficit It's a 1,000,000 tons every month for those 3 months. So it's understandable, but the market expects a tender that there should be a need for India to buy some more. And how much of the delay that might be related to this Iranian payment issues and sorting out those and how much My CEO is Petros. I need on hold until we are just observing like you are.
Okay. Got it. And Sorry, one more. And apologies because I know you commented, but I missed it. Somebody asked earlier about Brazil and your order books, and I missed your comment.
Could you repeat that, please?
The order books in Brazil?
Yes. Someone is asking about your short term All the patents in Brazil. So away from the EUR 15,000,000 of costs, are we seeing it? Yes. And I missed the comment.
I apologize.
Okay. Now briefly, the comment was that we think actually the we and the industry will working through this. I mean, you basically need a few months to reorganize and start to pass through these extra costs. So that's why we communicated we have some costs this quarter. We expect a similar magnitude negative effect next quarter.
But beyond that, We expect this we can work through this. And then the only other thing I mentioned, there is the possibility that the tariffs may change again. I mean, presumably not to be increased further, but maybe to be reduced or reversed. But in a way, we think either way this. This is Werthermal.
I'm sorry, I think you misunderstood the question, so I was asking about the volume impact, if any. So I get the cost comment. I just wondered if with a lot of the trucks being sat around, whether there's an impact on volume for Q3 or not?
No, but within that, this. We don't see a fundamental volume impact from this. I mean, could it you know that you get a slightly different pattern between 3rd Q4 possibly. As you know, normally the big months in Brazil our August, September, October. So maybe it affects that a bit, but fundamentally for the whole season, we See you later.
Yes, perfect. Thanks a lot. Thank you.
Thank you so much. And your next question comes from the line of Peter Testa. Your line is open. Please go ahead.
Thank you for taking the questions. I have 2, please. 1 is just on Slide 16, where you give your global capacity additions. There's quite a change in the production line versus the last quarter when you're using the CRU numbers. I was wondering if you could give any thoughts on how this changed your mark of your 2018 in H1 versus H2.
Plus in there, there's the question around Iran And how you would feel Iran and sanction risk should be taken into account on this
top of the slide.
And I have one other question.
Yes. There are some more kind of maybe you Cannot call it technical issues, but I mean, some of the reason provided by the actual supply increase seen by CRU exceeds CapEx is so much for 2018. It's, of course, that there were kind of delays to some projects that were kind of presumed to be producing more in 2017 as I think kind of gradually phased into 2018. That's wrong thing. But that's probably not the big change from last report that you were talking about.
So there are a couple of changes that are related to the assumed closures. You may know that There is a plant in Kuwait that has now closed as far as we understand from July 1. That was assumed to be closed earlier in the previous report, so that CRU had to add some more supply back from that plant for 2018. The same with our submissions on these 2 Petrobras plants that were announced closed earlier. And then there were some pushback from local governments to kind of try to keep them running.
And that also forced CRU to put some more volume back into 2018 compared to their previous report. So I think there is a number there are some factors like that, that have kind of beefed up the assuming Supply increased for 2018.
Okay. And then views on H1 versus H2,
I am I am I am I am. Of course, I mean, Iran has, of course, struggled for many years And I've been scotty saved by India to a large extent, but also been able to sell elsewhere, that is to Mexico to Turkey to other places. And I have often been involved with a discount. So that there have been buyers for their phones, So that's a cheaper price basically. And that is one assumption going forward also, of course, but if they were to force to close.
I mean, if ever not allowed to export anywhere, then you're talking about more than 3,000,000 tons of export supplier. So that would, of course, be very tightening for the market if that's where to happen. But I so I don't want to speculate on probabilities here, but yes. There is a really an influential, influential factor if they didn't find any outlets for their phones.
Yes. Okay. And then the other question was just you talked about the impact of urea prices lifting the end of the quarter versus Cas. And I was wondering if you could give any sort of further comment on the nitrogen upgrading margin impact you've seen, whether that's been coming up in support of that or somehow offset some of this move in the urea versus gas price recently. And an extension of Slide 7.
This. Yes. So did you I think this Did you hear our comments? Because we've received a question earlier about sort of how this what this
looks like. Yes. No, on the urea part, yes, I was trying to understand how it focuses also down on the upgrading margins and whether you've seen some of that also push through on some of the upgrading margins or just on straight on the urea speaker.
