CLEAN FUEL, DIRTY POLITICS: The Suppression of Ammonia Fuel With Greg Vezina

A Canadian inventor successfully adapted a car to run on ammonia 40 years ago. Why did governments suppress this technology? Greg Vezina shares how ammonia could finally lead us to a hydrogen economy without building entirely new infrastructure.

His journey began with a single car conversion in the 1980s that sparked four decades of advocacy for ammonia as a cleaner energy alternative. The chairman and CEO of Hydrofuel Canada shares how he successfully adapted a Chevrolet Impala to run on ammonia and drove it across Canada, only to face political roadblocks despite demonstrating the technology's viability.


The most promising immediate applications for ammonia aren't personal vehicles but industrial sectors—cement production, heavy equipment, garbage collection, and shipping. Projects like the UK's Leeds initiative, with offshore wind generators producing ammonia on-site to fuel barges, demonstrate practical integration with existing systems.

Beyond ammonia, Vezina’s team is pioneering photochemistry—using light instead of heat for chemical processes—which could revolutionise hydrocarbon refining without carbon emissions. This breakthrough would allow continued use of existing infrastructure while eliminating pollution, offering a pragmatic transition pathway.

Want to learn more about the future of clean energy? Visit hydrofuel.com and follow the developments being announced at the Canadian Hydrogen Conference. The energy revolution may not look exactly as we imagined—it might be powered by ammonia instead.

Hi listener. I thought you might enjoy Don Anderson's podcast. Missing Pieces - NPE Life is a podcast that curates stories of and about people who find out, usually through a home DNA test, that someone in their family tree isn't who they thought. They also tell stories of adoptees who've found lost family, or are looking.  The host, Don Anderson, found out in 2021 that his dad wasn't his dad. It changed his life. NPE stands for Not Parent Expected or Non Paternity Event.

Chapters

• 0:00 Ammonia-Powered Car in the 1980s
• 3:51 Politics vs Clean Energy Development
• 9:42 The Economics of Energy Independence
• 13:32 Hydrogen Economy and Ammonia's Potential
• 19:03 China's Lead in Ammonia Technology
• 22:22 Photochemistry: The Next Energy Revolution
• 26:45 Why Government Should Price All Pollution
• 32:08 Canadian Government Response

Transcript

Angela Walker: 0:03

A Canadian inventor who successfully adapted a carteron on ammonia more than 40 years ago, believes the government suppressed its development because of its interest in petroleum, also thwarting moves towards a hydrogen economy. My guest today says a clean, low-carbon energy source with reduced emissions that could help decarbonise industry is possible. I'm journalist Angela Walker, and in this podcast I talk to inspirational people and discuss under-reported issues. My guest today is Greg Vazina, chairman and CEO of Hydrofuel Canada. Greg, thank you so much for coming on the show.

Greg Vezina: 0:42

Thank you very much for inviting me on the show, for coming on the show.

Angela Walker: 0:44

Well, thank you very much for inviting me on the show. Now I want to ask you how we can move towards a hydrogen economy later in the program. But first I want to hear about this car, because take us back to the 1980s. You converted your Chevy to run on ammonia. How did you do it and why did you do it?

Greg Vezina: 1:05

Long story short. I was sitting in a gas station or a garage waiting for my car. I picked up a copy of Popular Mechanics or something and it talked about an idea to use solar energy in Nevada to make a hydrogen fuel to run cars. And there were some serious people involved Jack Nicholson, marlon Brando, joanne Carson, dr Herbert Madurey, who reversed the LED and I thought I want in on this. So I got together my family and some friends and we invested in the technology. I got together my family and some friends and we invested in the technology.

Greg Vezina: 1:45

It turned out the company went out of business because they got in a squabble with the US government, which people are learning you shouldn't try to do and so we decided either to write it off and walk away or to do it ourselves. So we hired the people we could out of Los Angeles. We went to our family farm my wife's family farm in Saskatchewan, and we bought a Chevy Impala and a Chevy truck diesel and we converted both of them to run on ammonia fuel. The gasoline version worked better. It was easier, less complicated. Diesel compression ignition of ammonia, which is a very narrow flame area to ignite, is much more challenging.

Greg Vezina: 2:30

So we said all right, we're going with the car and we started in Edmonton and we drove from Edmonton, alberta, to Ottawa. We arrived in Ottawa the week of our constitution settlement and the governor general then, ed Schreier, who was a very big supporter of alternative energy and what we were doing called a press conference on Constitution Day. The morning that we settled our constitution, after 100 and whatever years and half of parliament, showed up, a number of cabinet ministers and you know the media was there and they said, assuming it's competitive with oil, they'll encourage you to support and their department is working very closely with us. And here we are, 44 years later, and we're still waiting for their department to be working very closely with us.

