Okay, Nori, can I get a sound check, please? You sound wonderful. Very good. All right. Thank you very much, Professor Beek for the introduction. So we're going to jump right into this. I've got a brief lecture prepared. Our purpose today is to excite your brain to come up with ideas and thoughts and ideas, to create a dialogue. So that's part of what translating research into practice is all about. So the title here is solving all the world's energy problems for once and forever. A bold claim, which I'll present here on the next page. So being able to address all people, all humans, everywhere on the planet, has three different aspects. One is for areas of high population density, where there's commercial and industrial operations, factories and warehouses, municipal operations. This is on a scale of gigawatts and higher, and we need power here around the clock, especially during the day, but even at night. Then we have many areas where there is a low population density, where there might be farming or ranching, where it's generally dark at night, if you see a satellite photograph, where work is often synchronized with the sun. These places generate organic material, so this waste generation may include agricultural residues, animal manure or brush removal. So the scales here are in the order of hundreds of kilowatts perhaps under a megawatt, about 1,000 times smaller per site than with cities and metropolitan statistical areas. At these sites, we can use their waste materials to produce chemicals, energy, fuels, and heat. And in particular, as we discussed this, I'll be talking about hydrogen that can be produced from biomass. The third area is in transportation. So think of rail, air, and trucking. So for mobility, there's also our cars, taxis, scooters that move people around, as well as handhelds, like our laptops and our smartphones. Right now, batteries are very popular, but batteries have a number of challenges that make them a very difficult technology to scale in the future. For one, in airplanes to try to go to electric aircraft, Right now, airplanes lose their fuel through flight, and so they land light, battery powered aircraft would land heavy, which is not safe. Class eight trucks that carry our materials across interstate lines, with batteries would be so heavy, they would pulverize the roadways. And if we think about batteries as a technology, they charge slowly. They're not recyclable. They catch fire and can't be put out, and they're made from materials that are not earth abundant. So if we think about batteries as something for today, that's fine, but for the future, it's not enough. Consider that hydrogen atom and a lithium atom have the same charge plus one. But a hydrogen atom is only 14% of the weight. So if we can produce and store hydrogen instead of lithium, then we can have a seven times improvement in the weight of the fuel that we carry as hydrogen. So all of these are to support a hydrogen economy. I'll go into each of the individual technologies at this point. But this is now space solar power. Some call this space solar or space based solar power. The concept has been around since the late 1960s of putting large scale solar power satellites into orbit around the Earth, where they're at a high enough altitude that the shadow of the Earth passes over them only for a few hours in the spring and fall at the equinoxes. But otherwise, they see the sunlight 24 hours a day. The approach that I've been pursuing here at IPI is to create these silicon solar cells with lunar materials. The surface of the moon is 21% silicon. Silicon is what's used to make solar panels, and I've got four patents on how to extract silicon and aluminum from lunar soil. We fabricate these solar panels on the moon, deliver them to orbit, assemble them into a power sat, and then deliver this with radio frequencies. So radio frequencies, think of your smartphone, that's at 2.45 gigahertz frequency. That goes right through bodily tissues, goes through clouds and rain. So this is a very safe frequency, and that's the frequency that will be used to deliver gigawatts of power to locations on the earth next to cities, so they can be able to run their cities around the clock. So that's called base load power. Then at night when people are sleeping and the low demand is lower, we use the excess to turn water into hydrogen and make green hydrogen at night for fleets. For rural and remote locations, we have a biomass conversion. We can call this gasification for short. The fancy term is indirectly heated pyrolytic gasification. This is a new approach to thermal chemical conversion of biomass that is a subject now of five US patents. So this is a Sankey diagram showing how on a farm operation, we can take their non food biomass and turn that into a sin gas that's hydrogen and carbon monoxide plus carbon, which is a solid. The gases can be used in an internal combustion engine, the spark ignited type, similar to a natural gas engine, and this engine turns a dynamo that makes electricity. So 35% or so of the chemical energy is turned into electrical energy. The rest is heat that can now be used for space heating or sterilization. And the carbon can be used as a soil augmentation. It's not a fertilizer, but rather it makes the soil easier to retain moisture, makes it easier for earthworms to go through, makes it easier to till, makes it easier for nitrogen fixing bacteria to form there. And this is the only proven way of carbon sequestration. I want to direct your attention only to the bottom line of this, but this is now looking at the mineral ash that comes from converting biomass in the system that's shown at the top right. And because some of the minerals are sand or silica silicon dioxide, we can actually separate the silicon out to be able to use that for the hydrogen storage that'll show in the next slide at a really low price of less than a penny per