Yes. No, I mean, if you're looking at urea, then as we mentioned, you can sort of every dollar on gas is, is, let's say, dollars 20 to $25 per ton of urea depending on whether it's an efficient plant or not. And you can look at the price references year over year, what you should come out. I mean, what it looks like if you do that specifically For spot pricing now and our guidance for Q3 gas cost in Europe, for example, it looks kind of direction of a similar magnitude, the increases.
And can pricing?
Well, the nitrate premium we mentioned during the presentation is higher now than it was at the end of the second quarter.
Right. Okay. That's fine. Thank you.
And your next question comes from the line of Neil Tyler from Redburn. Your line is open. Please go ahead.
Good afternoon. One left actually. Financial question relating to the EBITDA bridge. In the others line, you referred to the negative impact there as reflecting principally a step up in fixed costs, some of which were talked about on the webcast this morning, specifically Around your digital effort. Can you help me understand how that's likely to develop year on year Over the remainder of this year and into next.
And what the other components were? Because I was led to believe that there was some costs booked through that Or reflected in that line last year relating to the Porzkruzan fire, I can't remember which quarters those fell into, those additional costs. And I think you're still due at some point the rest of the insurance payment from that, but I might be wrong there. Thank you.
Yes. So the right. So let me There may be a few things in this, but the question was fundamentally about the other category in the variance analysis this. We mentioned earlier was included some positive with the added starters on the volumes, expansions in M and A, but also a negative effect from fixed cost including digital. Team.
Okay. So of that, so we have a roughly $20,000,000 is on the cost the such of which about half is digital. We, I think, can add the comment that The digital cost is kind of we don't expect it to increase materially further from here. So you can use those numbers as a basis looking forward. You are right that we have still some insurance payments outstanding from the Poskruen Stockbridge last year, But we don't have specific information yet on when they are due and what the amounts will be.
Okay. And am I right in thinking that you in the fixed cost, the way you sort of reflect the fixed cost relating to the EBITDA Improvement Program. Is in the past, has been through that line as well?
Yes.
Okay. No, that's helpful. Thank you.
Thank you. And next question comes from the line of Chetan Udeshi from JPMorgan. Thank you. Hi, thanks. I just had one question on Slide 16, where you discuss supply and demand.
And my Question is around 3% consumption growth. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the consumption growth in urea in recent years has been More like flat to up 1%. So is 3% using 3% number sort of Defined in the current environment where demand has grown much slower in recent years?
We try to be just passive kind of conveyor to the historic information here. So you're right That's probably 2017. It's a relatively weak year for consumption growth. The 3% that refers to the trend growth for the last 10 years that we have kind of active information with them is stopping in 2016. So And then we kind of leave it to the readers to make these kind of assumptions also going forward.
We are just showing the historic growth rate. But I would also use the opportunity to say that we are be aware that we are also we are in a way comparing apples and pearls because we are showing historic growth rates, but we are then showing added capacity with that assumption that that capacity runs at 100% and that nothing changes to the utilization rates It's fair. So I think you also have if you want to question the consumption growth, what consumption growth rate you should You should also make some judgments on actual supply increase rather than just looking at these VARs, which are the name, based capacity from your plants and the whole factor of utilization rate in the industry. Otherwise, it's not even kind of considered in this graph. So it's not a complete picture in that sense.
Okay. Thank you.
Thank you. And we have one follow-up question from Andrew Stott. Your line is open. Please go ahead.
Yes. Sorry for continuing one more. Just on your bigger scale ambitions in Africa, which you referred to back in February At the CMD. I just wonder if there's any progress updates on either Ethiopia or Mozambique or anything else? Thank you.
Yes, I guess the short answer is there is no particular thing to mention on both of these guys.
And just to add to Andrew, I'm not sure we'd agree with that we stated large ambitions there on the Capital Markets Day. But I do recall there was some media attention on this earlier in the year, I think originating from a conference in Africa. But Those projects are not in our pipeline today. They are not committed projects and particularly the African one is quite some distance away from potentially being so. Petrolol, as you know, is an evaluation that we need to conclude sometime in the next, let's say, 12 to 18 months or expect to conclude at least.
But as of now, it's not in the pipeline.
Okay, clear. Thank you.
Thank you. And there are no further questions at this time. Thank you. Please continue.
Okay. If there are no further questions, then thanks from everyone here for your interest attending the call, and we'll look forward to keep you updated going forward. Thanks very much.
Thank you. That does conclude our call for today. Thank you all for participating. You may all now disconnect. Speakers,