Nathalie Post  
Today I'm joined by Sherif Elsayed-Ali co founder and CEO of carbon rave, a recently founded climate tech startup. Previously, Sherif headed up the AI for climate practice at element AI. And prior to that, he co founded and led Amnesty Tech. In today's episode, we talk about Sherif's company Carbon Re, and how they're helping organisations to increase efficiency and reduce emissions. We also talk about the tech for climate space in general, and explore the role that technology can play in the climate challenges we're facing. I'm really excited to share this episode with you. So without further ado, let's get into it.

Hi, Sherif, and welcome to the human centred AI podcast. It's really great to have you here today. I'm really looking forward to this conversation. But for our listeners who may not know you, yet. And could you start by giving a bit of an introduction about yourself, and also your background?

Sherif Elsayed Ali  
Absolutely. And thank you very much Nathalie, it's a pleasure to be here today. So my name is Sherif Elsayed-Ali. I am a co founder and CEO of a new climate technology startup called Carbon Re, we are using artificial intelligence and continuous improvement, merging them together to create efficiencies in energy intensive manufacturing. Our main goal is to help manufacturers reduce costs and reduce carbon emissions at the same time. I have a bit of a mixed background by a civil engineer by training then I went into humanitarian work, working with the UN, on refugees, started my career, then went into human rights for Amnesty International for a long time, co founded Amnesty tech, which works at this intersection of technology and human rights. Then I joined Element AI, a Canadian startup set up the AI for climate practice there. And then now, for the past few months, I've been setting up my new company.

Nathalie Post  
Yeah, no, that's super exciting. I would say also for for in this year to be starting a new organisation, and especially in this area, I think it's very, very relevant. So I'm curious, like, what led you to focus on climate tech in particular, you know, giving your mixed background what steered you in that direction?

Sherif Elsayed Ali  
Well, you know, it's, I think, the biggest thing that that kind of pushed me in that direction is in the climate crisis, and sort of I mean, you know, we can talk a lot about that, of course, I mean, it's not like, it's not something new. But I think, you know, over the past few years, it's been getting clearer and clearer that just we're running out of time. So it's as simple as that. And, you know, if we start to, you know, what was very interesting about this year, actually, is that it's kind of showed us two things like the bad in terms of how we as societies are not very good at planning for things that we know, are coming. We knew that pandemics are possible, but not taken seriously until it happened. And also the good, which is that, you know, if you put capital and technology and knowledge together, and really kind of have the, you know, the intention, clear intention and clear focus to get something done. You can do things like getting vaccines, ready in 10 months, which would have been completely impossible. Yeah, totally, completely impossible, just even at the beginning of the year. And I think this is, you know, just kind of thinking that and thinking about climate, one, we know things are gonna be so much worse with climate change unless we do something about it. And at the same time that, you know, we really need to have that clear intention, intentionality, to commit to change things. And that combination of capital, technology and intent is what can solve it.

Nathalie Post  
Yeah. Yeah, I think it's really interesting about the parallel that you draw here because I think with the pandemic, we obviously were put to a halt where it's like we now have to solve this collectively. Whereas with climate change, we're seeing that there's gradual signs of things going in a bad direction. But we haven't come to that halt yet, you know? And so I'm curious, what is your view on that? Like, where do you see like a point where it's like kind of an inflection point of Okay, now we really have to change, because we're changing a little bit, maybe, but probably, well, very little still. So what's your view?

Sherif Elsayed Ali  
Yeah, that's it's very interesting, because it's just about the rate of change. And it's about the timeframes. And I think our biggest enemy is timeframes. So we were very good at thinking short term. Anything that goes beyond five or 10 years are completely hopeless, generally. And it's, you know, we find it very difficult to plan to whether in business or in government, or in policy terms to plan for longer term, but but we need to, we have to, and, and I think the trick is, with this year teach us that actually, if we do the right, that's the right investments today, will it pay off in the future or not? Or would we sort of just kind of, do bits and pieces move kind of slowly, and then in 10 years time, probably by 2030, you know, and kind of think how just everything from forest fires to floods to desertification is accelerating, we'll come to that inflection point where we're gonna say, Okay, I mean, now, you know, shit's hit the fan, and we have to do something about it very seriously. Hopefully, we don't, you know, it's more graduate rather than having to sort of deal with the pain that comes with having to do very sudden changes, which is what we've seen this year.