kilogram. Currently, the cheapest silicon you can get is $2 per kilogram, and really refined stuff is like $70 a kilogram. So this means that from the waste of a waste, so we're taking non food biomass and then converting it into electricity and heat. And then that waste, we can now turn it into purified silicon like this. So this scanning electron micrograph is a grain of silicon that's been made porous. So it has a ridiculously high surface area. Think of 1 gram of this stuff, nickel weighs 5 grams. So 1 gram has the same surface area as two tennis carts. And all those surfaces can store hydrogen in a solid state format. This is subject of four United States patents. The white crystals you see there are catalysts. The catalysts allow the hydrogen to go from a gas, which is H two, a molecule, to the individual hydrogens that spill over onto the silicon surface, and then are stored there. So this is now a very low cost way to be able to store hydrogen in a solid state material that's not going to explode, it's not going to catch on fire. It's made of materials that come up from the ground whenever plants grow. These are a few students in the laboratories that we have here at I UPOI. We've had funding on this technology from the Department of Energy, from the National Science Foundation, from the Department of Defense, as well as from private industries. So in order to create a hydrogen economy that provides all the energy we need for everybody on the planet for all time to come, we need large scale zero carbon hydrogen, electricity that comes from Earth orbit with those power sats. The excess hydrogen from that can be used for fleet vehicles. And then every time there's food production, and we've all got to eat, there's non food waste. That makes a freedom farm. With our patented technology, this can make a farm operation largely self sufficient so they don't need the amount of petrochemicals that are currently purchased by farms. This is replicable worldwide. Almost 2 billion people could take advantage of this technology. And really smart way to use this is for the electricity from the biomass to be used for light industry so that rural remote villages could build more of these machines and with their low cost labor, make them even more affordable to more marginal villages, so this spreads virally. The bio char that we produce from the biomass is the only proven method of carbon sequestration and can take carbon that was in the atmosphere in the most recent growing season and now sequester that in the soil that also makes the soil more productive. The silicon that we get from that waste of a waste can be used to store the hydrogen, so it's conceivable that a place in the middle of the bush in Africa with one of these systems could make the hydrogen that they need in the storage that they need to take a fuel cell vehicle and drive their products to market. So fuel cells will become cheaper as the technologies developed in space, allow us to reach asteroids where there's abundant platinum that can now make the fuel cells cheaper. Platinum is a big cost of that. And then with this whole comprehensive system of three different approaches at the large scale, at the remote scale, and then at the transportation scale, can provide all the energy we need for all human enterprise for all time to come. So the reason why we've invited you here today is not just to hear about this exciting concept, but also to say, you know, Hey, Peter, how come this hasn't taken off? Why aren't you on the National News? Why hasn't the government given you $100,000,000,000? You know, What is going on? Is this a good idea? What can be improved? What are alternative technologies or ideas that could be happening. So what I would like is for you guys to contribute to that. I don't need praise. I don't like criticism, but I love some good suggestions and some innovative ideas. So with that, I'd like to open up the floor for input and comments from our audience. Wow. Okay. Thank you. So you see a few questions here on the screen that Peter is proposing. And we made other questions. So there's already something in the chat. I don't know if you can see that, Peter, from Kathleen. It says, I do think the government should give you a bunch of money. Thank you. So does someone have you want to unshare your screen now for a moment. And then we can see each other better? There we go. I have a quick question, if that's all right. I don't know if it's pertinent to the discussion, but Peter, this is very interesting. One of the things that I've been aware of is that and I'm hardly an expert, but that the state of the existing grid infrastructure that we have has been a barrier to the implementation of alternative sources of information because of the lack of storage and the lack of ability to accommodate the variability in the production. Do some of the solutions that you propose that you propose, are they more amenable to the existing grid infrastructure? Are they more plug and play with what we already have? Yeah, I've got two answers for that. The first one is that with hydrogen, we don't need the grid, but the Department of Energy says, Oh my gosh, we need a network of pipelines. However, pipelines are in a chicken and egg situation because the market is not yet developed, and it would cost hundreds of billions of dollars to establish that. So it's never going to happen. Instead, the solid state storage that you've got is a granular material and can fill a 53 foot truck trailer or a DOT 111 tanker car, and we can move things by existing infrastructure in very large quantities across the rails and the streets and it's in a safe format. So that means that the distribution of the hydron should be an easy thing to do. The second answer I've got for your excellent question is that for grid level storage, another technology that's not part of this presentation is to use abandoned coal mines for energy storage