Decarbonising Concrete With Carbon-Neutral Materials

8% of global emissions come from the material we barely talk about.
Concrete. Cement. The literal foundations of modern life, and one of the hardest climate problems we face.

In this episode, I’m joined by Ana Luisa Vaz, VP of Product at Paebbl, to unpack why construction is such a stubborn emissions hotspot, and what it would take to genuinely change that.

Ana explains why cement emits CO₂ by design, not by accident. Half its emissions come from chemistry, not fuel. You can electrify kilns and still be stuck with the carbon. That’s why Paebbl is taking a different path: using accelerated mineralisation to turn captured CO₂ into a cement substitute, permanently locking carbon into concrete itself.

We dig into what “permanence” really means in carbon removal, why performance matters more than good intentions, and how conservative industries like construction can adopt new materials without compromising safety. You’ll hear how Paebbl can already replace up to 30% of cement today, why cost curves matter more than green premiums, and how digital tools, sensors, and models are accelerating learning in an industry that usually moves at a glacial pace.

We also explore the role of policy, public procurement, and cities, the uncomfortable changes the sector needs to unlearn, and whether carbon-negative construction is a realistic goal this century, or just another climate promise that collapses under scrutiny.

This is a conversation about climate tech that lives in the physical world. Hard to abate. Harder to ignore.

🎙️ Listen now to hear how Ana Luisa Vaz and Paebbl are rethinking concrete, permanence, and what real decarbonisation looks like at scale.

Sign up to Climate Confident+ for deep dive analysis of the major climate and energy stories of the day.

Transcript

Copy

0:03

300 kilograms of equivalent on CO2 per meter cubic of concrete you make. And now you multiply this on the very large metric tons that we produce worldwide. And then you have your answer, 8% of the contribution for global emissions. Good morning, good afternoon, or good evening, wherever you are in the world. Welcome to episode 255 of the Climate Confident Podcast. 8%. That's the share of global emissions that come from cement and concrete alone, not energy, not transport, not agriculture. The literal stuff we build our cities out of. And here's the uncomfortable part. Unlike power or transport, this isn't a sector we're slowly winding down. We're still building more cities, more housing, more infrastructure, more concrete. Which means decarbonising construction isn't optional. It's structural and it's hard. Cement hasn't fundamentally changed in over a century. It's cheap, it's reliable, and it emits CO2 by design. Half of its emissions come from chemistry, not fuel. You can electrify the kiln and still be stuck with the carbon. My guest today is working on a different approach, one that doesn't just reduce emissions but locks carbon away inside the materials we use to build permanently. Ana Luisa is VP of Product at Paebbl, a company using accelerated mineralisation to turn captured CO2 into a cement substitute, embedding carbon into concrete itself while maintaining performance and safety. We talk about why construction is so conservative, why performance always beats good intentions. How you convince engineers to trust new materials and whether carbon negative buildings are actually plausible this century. If you care about hard to abate sectors, real permanence and solutions that scale in the physical world, this is a conversation worth your time. Ana, welcome to the podcast. Would you like to introduce yourself? Hi Tom. Thank you. Thanks. Sure. Yeah. My name is Ana Luisa. I'm a Portuguese by origin, and I work at Paebbl. At Paebbl I lead the VP of Products. What that means is actually I support the product introduction at the same time accelerate the product development of the materials to better fit on the application. And Ana, for people who are unfamiliar, what is Paebbl? Paebbl is actually a super nice company. It planes on the intersection between clima tech and building and materials, so that's. Makes it super interesting on the sense we capture carbon. The focus of the company is actually to sequester the carbon in something which becomes permanent. And with that, we make a material that can be used in different applications on building and construction. Mainly it's functions for cement applications and concrete, which is one of the most used materials in our society. Okay, great. So let's start with the kind of heavy industry, concrete, you mentioned, and the ways to decarbonise it. How do you see the, the core challenge with concrete and cement today? Why has it been, why has that sector been so hard to clean up? Yeah, I, I think we've not even started, so the started focus came in the last years. So it's a very versatile material. It's actually cheap as well and makes it so interesting. And that's why we can build so much. You give us shelters, you give us properties to protect us from the cold. and it can be used all sides of the world, of the world. So it actually is used to grow the society and