Nathalie Post  
Yeah. Yeah. And so talking about gradual, you've said that, with Carbon Re, you're first focusing on the cement industry. I'm very curious about about that choice, as well, of focusing on demand and those types of industries in particular, and I know you've named it the the kind of lower hanging fruit. So could you elaborate a little bit more about that, of why that choice? Why does it make sense?

Sherif Elsayed Ali  
You know, we looked at the the I mean, partly, of course, it's part of our, you know, our funding team has expertise in that area. So, so that that's part of it, but why became attractive in the first place is the, you know, we have, if you look at kind of everything that's happening, most of the investment, most of the innovation that's going around, in kind of climate technology, or green, green transition, it's predominantly around energy, and transportation. So you know, so kind of the shift to renewables, increasing that shift to electric cars. But you see that in the, you know, there's a couple of areas that are still very, that are huge, but not, not gonna get anywhere near as much attention. One of them. So agriculture is one of them. The other one is, is manufacturing. And, and the thing with manufacturing is that did, for example, energy intensive manufacturing. So there's things like cement, steel, metals, other metals, paper, they're exempt about 21% of all global emissions, take steel and cement. Just just those two, that's 15% of global emissions. Cement by itself is just about the is about 8%. And the thing of this is that we cannot shift from, you know, I don't know, call to shift from coast to wind, we can just shift from steel to I don't know, sand or is from cement, and he just there is no, there is no clear alternative, there is no readily available alternative, there is nothing we can you know, we can also say that we're going to stop using these things, because people are going to study at homes and offices and hospitals. First of all, you know, we know that by the 2040s, we're going to have to get to a point where these industries are operating in a zero carbon way. Right. So I mean, we know the endpoint, and we know where we are today. And the question is, how do you get from A to B, and usually, the way that we deal with lots of problems is that, you know, we, as societies, collectively will try things, you know, it will kind of take our time, we only act kind of quite late. And you know, and you end up with having the spaghetti of getting from A to B, and it takes a lot longer than than it should. And if things keep on going as they are, we're not going to get there by 2040. Right? It's going to take much longer, we just don't have this time. And so kind of what you're looking at is seeing is like how do you get from A to B in the shortest, shortest possible time? And what are the technologies and investments needed to get there?

Nathalie Post  
Yeah, so I'm curious, so with, with the cement industry, so my knowledge about the cement industry is fairly limited. And I can imagine some of our audience is also limitedly aware of, you know, what, how the industry exactly looks like, what their kind of technological infrastructure is like, etc. But talking from, you know, a perspective, from the machine learning space, one of the challenges typically face is just, you know, lack of data or good data to work with at least. And so I'm very curious, how do you go about this with the different technological setups and infrastructures that there are in the cement industry, with the solutions that you're building to, you know, be able to apply for multiple different companies? I can also imagine it's fairly limited, how many cement organisations there are, but I'm very curious to hear more about that.