by building a lake above them. And then when we've got excess energy from wind, which is usually at night or solar, which is usually in the day, we pump the water uphill to the upper reservoir, and then when we need that power, we drop that water down, run turbines, and we can have grid scale storage using our marginal lands. That's cheaper than batteries and can scale up and allow us to increase our portfolio of solar and wind. But it sounds like so the first I like the second answer and I like the first answer, but the first answer seems to suggest that we would switch to more of a micro grid type of infrastructure across the country with production scaled locally rather than at the say, metropolitan or large regional level. Is that a correct interpretation? Yes, sir. And are you able to see the questions in the chat there? Because one relates, I think to what we just talked about was from Tom asking about the paths to the H two infrastructure. Can we reuse existing natural gas delivery infrastructure as an alternative? Yeah. Thanks, Tom. Natural gas pipelines can accept hydrogen, how much they can store is a fuzzy number because hydron has a tendency in steel vessels to migrate into the metal because it's such a small molecule, and steel is usually carbon steel. So when the hydron finds a carbon, it says, Hey, I will bond with you, and once you've got four Hydrogens on one carbon. That's a methane molecule. So inside the thickness of the steel walls, you're forming a gas, and this causes what they call hydrogen and brittlement. So that means you have to keep the hydrogen percent. It's very low. So it is possible. Europe is doing this, US is exploring it to mix some amount of hydrogen in with the natural gas. But then you've got some complicated separations that need to be done at one end versus the other. So it's definitely a doable technology, but it may not be thoroughly scaled. And to go back, did you see Angela's question about your hydrogen energy recommendations and whether they're similar to a book, the hydrogen economy that came out in 2022? Yeah. So I think I have that on my shelf, but I couldn't find it just looking over there. But I've read I think all of Rifkins books. He's really a great visionary on this stuff. But the problems he had in 2002 were the ones identified by Milly Dresselhous, who was a really famous MIT professor. And she said, Hydrogen's got three Achilles heels. One is the generation. How do you make it cheap? The other one is storage. How do you store it cheaply and safely? And the third one is how do you make fuel cells cheap. So I think what you heard today is that after I heard Miley russell House say this in 2002, I've been working on this very consistently for the last 20 years, and I have solutions for all those. In particular, the generation from biomass into hydrogen, the DOE has a goal by 2030 to get to below $1 per kilogram of hydrogen. You know, within that time frame. 1 kilogram of hydrogen has the same energy as a gallon of gasoline. So it's like dollar gallon gas. We did a project with D DUE this summer, and we showed how with biomass, we can get hydrogen at $0.78 per kilogram that's eight years earlier than their goal and $0.22 below that. And they still have not responded back to us. So, Phillip going back to your point. I think that the Department of Energy is very focused on how do we serve the large, centralized mega conglomerates that seem to control America? And it might be that a distributed approach, such as what we're just talking about here may not get the traction it needs in the US, which is why I've been spending a lot of my time working in Europe, where they're much more interested in smaller scale solutions. So backing up again on the chat, there's a comment about the chicken and egg thing you mentioned, and what could be learned and emulated from adoption of automobiles and the creation of a highway system. Yeah, hydrogen is right now in second place two batteries. In the US, the you know, perception of batteries and Elon Musk is very high. So if we look at China, for example, the sort of giga factories that Elon Musk is promoting here are already abundant in China. One of the people on the Advisory Board for the Liga Center for Renewable Energy tells me that China is very advanced in terms of making batteries safe, maybe even safer than the manufacturing in the US. So batteries are really working great for where we are today. But the lithium is really the challenge. There's only about five countries that have deposits of lithium. And if we look at the reserves of lithium, those aren't going to get to the point where everyone can electrolyze their car with a battery. So it's a good bridge solution to have lithium ion batteries, but we really need hydrogen. And as you've seen from this discussion, we're not at the point yet where we have products that we can put into your hand and say, here, snap this into your vehicle design and let's go. That takes four years or so to get to that point takes another two years at least. So even if I got that $100,000,000,000 that Kathy Mars is going to try to get from me from the Congress, Um I would still take me about six years before I could replace batteries. So that's where I think we can come up with the egg to replace the big old chicken. There's a couple more technical questions that are flocking in, but one of them was how or who do we push for more government attention to this? Or I would add to that community attention to this. So I've been wondering from my perspective, how what recommendations do you or others have around? How do we talk about this in ways that folks would become interested and help talk about this generally so that those making policy decisions would hear more about it? What do we think about that? One idea that I would love to promote more broadly and maybe through this venue is that with solar and with biomass, we can