to grow the infrastructure. To your question right now we are looking at the material and we are looking, how do we make the material. And I worked previously in other industries with being in this transformation, automotive, being in that transformation from fossil motors to electrical powered vehicles. I think packaging also being in that transformation, I think that transformation now is coming to building and constructions. Can we build better? And if you look to concrete, it is mainly made of four ingredients. So you have water, you have big stones, aggregate it's called. You have sand and cement and other small part of additives and fillers. So the main contribution is actually cement. Cement is made in a old fashioned way. We are doing the same way more than a hundred years. We burn limestone. And then by that process, half of the material goes to CO2. We make CO2 of it to get the chemical properties. And we use quite a lot of energy to do so because it's done at very high temperatures. So that gives you, to give you some numbers, you're talking about 800 average, 800 CO2 equivalents, so amount of CO2 that you use to make that product. And then you use that, you put it in concrete, that behaves as a nicely binder glue, to gives the performance of concrete. That in itself gives you then the overall average of about 300 kilograms of equivalent on CO2 per meter cubic of concrete you make. And now you multiply this on the very large metric tons that we produce worldwide. And then you have your answer, 8% of the contribution for global emissions. I don't think we are dimming down. We are building up. As we grow society is is developing. We are actually growing as a population. And in order to address that, I think one of the challenges that we have here is can we look to the way we build, can we make it better? Can we actually redesign this mix? And this is where Paebbl actually comes in. The material can partially replace cement. So what does that mean is overall you can remove a bit of this ingredient, right, which actually has a large CO2 emissions, and then you use Paebbl as such. And by that you can actually reduce and make a low carbon concrete. And in addition, you do something unique, which is actually you use building an infrastructure to actually store the CO2, which was previously in the air or previously emitted in a very useful way because the alternative is actually right, storing it under the ground. So why don't we can make something useful out of the material? So that's, that's a bit how the challenge is and how Paebbl can fit on addressing some of the challenges on the long term to make us more resilient and climate adapted. So you've got a, a, drop in substitute for cement or partial substitute for cement from what you're saying. What's it made of? It's actually made of a mineral. So the, the beauty here, and I think with many inventions or many technologies, developments are inspired in nature. so we did the same. We got inspired by nature. Mineralisation is done in nature, which is the base of the technology at Paebbl that we developed. We use water. A rock, a silica rock fine grinded plus blended in together with CO2. We use very unique conditions of settings, of temperatures and pressures, and also some small magic that we developed at Paebbl and now with our scientists. And from there you get this material that comes out, which comes directly in the powder form that can use as used correctly sized to partially replace cement. So that's how we, we made it is a very high tech powered by nature. So with the idea that nature had, the, the difference is we accelerated millions of in the time unit. So in, in the, in the nature that process takes is very slow. It takes time, and then the, the carbon absorbed in the rock. We do that in the very fast pace and by that allow us to produce the material that we do. And there is another nuance here, which is very interesting as well, which is the energy that we need to use can be then recovered because the reaction, it's actually a chemical reaction. It generates energy that can then be reused again in the process, which makes our overall Lifecycle of the product actually, negative. That's the difference and that's the uniqueness then of what we're doing here. Interesting. And, you say it is a partial drop in replacement for cement. Roughly how much of the cement are you partially replacing? Today we can replace up to 30%. So for us, and I think that's, that's the way we, I approach the introduction to the market, I think it's important to look to decarbonisation in new materials. But focus in performance, right? If we replace, but then the performance is not the same and you cannot build in the same way, then we need to rethink. Technology and the stages of development allow us to do so. So in order to retain performance, we today advise up to 30% replacement of, pure cement. We plan to extend and evolve. This is our generation one product. We want to have more and more replacement, but that's part of our development process, what we are doing in our labs here at Paebbl. And you are putting the CO2 into Paebbl so that it is already embedded when it's put into the buildings. Is