Greg Vezina: 3:19

But the bottom line is is we drove the car across Canada, then to Montreal and then to Toronto, and I've spent the last 40 years trying to show the world that that ammonia is a fuel, an energy currency, a way to store and use hydrogen, and indeed it's a way to utilize hydrocarbons in non-polluting applications. So really, that's what it's all about. It started out as a kid waiting for his car to be fixed who found out about a technology and chased the dream.

Angela Walker: 3:52

So you made it work. You proved that it could work. You drove it across Canada. You showed it to the politicians. They said they were going to get behind developing it further. What went wrong?

Greg Vezina: 4:11

Politicians, by their very nature, are what I would call, at best, conflicted. You got to dance with the one what run you. So in order to understand policy public policy you have to understand who gets these people elected. And the reality is that it's not the voters, it's whatever special interest group it is. If it's a conservative, it's money. If it's the Socialist or New Democratic Party in Canada, it's the union. If it's the Liberal Party, it's both. So politicians promise one thing and then, when they get elected, they have to pay off the favors and they have to do the things for the constituents that are required to stay elected.

Greg Vezina: 4:52

And a great example of environmental error is the United States policy on ethanol. Al Gore broke the tie vote as vice president and America had an ethanol policy in subsidy. But if you want to stop pollution, you just stop. You don't increase it with technologies that are worse. Ethanol only contains 75% of the energy that was in the diesel fuel and fertilizer used to make it. You want to reduce pollution by 25%? Outlaw it, Don't mandate it. The US is increasing the mandated use in Canada from 10% to 15%. The EU is going down from 7.9% to 4% to 0%. They're outlawing using old-growth wood chips from BC in power plants in the UK and calling it green. So the short answer is politics have been conflicted because they can't be honest, they won't allow level playing field, they won't allow winners to be winners and losers to losers. They want the largest sector of the economy to be the industry of applying for government grants for industry. And that's really what happened. Eventually and Greta Thunberger tells us it will be totally green in 2035, eventually reality hits and you understand, A how big the problem is and, B, how expensive it wanting you to go to jail for life for smoking one marijuana joint. But where were the first 13 states in the United States to legalize marijuana? Republican states? Why? Because they eventually followed the money.

Greg Vezina: 6:38

So what's happened is that we're now in global politics, especially with what's going on in the United States, where countries are going to have to look at baseline economics. They're going to have to look at the cost of their economy of importing technology and energy versus producing. And they'll go back to the Brazil experiment for ethanol, which you know Brazil was bankrupt, 19 largest economy in the world. You know the IMF was taking their schools, hospitals and airports for interest on loan and they said forget it bulldoze the rainforest, we're going to make alcohol fuels, and it took about 10 years to figure out how not to bulldoze it every year. But the bottom line is here we are 30 years later they're the ninth largest economy in the world and there's nothing built on that runs on alcohol in the world that isn't built in Brazil.

Greg Vezina: 7:24

And the IMF said at the end they could spend 10 times as much producing internally as for imports, because imports meant the money left the economy immediately and came back as investment in infrastructure at pennies on the dollar. But if they did it internally, it went through the economy 13 times, creating 390 times the tax percent tax base. So if you do it yourself, even if it costs you more, you're better off. So now we've reached that wonderful nirvana where we're going to move very quickly, I think in probably less than a decade, from 13 countries providing 90% of the world's energy to 90% of the world making their own, and that means 90% of the world is a first world country, Because if you have energy, technology, resources etc. You have an agriculture, you're a first world country and they'll have at least one, and that gives you the other three.

Angela Walker: 8:23

I want to get back to this point really about you know. The political will to invest in developing ammonia as a fuel wasn't there. Do you think it was actually suppressed, this invention of yours?

Greg Vezina: 8:41

Well, there are people that claim that, and they claim that about a water car, and they claim a 200, 200 mile per gallon carburetor was suppressed. But you know, I just think it's just the way things were. Their focus was on canada buying an oil company. We owned an oil company.

Greg Vezina: 8:59

For christ's sakes, a politician who heard that someone had a better technology, who had just spent billions of dollars on taxpayers' money on an oil company, probably didn't want to hear that there was something else. The other thing is that you got to remember. In politics things are cyclical. So hydrogen was really big in 1980 and 81. By 83 or 84, it was dead. In 2000, hydrogen was really big for three or four years, was dead. Here we are in the same basic cycle that started again in 2020.