Sherif Elsayed Ali  
Yeah. You know, what's interesting is that there is if you think there are some industries, which are sometimes called foundation industry, so like cement, steel, ceramics, paper, other metals glass, are, they have quite a lot in common in the sense that these are the process industries. So there are generally one or two main processes in each industry. And that's how it kind of all the steel and all the cement is done, but they don't, you know, hundreds or 50s, or dozens of different ways like you can have in like putting together a car or a, or a mobile phone, it's, it's, there's a set of chemical processes and things steps that have to be taken. And so it means that there is a degree of generalisation as possible is quite possible occur across each each of the sectors and each of these processes. So suppose you take cement as an example. There's about 3000 cement plants in the world, you know that some, some, some companies have up to like over 200 plants, others have one, you know, so you kind of have all the range between small and medium and very large companies, and, but they all employ, you know, one or two very similar, like sets of steps and technologies and the way now, they face. So you talk about cement for example, and they have this very, it's a very challenging industry to be in one, it's a lot of competition, it's low margin industry. And there is not that much room to, you know, to kind of reduce costs. But what's also kind of common between them is that, you know, they have to produce very high heat. So, for example, for steel is to kind of process the iron ore, and for cement is to heat up the limestone, which then produces something called clinker, which is the main ingredient, and then some and then the effects event so that the heat, we're talking about 15, about 1500 degrees Celsius and heats that have to be achieved. And so the only way to do that is by burning kind of fossil fuel derived fuel, sometimes you can replace a little bit of that with with wastes. But you can actually get this, you know, that process itself is responsible for 40% of it, the emissions from cement, and that 40% of a percent of global emissions, we're talking about just that process, and cement is responsible for 3% of all emissions. Right, and then you have another 50%, half of that of the emissions from cement coming from the chemical reaction, when you heat up the limestone, which releases co2. So the you know, you can't there is no the bits that you can replace by with electricity, renewable electricity have nothing to do with this, right. So it's completely outside of those, those 90%. And so there's not many things you can do right. So but you have to use carbon capture, which is not mature enough to be deployed at scale. At this stage, look at things like a green hydrogen instead as a as a fuel. Again, same thing, just not there yet. One, but one thing we can do today is make that fuel burning process more efficient. And we believe we can you can both reduce the fuel consumption by controlling the the way the process is done, and reducing emissions from that by up to 20%.

Nathalie Post  
Yes, yeah. And so I think it's super interesting, because it definitely explained, at least to me more about, you know, that entire process, which I think for most of us, we're surrounded by cement in our daily lives, where we never really care to think that much about what actually goes into it. But what I'm curious about is the topic of efficiency because oftentimes, the thing that is brought up is the Jeavons paradox, which basically technological progress increases efficiency, and that can in turn increase consumption. I'm very curious to hear your view on that. Because, you know, like, how does that play into the work that you're doing? And is this something you take into consideration?

Sherif Elsayed Ali  
Yeah, I think I think it's, you know, the paradox is happens differently, can manifest differently across different things, right. So if you talk about, you know, maybe making flying more efficient and cheaper, that means that tickets are cheaper, and that people fly more, so you end up having to move to more emissions. That that's, that's one thing, but I think it's, it's quite different. When you talk about things like cement and steel, which are in the sensitive, the controlling factor is not so much that is it, you know, 5%, cheaper to produce, and, you know, 8%, with 8%, less emissions, that's not going to impact the price of a flat or a house that much lighter the product, and it's not going to impact the demand in the sense that, you know, you still have this base demand that you need offices, you need, places for people to eat and all of that. So I think that's, that's one thing, I think the kind of the supply demand side of it is, is quite different from from some other things that are more like optional items, or luxury items or things that are, you know, I can grab a little bit more with that car, you know, I kind of pick up on my trips, I think it's quite different there. But the thing is, I think, generally, and this has to do with how the policy around emissions is done is that you you know, at the end of the day, you know, you have to have that public policy that controls for the level of emissions. And, you know, part of how we do that is with emission trading schemes like we're having, and you're where it's, you, you set the price to, to help to get to kind of get that level of emissions that you want. And I think that that's key, really. So that that has that control has to be in place.

Nathalie Post  
Yeah, no clear, but very interesting to hear more about that, and also how it's different in different industries or with different applications in, in a way. Ehm, one thing you mentioned before, that I wanted to go back to is, so you mentioned carbon capture technologies. And, you know, when I look at the the tech for climate space, I often feel like there's this increasing almost hope that technology at some point will save us, like with carbon capture technologies. And what is your view on this? You know, is this realistic? And does this maybe even distract us from implementing pushing for policies and things like that? Yeah.