that the, it's, it's not that it absorbs CO2 when the building is built, it's that it's actually already embedded in the Paebbl when it's put into the concrete? Yes, so it's a chemical reaction. So you have CO2 in the gas phase and we make it in a stable phase, which is a carbonate CO3. So we solidify it so it's permanently bound, and yes, correctly, as you said, is inside the material, which is different than what you explained if there is a lifetime of absorbing during the building. That's a different phenomena here, it's entrapped as we call it is actually chemical bonds and transformed in a more stable material. It's, which is a carbonate. And where are you sourcing the CO2? The focus of the technology is the storing part. There is several companies doing the capturing part. So it can be from a single point captured. It can be from direct air capture. So for us, it doesn't really matter to be honest. We partners with companies that do that. We receive that CO2 and we focusing on the storing part. And what's your view on accelerated mineralisation as a pathway? You know, what makes it compelling compared to other decarbonisation approaches? I think what makes it interesting is the permanence. I don't like the word of comparing myself with other paths. I think we as a humanity, need, need all the paths, all shots on goal. We, unfortunately, we did so many damage that it's, not correct to say, okay, this is better than the other. I have my personal opinion in, in severals. One's maybe more stronger than others. Specifically on mineralisation, which is the one that I work for I do think that the beauty there, it is permanently stored, right? You can recycle the concrete, it doesn't get released again, you can just mechanical recycle it, you can put it back again. it's in the different solid form. So, that permanence for longer time because building the design of infrastructure is actually designed for 50 years or more. One of the most larger applications that we humans use, right? Because if you look to paper or cards or consumer goods, the lifetime you're talking about- two years, five years. In construction, the beauty is architecture stays for many, many, many years. So that gives you the permanence. In addition, you are taking the CO2 and you do something that actually last long lasting and you can actually make a use out of it. That's one of the motivations why Paebbl, it becomes such an interesting pathway because you can do the two things right? You can lock the CO2. Can make something useful out of it and redesign materials in a more smart way. So that's, I think, gives you that benefits compared as in this specific pathway. But I do think that we need to work in all different pathways. One of the beauty, and I think linked to the technology is we have now so many technologies, so many digitalisation paths. We should use that in order to rethink what we do, right and to rethink the, the environment, the objects you use, the houses we are living, the way we actually live in order to make us more climate adaptive and, and better. And not only that, but also resilience. Right, because making us effective, the use of less materials will also make it more efficient and use better the resources. So you can get the best of all, both worlds as I say it. The construction industry is notoriously, well, a) analog, but b) Conservative, how are they going to take to a new material, especially one that's going to be put into structures that people rely on for safety, for shelter whether it's housing, whether it's bridges, whatever. How do you ensure that it's got the same performance criteria as regular cement or concrete? Test and test again, and you test again. So in a very simple way, that's what we do. Of course, it's the way we do it we actually use the data, what we call the metadata from all the tests we do, and we learning not on our own small world. We are very keen at Paebbl to, to use an approach which is called open innovation, right? So we collaborate in partnerships with our customers, with the larger construction companies in the world, with the cement producers and also the building owners. Together we do plans for development. We use our own labs to be their extension of their R&D, And we test the material in all types of conditions, also in real life type of conditions. So we expose materials to heat, we expose materials to long weathering. To cold in different accelerated tests in order to prove actually the performance. So we have very strict methodologies to test the materials, and we use the knowledge of our customers, which knows even better how it's gonna behave in certain performance. In certain environments. Sorry. So in order to actually answer that question. What you mentioned for me is a very interesting I do agree is a very conservative, probably one of the industries. As I mentioned, I work in several industries. I will say pharma, it's maybe a little even more conservative, but construction it is. And there is a good reason for that, as you mentioned, right? So if you build a house and you stand behind the house, you have a roof in front of you, or a bridge or any infrastructure, you need to assure that it lasts and