Greg Vezina: 9:31

The problem is that most new technologies are science experiments. They're not economically viable at grid scale, and that's really one of the things that we've learned and we've dealt with with the technologies we have today. We've defeated grid scale, being better and more economic because of transportation and storage. We're now at the point where we can clean hydrocarbons or make ammonia at end use, right where they use it, the day before they use it. Well, that eliminates two thirds of your costs. So now, all of a sudden, cleaner technologies are viable based on simple mathematics, not government subsidies, not incentives, not politicians that come and go. So that's the really important thing that's happened.

Greg Vezina: 10:18

I don't think I was suppressed as much as the whole sector was ignored. But understand the US military dida huge project in the 1960s on ammonia as a fuel. It was called the Energy Depot and although the idea ended up being not executed properly, the science was proven. They were losing four out of five fuel convoys going to the front line, not accounting the life, the loss of life. So they wanted to find a way to make fuel at the front line. So some genius said let's drop a portable tokamak nuclear reactor at the front line and make the fuel. What can we make? They figured out they could make ammonia. They hired GM Continental Aviation Engineering. They made ammonia fuel cells, ammonia engines. They proved it worked. And then it got to the Senate committee and some congressman asked the military guy what happens when they blow up the portable nuclear reactor and he said we won't fight for that land for 10,000 years. And then out went the baby with the bathwater. So just because that particular way to do it was proven to be a little out there, they threw it all away.

Greg Vezina: 11:24

But America came back to this in 1980, 81 as well. A great deal of research said we should do this. Of course it was ignored. It came back again in 2000,. As I said, not only hydrogen but ammonia and ammonia energy association was started and off it went. Today there is ammonia powered ships being sold. There are conversion systems to convert bunker fuel oil ships to run on ammonia or alternative fuels or a combination. There are coal powered plants where they're using ammonia to reduce emissions. So what's happened is what we said should happen has happened, but it's only happened at the industrial scale. It hasn't happened at the industrial scale. It hasn't happened at the consumer level and, to be honest, the reason we converted a car to run on ammonia instead of a generator was because the media wants you to do something sexy like run your car. The last place you're going to use ammonia is in a passenger car in a major urban center. There are so many other places to use it where it's safer, cheaper and you don't risk a Hindenburg experiment.

Angela Walker: 13:01

How viable is it to really shift over what we're doing worldwide really? But I'm quite interested, obviously, because I'm in the UK. What is the potential of ammonia here? I mean it's cleaner, it's greener. Could we potentially move over to it? Is it feasible for us to have it here?

Greg Vezina: 13:22

Well, people have to understand a fundamental fact how big the energy sector is. It's $10, $11 trillion a year out of $110 trillion global GDP. It is very, very, very, very, very big. So there are numerous specific applications today where this works better than anything else we have. Keep in mind, though we have fossil fuels. They exist.

Greg Vezina: 13:57

When you're going to make a form of energy from something, you've got to make it from start to finish. You got to make it from start to finish. You need to generate the electricity, and then you need to convert it. You know the water and the hydrogen and oxygen, and then okay, so there are places where this will work today and there very low carbon content, natural gas, and we found out there are trillions and trillions of metric tons of this stuff around the world. Now you got to go down 10,000 meters to get it. So there will be places where very low cost hydrogen is available, either because of cheap electricity or stranded electricity.

Greg Vezina: 14:52

And the third thing is that we have, you know, hundreds, if not thousands of years of hydrocarbons. What happens if we develop the technology to utilize, to refine them without using heat and electricity made from hydrocarbons, and then find a way to utilize them at end use without emitting the carbon. Now, all of a sudden we've got this huge supply of hydrocarbons that we've been told by people has to stay in the ground. They don't have to stay in the ground. There'll be less pollution if you eliminate upstream and downstream carbon emissions from the midstream, even if it's 7% instead of the 3% industry says. Then there would be building a windmill, you know, or building a solar farm, because you got to mine the materials and da, da, da, da da. So we really, we really have three major sources of feedstocks to move to a hydrogen economy.

Greg Vezina: 15:45

Except you can't get to a hydrogen economy with hydrogen because hydrogen doesn't like to be hydrogen. It likes to be hydrogen and something oxygen and water, nitrogen and ammonia, carbon and hydrocarbons. So although ammonia contains half of the energy density of diesel, it is one and a half times more hydrogen than hydrogen itself liquefied, using 40% of the energy to do it. So ammonia is the easy way to use hydrogen. But then the question becomes are we going to build this massive infrastructure like we have for the oil and gas industry? Remember $11 trillion a year for the last how many years? We're talking about half a quadrillion dollars to replace that infrastructure and if you're using renewables, that's every 15 years, except they need three to one for storage and regeneration to replace baseload. So we're coming up with half a trillion dollars every five years. That's 100 trillion a year. That's the entire GDP to go green.