Sherif Elsayed Ali  
I mean, I think the technology will get there right, the technology to capture carbon efficiently, technology to, to have, you know, cleaner and cleaner energy and large battery storage, and all of that will get, you know, and, but even things like, you know, the waste kind of early stage technologies now to actually shift that fuel part of cement and steel production to extremity. So, so these things will happen, right, but the question is, when, and when will they happen at a scale that actually makes a difference? And the difficulty we have that we have, we have no time, right? So we have no time to kind of waste and waiting for things to happen, you know, we need to accelerate the process of these new zero carbon technologies actually happening. But we need to use what you have today. And and I think was, you know, what we tend to forget is that, you know, the, you know, when you release a tonne of co2 today, because of the kind of radiative forcing it has over time. It's, it does a lot more damage than than atomic carbon release in 10 years time. And so, which means I also that detect the form of carbon you save today has much more value than the tonne of carbon you save in 2030 2040 2050. And that increase over time. And I think we need to focus on, you know, what we can do today and the efficiencies we achieve today. And I think, you know, what's very interesting is that we're not, you know, there isn't, you don't have to choose between profits and, and less carbon, you can actually do both, you can reduce your cost and reduce your carbon emissions. And so the question is why we're not doing that. I think it's, you know, there's lots of possibility, you know, there's always lots of potential things you can do and, and it's, I think, sometimes it's difficult to say, okay, like, okay, that thing we can try, but I think also the the difficulty is often with is an execution problem. So I think the, you know, what you're trying to do is is actually using artificial intelligence to make something That we know can be done. So kind of those efficiency improvement that usually do a continuous improvement, but that require a lot of human expertise over a lot of time to do like in one plant in one place, but then becomes very difficult to scale. But with artificial intelligence, you can start doing that on a much more continuous basis. And you can start to replicate and scale that across different places and processing plants and kind of have that wide scale impact rather than just kind of changing things in one place and not the other.

Nathalie Post  
Yeah. Could you elaborate actually a bit more about that? Because on the website of Carbon Re, and I saw Indeed, this this graph of saying, like continuous improvement, versus AI versus continuous improvement, and artificial intelligence? And, you know, could you elaborate a bit more on how AI can make it possible, to increase efficiency in ways that are not possible without AI?

Sherif Elsayed Ali  
Yeah, absolutely. And, and, you know, we'll have more on our website with more information as well. So that I promise, but yeah, so, you know, I think what was, you know, what I do, I mean, I've kind of almost like this idea of, you know, because once you get a lot that that's covered, and people talk about, like, autonomous robots, and autonomous cars, and general artificial intelligence, and all of that, and that's kind of great and fun to think about. But the, the kind of the real applications of AI that actually have a difference that make a difference today, and are the ones that are almost there work so well, that they are boring, almost, like it's so you know, we don't really think about anymore about, you know, giving voice commands to our phone or something, you know, that, you know, that it works, right, which is, you know, 10 years ago would have been absolutely insane, but it actually works now. So it's kind of it's these things that are there or kind of how, you know, Google Maps to can take us from A to B, so easily. And I think the you know, it's sort of similar with with those efficiency gains are we talking about taking a lot of numbers. So, you know, you have in the manufacturing process, you have so many things happening at the same time, right to have you know, the fuel being burned, you have different amount of air going into furnace, different type of oxygen, different types of fuels, you have electricity, you have production schedules, you have machines being, you know, having maybe having to be turned on and off, you have maintenance schedules, you have, you know, kind of the electricity consumption, the temperature inside and outside, and you end up having by these hundreds of data points at any point in time that are there in front of an operator and it's just, you know, and, and you have these incredibly skilled operators who are able to just look at like all this, like, you know, that doesn't screen and sort of something and then be able to like, Okay, do they see what's the most important thing they need to focus on the focus on the quality bait, focus on making sure that things keep out the process keeps on going, but it's just, you know, it's humanly impossible to be able to kind of look at everything got like, hundreds of data points at the same time and sort of optimise all these different processes and, and that's exactly what artificial intelligence can do. So, it can do all that number crunching, do all that forecasting, kind of look at different how different things will change a few things one thing or another and actually propose and give you the most effective path to achieve, you know, to produce what you want to produce at the least cost to the least fuel consumption and these carbon emissions. And and, you know, kind of the point between continued continuous improvement is very good. And it's often done manually, right basis, it's on it's done like with human expertise largely manually. But it's on really tweaking and optimising you know, processes. But, but it's, you know, you kind of do it in fits and starts a little bit so he knows he would come in and do kind of all this work and kind of the improvement process and then you stop doing it because it's too expensive and cost too much to get someone to do it. So kind of that that improvement starts going down over time. And but with if you combine the iron contains equipment together, you can get this this sort of this big bump and in, in efficiency, but then that keeps on improving over time as well because you have that learning part of the eye that that helps you keep going and improving over time.