you cannot have accidents. It can cause very serious, even deaths, right? So that's one of the reasons why the industry is conservative. If you understand that right, as a developer is our duty to answer to that concerns, okay? You are introducing a new technology. We are gonna take some, what I call calculated and controlled environment risks, right? We are gonna do small pilots, small in small applications from low low risk application and you gradually learn. This is the way that we, we did before. Right. you do that in a very controlled and educated way. I think the beauty, what we are in the era we are now is you can use a lot of tech to help you. So you have of course the buzzword AI, which means just that the models learn faster. Before it took us ages to assess material performance. We were many, many hours looking to data, how to see the, connections. Right now we can see the connection in minutes. We can put sensors in the material, right? We have educated way of building. That way, you actually give proof and data to your customers and actually to the people build that the material works and that actually you are introducing a technology without disturbing the performance, which I think is very important for us and in my perspective, very important to any technology bring to the market, right? It needs to be safe and it needs to perform. And at the same time. And that's the third variable we bring in the, in our era, it should not harm the, the environment or minimally harm the environment. And do you have a feedstock flexibility, you know, natural minerals versus waste streams. You mentioned, that buildings can be recycled at end of life. Can you take that in? You know what, what, what kind of flexibility do you have there with the feed stock? Yeah, so the technology is actually a platform and it varies. Very versatile. So we started one specific mineral but it can be applied with different minerals. At our research facility, we test more than 20 minerals and what you, what you call waste streams. So yes, it works. It of course has different efficiencies. And we try always to focus on the scalability of this tech, right? You're talking about an industry with a lot of metric tons, sometimes un get lost with all the zeros they put out, the million metric tons you produce in order to supply to the demand of the construction. So with today, we use a mineral, which is widely available In the, in earth. But we can use mild tailings, recycles. It's about developing. As you might understand, for, developing technology, we also need focus. So we put focus on the mineral, which has actually absorbed quite a lot. So you're talking about per each ton of the material we produce, we absorb about 200 to 300 kgs of CO2 today. And based on that metrics, we can then choose the mineral. But the reality is you can use this as a platform to apply to different minerals and we do truly believe that it's scalable and actually can solve the supply problem as well on low carbon materials. The other factor that obviously needs to be taken into account, which we haven't talked about yet, is the cost. So how is the cost comparison with using Paebbl versus using standard cement. Yeah, it's the question I receive in every single call, so I'm happy to, to deep dive. We of course thought about it, right? So we are entering the market. We have a couple of years on develop of the technology. So today as we are on the scale up path, we don't have the larger scale to bring that cost down. So that industries that have been there before. So the way we are approaching, we have what we call a cost down curve. And we plan to be competitive up to in 2028 when we build our next plant, which we will we call the first of a kind on this technology there where we are gonna land in very competitive prices today. Compared to what cement is now put on the market. So that's our landing costs. We do understand that's very critical, right to material adoption. I think more and more you talk about yeah, startups capitalising on green premiums. This is a very complex topic, because on one way you're developing technologies. So yes, there is extra cost. Yes, we are reinventing industries that spend many, many years on cost optimisation. Right? Cement has been spent the last 25 years on cost optimisation, right? So that needs to be put in perspective, but we understand that it needs to be cost competitive at the long shot. And we understand that the industry cannot just stay uptake, you know, green premiums all the time. So that's very clear. So in our pathway to the cost down on optimisation, this processes, we wanna land closer to the cement prices. So Ana, I mean, you talk about or Paebbl talks about on, on your website learning velocity with like sensors everywhere, cloud connected reactors, digital twins. How is that changing the pace of improvement? Yeah, it's actually accelerating. So if you see how do we develop in the last two years, right? We went from microscale to a demo plant, which is can produce up to one kiloton of material. And this is, was only possible because we have, of course, tools that help us accelerate and minimise the amount of experiments and educate our, our