create hydrogen At small scales. So certainly at a farm scale, we can do that probably next year. At a home scale, maybe in a couple more years, we can make something that scales down and fits in your garage and makes hydrogen from your food waste and your packaging waste. But already from the solar on the roof, we can use electrolysis to take water from your tap. And so with sunlight and water, we can make hydrogen. The storage of hydrogen in my system only requires the same amount of pressure as a bicycle tire, racing bicycle tire, about 110 PSI, which you can do with a hand pump. So we can make very small, very inexpensive, very safe ways to produce hydrogen, store it in my material, provide it for your home, as well as for your vehicle. So, Steve, you never have to go to a gas station again. You never have to pay for utility bill ever again. That's where we get the rank and file people to say, I need the solution. Mm. Yeah. Well, then that flips us technological questions about, like, well, how do we get to that, right? How do we do that? But I hope we have some conversation about how do you frame this? How do you talk about? And maybe that's a key, right, to say that if you want to eliminate your utility bills, take a lot of conversation, I think to change this, right? We have a system we're apparently quite used to and are not so willing to change for whatever reasons. And what will it take to do that? I don't know There's a quote from Machiavelli, and he says that there's nothing more dangerous. Takes to change the order of things, because you find resistance in all those who benefit from the current order, and nothing but lukewarm response from those who benefit from the new order because of the tendency of humans not realize or believe in something until they actually see it done. So I think in order to overcome that hurdle, Steve, I need to get to the point where I can demonstrate this and have a place where people can come and see it, kick the tires, challenge it, ask the questions, and say, Could I do that myself and then it'll take off virally. Okay, so take a look, Peter at the variety of stans because these are they're long and complicated. And so we'll let you take a look at these and see which ones make sense to respond to in which order, that would be okay. I see a chemist question from Pierre Andre, Extracting silicon from Biochar. Earth metals, the purest silicon we have is from the Spruce Pine District in North Carolina where they get that beautiful white sand that people love to put on beaches all around the world. That's where people mine silica to get silicon. And that process is very energy intensive, and it's also very dirty. So it requires a lot of halogens to make the silicon tetrachloride, and then that's refined, et cetera. So it's a very difficult, expensive process. If instead, we allow plants, growing plant matter to pull from the environment just those pieces of silica that they need, the little grains of sand. They're in the nanoscale range, but they're like 6% for corn and like 22% for rice husks. Then they pre screen for the minerals that they need. And the plants are pre purifying the silica, which makes it even better than the stuff in the Spruce Pine District. If we consider rice hulls, those are a huge problem in most of Southeast Asia because they don't burn, they don't decompose because they're so high in silica. So there's 120 million metric tons of rice hulls produced each year from rice production that just sits on the side of the road and the piles get larger and larger. We could consume those and take just the amount each year and provide all the silicon we need for all transportation for all vehicles on the road forever, in a completely sustainable way with all those existing manufacturing processes being entirely bypassed with one that's much greener and lighter on the environment. And now, there's a question a little bit further down from Lisa a suggestion, perhaps, setting up a small system in a small rural area in Indiana, which makes me wonder about do I understand that North on 65 at State Road 14 is doing a lot of self sustaining with energy, et cetera using what they have and converting each other. So Might be find somebody who's already trying to do this and expand their opportunities a bit? It might not be Indiana does this first. Indiana in my experience is glad to come second or third, but doesn't like to be first. But it's probably going to be first in Oregon or in Florida. So the first demonstration of this might happen in Oregon where they use a supercritical CO two to take HP materials and extract all of the volatiles from them, so the CBDs, the THCs, et cetera. And then the stuff that's left behind is a super dry powder. And they are like, Well, what do we do with this? Nobody wants to pay us for it. So when they found my technology, they're like, Oh my gosh, it's dry, which means we're going to get the maximum amount of bio chart from it. They want to sell the bio chart, and I'm like, we can also make the hydrogen for less than $1. And right now the US is offering $3 a kilogram on green hydrogen, which means we could sell it for a buck. And get $3 extra profit from the government. It's almost unfair how great this technology is. So it might happen in Oregon. O in Florida, where they have a lot of horses in West Palm Beach, the horse bedding material is a huge waste problem. So if we can take their horse bedding material, put that through my system, which will take the manure and the urea, and the wood chips and everything, and then be able to produce their own operations and make biochar, which is now going to be an odor absorbent for those same horses. We can take their waste material, have them pay us to take it. And then sell it back to them and have electricity besides this whole system will pay for itself in nine months. So those are probably the places where it'll start first. So Mark