Nathalie Post  
Yeah. And do you think that that is why there has been this increased interest in research In AI for climate applications, so to just like to box it in in a little bit, and that's, you know, what is believed to be possible with technologies in the field of AI? Like what types of other application areas do you see? Maybe they follow a different pattern or focus on different application areas of artificial intelligence?

Sherif Elsayed Ali  
I think that there's, there's some very exciting things. So I mean, so you have, I mean, there are things that sort of evolved in the past as well, which kind of are more in like detecting climate signals from space, some very interesting work being done there. Whether it's, you know, kind of things that have been done on monitoring deforestation, but also like, you can look at things like monitoring more recently developing working on monitoring, emissions from from, with what's called hyperspectral, satellite data, or drone data. There's quite a quite a bit there, all sorts of things, like looking at the movements of icebergs and ice sheets, and kind of the changes in rivers, those come kind of applications for precision agriculture as well, that are possible and being explored. But one area that I think is extremely interesting, that's a few that's just been picking up more tech getting more attention and more research going into it in the last year or two is the using AI for material discovery. And that's sort of kind of in developing new materials, new compounds, alloys, but also new designs that are more efficient. So even if thinking of like building designs, for example, what you can do there to just design, but it's more efficiency reduced as material, but also kind of applying some kind of using AI for that discovery process, and really is kind of to support things like whether it's architecture or material sciences. But in this space, I think is very exciting.

Nathalie Post  
Yeah, so you're talking more about, like, the type of generative models that in this case, and kind of like how humans think could collaborate with that knowledge, almost of the suggestions that will come out of it. Is that am I getting it correctly? Okay. Okay. Yeah, no, great. And so maybe as a slight segue from that, but I'm curious, you know, how should the non tech world respond to all these developments, you know, also in terms of education, and policy, etc. Because if I look at the AI for climate space, you know, it requires quite some interdisciplinary knowledge, you know, of even, you know, the issues that we're facing the different solutions that we have. And even if I look at your team, your founding team, it's a very interdisciplinary team, which I find really beautiful. And it's really representative of the complexities of this field. So how should the, you know, the non tech world go about this?