views with models sensors also on application side. If you use sensors to understand how the reaction behaves, and now as the strength in concrete, for example, you don't need to wait for the long time of the testing. You still need to do testing. So let's be honest, I think models only work as good as they are validated. It was the same that happened with all this this learning models. It took them some time until they fine tune. But what we see now as we learn and we teach and we actually validate the models more and more, they get a really aid to help us develop faster. So that's, the fact. And I really hope that sooner rather than later, if you wanna test the strength of a material or if you wanna comply, and that's another interesting topic regulatory perspective, that can they accept models instead of real experiments. Right, right now. If you wanna know if a a building will survive to a earthquake, you have to go and, and shake, make huge facade, huge investments to prove that the material is correct. So I think where we wanted to go is, can we actually use models to give us the trust that you can just model the conditions and actually predict performance? It's done in other industries. Automotive is doing that, pharmaceutical is doing that. So they are screening ingredients at at that speed of light. As I say, in order to accelerate developments that before you used to take many, many years. I do think construction is in that path. We are starting that, but it is the beginning. But there is, to answer your question, a lot of tech and a lot of tools that we can use. And with Paebbl we try to be as, as part of our heartbeat and as you need as a startup. That's, that's actually why, why the beauty of startups, right? You can actually develop faster and use the top-notch technologies to, to help us on that process. So we are definitely capitalising on that. We have a large team of data and digitalisation crew on board to help us accelerate and as we say, augment our knowledge and technology development. And in taking in that data, was there anything that surprised you when you first saw data from live operations? Yeah, I'll not say surprise is every day is a learning. So I say there is no boring day in a Paebbl. Every day we learn something new, we learn something really fast. I think we are developing a new material, so it was not there before it was in nature, but not necessarily used in an application. So every experiment, model, run every time we learn something. And that's not really a surprise. It's just a very exciting moment when you learn and you see, oh, this is how it works. How do we make it better on that, on that way, and how can we actually use it on the customer demands, right? How can we provide a solution because that's, we are here doing So it's a very interesting and yeah, never a boring day. And when you see things like the EU's Clean Industrial Deal, how is that influencing scale up, you know, especially for hard to abate sectors? I think is very important is the drive as well is one of the drives, right? I think in Europe that's the good parts of regulatory and push, right? It helps companies to keep their focus, right? Because if you just let the business side of it we just gonna focus on money that not necessarily will look to the overall picture and growth demand. That deals and added initiatives, the, the Bauhaus, the Green Deals I think are very important to keep us as a humanity focus. That it's not just about economics, it's also about climate adaptation, right? We need to continue living. And that brings that, that sharpen on that. So I do think it does help technologies and developments to put their needle also what matters. And you see the evolution of companies having sustainability reports, companies putting effort I definitely think it'll help. The other side of the coin. Sometimes we go too far. So, and we don't really align the existing regulatory with the new regulatory. So there is standardisation and regulatory on materials which not necessarily yet fully aligned with the speed we need to take clean tech technologies, but also new, new and new type of technology in Europe. And that is what we are actually asking the regulators to be an enabler and not a blocker. I think the message is we are willing to collaborate. We will put the energy and the efforts in our brains, and we have one of them. We, we try to hire very educated people, a lot of scientists with a lot of tracking, so we will facilitate the data, but we are asking that they work together with us in the same way they do them. That policies to look to the future and how can we adapt these technologies within the existing regulatory perspective. And you are at the moment looking to take 30% of cement out of concrete and replace it with Paebbl. Is there a pathway to get beyond 30% to 50, 80, a hundred? I hope so. I hope so. And I'm, I'm, I'm sure. Right. So I the answer to you is of course there are pathways exactly how they gonna develop. We need to put our thoughts and our brains on that. We are working on that very heavily, and I do believe so. Where this is gonna be the end, I dunno this, but there are technologies and I believe if we