is suggesting maybe that we figure out a frame to help the big energy folks understand that they could make more money, and maybe they would be more interested. And then Ruth's asking about the recent and I think you had brought this up to the international Summit, whatever it's called about energy. Was any of this discussed there that you're aware of? This got a lot of interest last November at the 77th General Assembly of the United Nations. So I was invited to speak to a panel that was looking at, what are the solutions for Africa? So I think Noy is going to put a link to some of the books that I published. So I have some science fiction books, and those start in Africa. And so you'll see how these whole ideas in advance of me being able to do them in real life as an engineer, as an entrepreneur. I first did them in in literature to kind of make my own roadmap, and now I'm trying to make that road map happen. Anyway, so there's a lot of opportunity in Africa for being able to take waste materials because waste handling in Africa in many places, is really awful. And there's people living subsistence lives. There's girls who have to go get wood to cook fires, and they're dinuding around their village and increasing desertification. All those negative trends can be reversed with this technology because we can use the woody materials much more efficiently. This is a 60% efficient conversion versus open fire burning, which is seven to 15%, and we're getting electricity besides, so we can provide education to them. So right now, my wife has just named the International committee chairman for the Carmel Rotary Club, and we're hatching an idea to have the rotary help us jump start this technology over in Sub Saharan Africa in a way that can be replicable to reach those 2 billion people I was mentioning earlier. So I was scrolling back in the chat because we don't want to leave anybody out. And there is a comment about from Mark Wood, about the maintenance of hydrogen fuel systems in consumer products like cars. Do you see that question? Noting that a lot of people don't take care of their powers anyway, the way it's recommended, so you have thoughts about that? Question. I do. A lot of us in America drive cars. One of the things that's really not well known is that electric vehicles, I'm talking about EV, so pure electric, not just a hybrid are significantly lower in maintenance than an internal combustion engine. So the number of moving parts is greatly reduced. What that means is that the cost of ownership is way lower. And electric motors have been around since longer than internal combustion engines. They only have one moving part. So it's dramatically reducing your maintenance requirements on a motor vehicle by going to all electric. But as I mentioned, batteries are, in my opinion, not the end all. So if we have hydrogen, that goes into a fuel cell. A fuel cell has a fan for circulating air, and that's kind of the only moving part. There's a couple of other pumps, but there's very little to do in terms of maintenance and very little problems that can happen with a fuel cell. They're just kind of a solid stack of things with channels for the hydro and the oxygen. So I think we're entering a phase where the maintenance that was done by all of the mechanical engineers back in the 50s and 70s and now is only done in dealerships may soon be something that you don't have to do very often at all. And I think this hydrogen is a way that we can continue that trend into the future. So fundamental shift in how we think about and do a whole lot of different things sounds like potentially. The question right after a comment, right after that one is from Pierre Andre, which is I'm asking about why would we try to extract silicon Got that one, but let me take the tougher one from Kel Go. So go form. This is something that tears me up inside sometimes. Okay. Energy efficiency is very important. Using less is very important. However, those are things that we do as individuals. And even corporations can do technologies where they are finding greener ways that are lower energy, and those even help them because if they're making things more efficiently, they have less waste, there's less stuff they have to buy, they can make more profits. There's all kinds of good reasons to do that. So that's the first thing that has to happen, improve efficiency. However, in order to continue to grow our economy, and from my understanding of economics, if we aren't growing, we're shrinking, and that means less good for all. So we need to find a way that economies can still grow. If we look at GAP miner, which is an online tool gap miner dot or really great tool, if you look at a trend of income or health versus energy, there's a very strong trend that those nations that use more energy have better health, better happiness and better economies. So we need to find a way, first of all, to use that energy more efficiently, but second and also very important is to have it be abundant. So if we can bring carbon free power from space, we can increase our energy footprint and do things like recycle. So right now, glass recycling, you know, we all put our recycling into the bin, but not all that turns into recycled products because there's not much market for it. We used to ship all of our plastic to China. But a number of years ago, they said, we're not going to do that anymore. So the trash companies like, we'll be glad to take that from you, but we can't promise all that's going to be recycled because it's not economical. If we can make electricity so cheap that it's coming from space, and we've got excess, then we can use that to make a circular economy and to take the things that we're throwing out and use those into new materials so that we're using much less of the resources of the Earth and getting to the circular economy. And if space is included, then that also means we have a place