Sherif Elsayed Ali  
I mean, thinking on the sort of education side of things, kind of one of the challenges we have is that there is more, there was increasing, you know, there's more complexity, because there's more technology in lots of different fields, or AI is just one thing, but about, you know, genetics or in, you know, computing, even just quantum computing, or even then cover kind of food, food technology, and there's so many things, and all of them are just there's more to know, which means that, you know, I think one of the biggest barriers, we have to mean, taking advantage as much as possible in terms of the potential, the technologies that are there, and the potential for them to innovate for innovation in the way that we we do everything is just a lack of generally that is very difficult for anyone person to be familiar with all the different possibilities. And it just, it's complex to explain that there's so much out there and if you kind of unless you have that some degree of sort of understanding and familiarity, it's very difficult to take advantage of it. And so I think, I mean, there's in different levels. I think the, you know, we talk a lot about science communication. I feel like the and that's definitely something that's been really changed so much in the last 1020 years. But technology communication is, I don't know, I feel it's still not there in some way. Even the discourse on AI is a little bit you know, I don't know it's, it's kind of I find it a bit depressing sometimes. Yeah, I feel like we just need to. It's not just that, you know, either AI is biased, or we're going to have self driving cars. Can we just like talk about a little bit about the you know, I don't know, slightly less, maybe maybe less exciting to the maybe less kind of headline grabbing? Actually, how can it? Can it be held back things that people are doing today? And what businesses are doing today and what governments are doing today? And kind of dive a little bit more into that and talk about things like optimization and forecasting.

Nathalie Post  
Absolutely. I definitely think like, every time there's, you know, this new development or, you know, the next big thing, the whole industry starts to think of, oh, how can we create use cases around that? How can we apply this? Whereas almost, I hate this word, but the proven technology, you know, the stuff that has been proven to work over the last year is there, I can sometimes already bring you so much value, I think when you apply it. So yeah, I definitely do agree with you on that narrative. And talking about communications. I actually have another question regarding that. Because what is actually the right narrative to be talking about the climate crisis, and especially from, you know, a perspective of developing technologies that aim to, you know, help the decarbonisation, etc. cuz I've read some pieces in the past, like Wallace Wells, TThe Uninhabitable Earth where, you know, the main criticism was like, it's way too pessimistic. So how should we be having these conversations in a way that encourage organisations to make steps into the right direction?

Sherif Elsayed Ali  
Yeah. So I mean, I think it's, it's interesting, right? Because I mean, I think having that it's definitely important to, for people to think about the consequences and what the consequences could be. And if we cannot imagine that if we cannot picture, then I think that the sound the urgency will go. And without that urgency, the outputs? What is it that making us to do anything at the same time? It's, the risk is that you make people feel like, there's nothing you can do? And it's a lost cause, You know, I think we, yeah, I mean, so it's a bit of a fine line, but, but I think we need to have a sense of urgency, but also need to have that, that sense of that it can be solved, and how we can get there and kind of start really breaking down things into solvable chunks, you know, smaller chunks, and Okay, what's the path for getting to, you know, cutting emissions here, or its path to solving this was was focused on the adaptation side of things. And, and I think the work can make the difference, as well as the the commitment that we hear. So kind of, from whether it's funding to big businesses or from technical leaders of you know, businesses, kind of having they're making their pledges is greater than society, lots of companies searching to make like netzero pledges by 2030. The problem is, that that part is good. The not the good part is that a lot of them have no idea how to get there. Or maybe they know how to do 10 to 20% of it, and the rest is, you know, not really sure or that, you know, everyone is kind of hoping to buy themselves buy their way out of it with offsets. But offsets are I mean, some some people doing offsets works, everybody's doing offset doesn't work. It's just not possible, because we're offsetting what at the end, and at the same time sort of having that this clear policy commitments and directions from from governments that we are going in that direction to get serious, and I think showing that there is a path to, to kind of move to that ideal world is really important.

Nathalie Post  
And you spoke about it before the the kind of monetary aspect that it can also result in cost savings, in some cases, at least, do you think that is a crucial component with most of the, let's say, developments in the space for organisations to increase their rate of adoption? Or do you think that without that monetary component, you know, how important is is it? That's, that's kind of what I'm getting?