continue putting our efforts there, we will see a replacement. And I, I really, truly believe that eventually we can arrive to a carbon neutral type of material as a concrete as itself. And where do you see the market pull coming from first? Is it from the likes of public procurement, private developers, big infrastructure owners, somebody else entirely? All of the above? All the three of them. So you see municipalities and cities really looking to what is a long term and I think the municipalities and the countries and the cities, they look long term. Yeah. Their job is resilience at the long term is not the 2, 3, 5 years, but this how is gonna be my city in 10, 20, 50 years. And they have this as they pull for these solutions, they are craving for these solutions. That's everybody we talk. It's like, yes, of course, yes. We, we want it, right? So if we can make better, build better at the same performance, there is no reason not to. Right? So you see that there, there is where they seeing a little bit long term the new building and the large infrastructures as well pull also from that regulatory perspective, as you mentioned. But I do think that is getting intrinsic on the corporations, you know, to build sustainable, to build more resilience and to look to longer term supply. So they are also asking the large infrastructure. So we see demand from all, all sectors, from private to public, to the cities. All of them are looking to something that can help us build better. So I have to say, and that's the nicer surprise in that way or hope to bring us hope and positive outlook to the future is the willingness is there. It's about how do we align all the steps and how do we do it, all together and work together to, make it and take sometimes some risks and maybe some extra work that we didn't plan to make it happen and that the ideas go out of the paper and we actually make real projects. And I think Paebbl, and I'm super proud. It's been an amazing year. We made five commercial pilot projects in the industry. As you said before, a couple of of minutes ago, very conservative. We actually made buildings and infrastructure out out of a new tech and new carbon storing material. So I'm super proud and I, not only myself, but I really thank the people that were together and work with us, our partners, and they're some of the people you mentioned, they are cities, they are large real estate owners. So one of our investors, Amazon is also there. This is important to pull that traction, that because there's nothing like belief, right? And, and having infrastructure there that shows that it's possible to build at the same performance. And what do you think the construction sector most needs to unlearn if we're going to hit our climate goals? Oh, that's an interesting question. I think that that fear of trying the sitting on, on the comfort, right? Oh, I, I did this all my life. Why should I change? And, and sometimes yeah, it takes, you have the willingness in, if you are maybe at, at the special positions or at the customer level. But when you are seated and you are just, you know, you are the, the director of the plant and you just don't wanna problems, you wanna do your daily life, the reality is it needs to be cascaded through the organisation and that person which is running that plant needs to be also have the willing to, to help and to implement this type of solutions. Seeing innovation as an enabler, not as a pain. It's probably what needs to change in order to make this movement faster and, and to uptake the solutions, right? So I think it's even a human behavior, not necessarily in all the industries we adapt, right? It's very easy to, oh, it works. So we, why should I put the effort, right, if it works right. That's unfortunately as humanity, we can't just afford to sit still and just, you know, see passing by because we will stop being competitive. And this is one of the main problems in Europe's right now. We need to, increase our, competitiveness compared to other countries. We need to come back to that, you know, discovery and implementing new techs. And for that you need a little bit of, yeah, you need momentum. That's, that's basically it. And that's one of the major things I will say. I dunno if you wanna call it a shout out, just, you know. Use your knowledge. Let's, let's go, let's get out of the, you know, of doing the same vanilla is always the same. Just take the risk. And some let surprise for what the tech can give. What if, if we can even build better? What if the car, it can be done better? Yeah. Why not? Right? So I think that's, the message I would like to, to leave here. Nice. Okay. What are the chances that we ever reach a world of carbon negative construction? And if you think we do, what's the timeline look like? I think we are waiting for a couple of decades and a lot of effort. That timeline is linked to the, what we just discussed before. How much the people are willing to put effort and, you know, and get out of their comfort zones. So it's a bit difficult to judge because unfortunately humanity has a bit unpredictable behaviors. So if you wanna hope for the positive side, I think my answer is the technologies are