for people to grow off planet where they take the nasty manufacturing and do that somewhere else. Peter, I was talking about the next comment. That was suggesting using the federal Transit administration as a partner in this. Does that make sense? It does. Also, the Department of Transportation covers things like how safe are things as you go across the road. So There's been a lot of work on hydrogen and how you transport that. Most of it's sent in tube trailers that are compressed like 3,000 PSI, but there's also really large trucks that have a really small tank inside that has liquid hydrogen in it. So those are things you don't want to have crossing where there's a train track, and there might be an explosion because they can blow up because there's so much energy embedded in them. So very briefly, the two main ways to store hydrogen are compressed gas and refrigerated liquid. Both of those require huge amounts of energy to either get that gas compressed down to really small size, because it's really hard to do, takes a lot of energy, you're wasting. Hydrogen is just an energy storage vector. And so if you're putting a lot of energy into it just to get it into a compressed state, you're throwing away efficiency. Same thing with refrigerated liquids. You have to get down within 20 degrees of absolute zero, like outer space. And that takes huge amounts of energy as well, and it tends to boil off. And both of those, if they were to be released into the environment, would be bad news. With our approach, we're using basically a rock. We're using a porous rock. It's like pumice. And if it gets hit, it'll just fall down. It's not going to catch on fire spontaneously. It's not going to release a lot of hydrogen. It's not going to make any sparks. It's not going to catch on fire. So it's an inherently safe way of transporting hydrogen. So if those agencies had the funds to develop the technologies that were safer, then I could appeal to them to fund this work. But since the Obama administration, they've been relying on the private sector instead to do that work. So one question here was, have you discovered any interest from foundations that focus on environmental issues? Is that a source to support this either through funding or explanation? There's a lot of really good foundations involved. They are not research and development organizations. So they say, Well, you know, Peter, show me your product. I'm like, Well, it's not a product yet. It's still in the laboratory. I can hold up my little sample to the stuff and they're like, that's it. That's it. So foundations won't touch anything until you have a product of commerce that they can point to it. They have a part number for it. They know how much it costs. They know it's performance specifications, and they could do their own mathematics to say, I our money going to give us the leverage? If there's the risk that it might not work or that there's some hidden gotcha along the way, foundations are not yet I'm not yet ready to approach foundations because of what path forward? What's next for Peter? I'm retiring. Our university is being split. The two parent universities have decided, just like Solomon said to rip the baby in half. So those of us who don't have a natural home after the split are cast to the wind with a little severance. So at the end of this academic year, I'll be launching off into career number four. And possibly one of these technologies will become my main gig, and I'll make this successful. We'll be able to respond back to a lot of really great questions that we haven't got a chance to address here today and have this be successful, and then point back way back to 2015, December, 2023, back in the old days, and you say, you heard it here first from I UPI, trip scholar of the month, Peter Suber, thank you all very much for your attention. Well, that sounds like a nice way to end this formal portion of our scholar of the month. We know that many of you have other activities at the top of the hour. And so we like to round out our time now for those that have to leave. And we apologize if we didn't get to all of the comments, but we will hang around for just a moment or two for those that want to stay and continue the conversation at least up until. Take a moment to thank Peter for his brilliant presentation, and for helping us have a conversation about this that allowed us in all of our perspectives, whether we're scientists, whether we're community partners, et cetera, to engage and to think about this and figure out how we could work together to address this very complex issue that we have to address. It's important that we do and figure out the way that happened. So thank you, Peter, for being willing to do this for being such a great partner for us here at the center, for translating research into practice that there's many more opportunities for us to partner together, wherever you land, whatever that looks like, that we would be We're all in this together and that we make that happen. And I hope that you get some ideas and support from the folks that are here today that may be able to help us get. That's what happens. That's one of the benefits of these meetings and opportunities that we think of things in some other ways and find other solutions. So you can see lots of comments. Thank you inside the chat, and we appreciate everybody coming. And so now we'll officially end this. And thank you all for coming. Please join us again. And next year for our next scholar of the month presentation with doctor Barbara Pierce. And if you're interested in learning about the Bans Community Fellow Award, there will be a informational session also in early January. Check out our website at WW TRIP EDU UPY, dot EDU, and you can learn more about it, and it's in the chat. So thank you, Peter, and we'll just carry on now for the post conversation for those that want to hang out for a little bit longer.