Sherif Elsayed Ali  
Yeah, I mean, I think the incentives have to be aligned, because at the end of the day, if you, you know, it's because the view from a societal point of view is very different than the calculation is very different. Because you can say, okay, like, you look at the macroeconomic settings, okay, like, that's going to be I don't know, I think the Economist Intelligence Unit had estimated that The cost of climate change will be $7.9 trillion per annum by 2015. In lost global output, so you know, so you're talking about huge caps with the insane, insane numbers, but you go that to the level of a business or an organisation or a charity, you know, whatever it is, it doesn't matter, but it's at the end of the day is going to be okay, can can make the numbers work by the end of the year, you know, we'll find that you know, the finances work will the you know, if you're a nonprofit, then we'll do our best, you know, expense, stick to the budget work together? Or if you're a for profit company, then, you know, can we make the returns that our shareholders expect? And I think those incentives are, you know, unless there is that alignment, and it's is this not going to work, right. And the only way to align them is either through making, you know, doing things that are also cutting your costs, as well as cutting your emissions. And investing in having incentives, whether they are tax incentives or investment sort of grants, or whatever it is to kind of upgrade kind of go to like math, capital expenditure to spend on other things, or to have like, subsidies, or, I mean, there has to be essentially something that that makes that equation work. And if the equation doesn't work, then, you know, very, very few organisations, or individuals or households are going to make the decision to, you know, kind of just in the 1000s of dollars, or euros or whatever, to, to instal solar panels, because it's good for the environment of sanctions, and they're gonna cost me more money in the over the next 10 years.

Nathalie Post  
I think we're almost through our time here. But my final question is exactly linked to what you were saying. And it's more about the future perspective, what would you recommend people to do, and not only from them as an, you know, as a perspective of individual action, but also from their perspective as individuals being part of organisations?

Sherif Elsayed Ali  
I mean, so I guess individual as part of organisations, you know, the, regardless of what the organisation is, you know, and I think that's works across is, is actually having internally looking to the more you can push organisation to look at, okay, where can we be more efficient? Where can we also looking in, you can be more efficient today? You know, what metrics Can you put? Because efficiency is both costs and, and emissions together? And the other one is, where can we be more like in the longer term, you know, if this organisation is going to be successful, then it's going to need to compete with other people who are going to adopt new technologies and use new technology. So eventually, you're going to, you're going to need to get be there as well. And so can How can you look at that longer term? How can you prepare for that? I don't think I can just say, I mean, the things that I think work for kind of an individual level is, you know, one of these things, if someone is eats meat is probably to eat less meat. I mean, if you tell people just stop doing something, it's much harder if if you ask someone who can maybe do it a bit less. So you know, so skip the red meat a bit? And, you know, you know, forgot the car, you know, next car, you know, get an electric car again, you know, those? Yeah, they're not trying to throw things at us, you know, not have less waste. And, yeah, one thing we're seeing in a lot, lots of places that there is more and more that more and more renewable electricity providers, and even if there is okay, there is only a so much that there is on the grid. So in a way, if you have more people joining them, then it's got any react, you know, they that equation, it doesn't necessarily mean that it's going to be more numerically speaking, provided that she's there to show that there is more demand if you're switching to those, and that will should help with the adoption over time.

Nathalie Post  
Great. Thank you so much. As a final final question, Where should people go to find out more about carbon re and what you're doing and about yourself? Where would you send them?

Sherif Elsayed Ali  
No, absolutely. I mean, so we have our website, it's Carbon Re or carbonre.tech. You know, has a little bit of information gives you an overview. We will be putting it up more We're posting things on LinkedIn as well on our page there. And probably best ways is on LinkedIn for me. So I'd say yeah. Occasionally use Twitter these days, much less so than before. But yeah, you can sometimes find me there as well. And yeah, if you want to email us, ask, ask us about anything. It's info@carbonre.tech.

Nathalie Post  
Great. Thank you so much for this conversation. This was really insightful and yeah, very much enjoyed that. Thank you.

Sherif Elsayed Ali  
Thanks so much. Really, really a pleasure.

‍