there in the very nice, mature state and they can be uptake and they can be put in practice and delivered very interesting results on the carbon zero or decarbonisation. The time will depend just on us. I really hope for humanity and also for all of us and resilience as well that we do it as fast as possible. But I cannot really say Okay. What gives hope personally in this space right now? What gives me hope is I have a lot of positive calls. I have a lot of people in from very important companies, from very important positions in that sense. The people driving in, driving seats, which are asking for this solutions. People that actually see, we wanted I have a lot of calls and say, Ana, we're gonna make it happen. We're gonna try here, we're gonna try there, we are gonna demonstrate. There is a lot of willingness. There is a lot of fresh blood in the industry as well, right? Which helps that we wanna do it better. There is a lot of sense of yeah, can we use our skills to do something for the future and leave our our mark for the next generation? That's what keeps me positive. That's my day is charge with that calls and they charged with that willingness. I also have some, some, some slow backs, but I do have, I think if I analyse it, the majority is there is wilderness, there is a positive outlook of doing better and making better and and building better for sure. A left field question for you, Ana. If you could have any person or character, alive or dead, real or fictional a champion for carbon negative concrete. Who would it be and why? Hmm. I don't know. That's an interesting thing. Probably some inspirational character, right? Somebody that humanity sees an inspiration. I dunno if I can name a person or name an individual. I can describe you what I could imagine that will help. Somebody be inspirational. Somebody that people will see that they can trust, they don't perceive as greenwashing. And that's a little bit the problem here. There was a bit of a blend, is what is true, what is not true? What is science, what is not science? And unfortunately the societies instead of clarity is sometimes first. and I don't think that is helping in any direction. So if you describe somebody that is seen as yeah, an authority in that way, without being perceived as misleading or, that's probably what I will say. But does I, I, I think you can imagine that right now it's difficult if it's a politician. I think I will tend for a, philosopher, a thinker. I think Voltaire probably somebody is an inspirational more than that people can trust as an inspiration probably. That's what I will hint. Very good. Very good. Okay, we're coming towards the end of the podcast now, Ana. Is there any question that I didn't ask that you wish I did or aspect of this we haven't touched on that you think it's important for people to be aware of? No, I think we, we, we covered quite a lot of points. I hope it was interesting for your audience. Maybe I pulled back the question to you. What do you think about what I told you and how did you felt about it? Yeah, I think. it's fascinating because the construction industry, as we mentioned at the start, is very analog, very risk averse with good reason. I mean, similar to like the utility industries is another one that's very risk averse. and again, for good reason. So. It's a very challenging environment to try and make any changes, but obviously the changes are urgent because, as you said at the start, it's 8% of of global emissions come from construction, and that's a large portion. So we need to get that down. And it's universally described as hard to abate for many of those reasons. So having solutions like Paebbl, being able to come in and get those emissions down, hugely important. So I think it's been a fascinating conversation. Thank you, Super. It was a pleasure. It's always nice to, to talk about it and yeah, and to address complex but interesting topics. Indeed. Thank you Tom No, no. If people would like to know more, Ana, about yourself or any of the things we discussed on the podcast, where would you have me direct them? So our websites our socials, our LinkedIns, our posts, everything is around there. Please contact us. Please reach out. I'm Ana. Right. So as I said leading the, the, the product and the market introduction, but we have a full team that will be able to answer a lot of the questions. Feel free to reach out and, and share your thoughts, really looking forward. I'll put a link to the website in the, in the show notes so everyone has access to it. Great. Ana, that's been fascinating. Thanks a million for coming on the podcast today. Thank you. Thanks a lot. It was a pleasure. Thank you. Okay, we've come to the end of the show. Thanks everyone for listening. If you'd like to know more about the Climate Confident podcast, feel free to drop me an email to tomraftery at outlook. com or message me on LinkedIn or Twitter. If you like the show, please don't forget to click follow on it in your podcast application of choice to get new episodes as soon as they're published. Also, please don't forget to rate and review the podcast. It really does help new people to find the show. Thanks. Catch you all next time.