Angela Walker: 16:50

Could we not integrate, like the hydrogen economy, with the existing economy and maybe just be phasing that out so that we are going greener, we are going towards hydrogen but we're not having a massive switchover. We're kind of allowing things to run their course a bit more?

Greg Vezina: 17:12

That's, in fact, the answer. The answer is we're not going to throw away this hydrocarbon infrastructure and industry we have. It's there and it's going to continue. And the reason it's going to continue is global demand is not leveled up, it's just going up and up and up and up, and we need to supply this energy. But at the same time, you're absolutely correct there are a number of places where we could start replacing the pollutingness, the worst of hydrocarbons with renewable hydrogen stored in ammonia and manufactured as close as possible to end use.

Greg Vezina: 17:47

You know the plan of taking your electricity in Newfoundland, Canada, and making ammonia and shipping it to Germany to convert it back to electricity. If you do your grade three math and science, it's not really really good. And here are the numbers. Let's assume that electrolysis is 50% 60% efficiency and let's assume that you can convert that hydrogen into ammonia at not the 65% efficiency of Haber, but let's say another 60%. Okay, now you've got to ship that ammonia from Newfoundland to Germany. Well, the World Bank says it costs $9 a kilogram to ship hydrogen as hydrogen and $3 a kilogram to ship hydrogen and ammonia. But you can make ammonia for under $3 a kilogram with electricity up to $0.08. So you'll make it in Germany. You won't ship it, so there won't be this large deal yeah.

Greg Vezina: 18:46

Where it will be used very quickly. You've got large, huge offshore wind capacity. In the UK there's a Leeds project now that has 65 wind generators on the ocean that make ammonia on site that will fuel barges, wow. So you don't have to have any domestic fuel production and storage and transportation and warehousing in the port. Everything's offshore and if something goes wrong you're not going to pollute the ocean with an ammonia spill. Well, that's one great example. There are other great examples in industry. Jcb has just put out a hydrogen engine, a wonderful product for big heavy equipment. In the cement industry, in the garbage industry. You have huge demand for fuel. You have centralized fuel and you have dedicated routes, private roads. Those are places where we can probably replace as much as 40% of the hydrocarbons we use with ammonia. So there are really really low places with low hanging fruit.

Angela Walker: 19:46

And I want to ask you, because we've been talking about, like Europe and Canada, but the biggest polluters, as we know, are China. Russia is a huge polluter Are they, are these countries going to get on board with a hydrogen kind of economy?

Greg Vezina: 20:11

board with a hydrogen kind of economy? I would say no, or not likely in the short to medium term. For Russia, I will say that China is already so far ahead of the rest of the world. It's ridiculous. I mean, they are running coal plant, they're building, you know, a coal plant a day, but they're starting to run them on between 20 and 50% ammonia. They you know, they have this. They have ammonia buses, they have ammonia fuel cells, they have ammonia cars, they have ammonia generators. China's an importer of energy. So again, they've done the math. It costs 10 times as much to import energy as it costs them over a generation to make it themselves. They're making it themselves, china has a huge renewable energy industry.

Greg Vezina: 20:54

They probably produce half or more of all of the solar and wind technology used in the planet Earth. China is going to be a very, very big competitor to economies that don't evolve.

Angela Walker: 21:10

That's really interesting. I had no idea, actually, that China were on board, because we're often, you know, in the UK we import so much stuff that's produced in factories in China and one of the real concerns people have is about the carbon footprint, for you know the cheap products that we're having and you know people don't seem to want to let go of having those cheap products. So to know that they are moving over to hydrogen is definitely a good thing. So what are the biggest challenges do you think Greg are like moving over? Do you think it's like a mindset thing of getting people to kind of accept that ammonia is a good way to produce energy?

Greg Vezina: 21:58

I don't want to be insulting, but the last place you need to go is to the consumer. Okay, the disinformation potential, it's just you. Go to the industries that can do it today, that are already doing it, that see the benefits. Okay, I'll give you another good example. Why would you take electricity, convert it to hydrogen, put it in a blast furnace in a steel mill to reduce your emissions, when you can just use the electricity in an arc furnace? Okay, you have to match the utilization technology with the demand. And so again, I say you know hydrogen passenger vehicles have been a disaster. Okay, say you know hydrogen passenger vehicles have been a disaster. Okay, every hydrogen bus test that's going on now is having challenges. They're finding out that the fuel storage is great, but all those metal piping and fueling systems in the hydrogen bus leak because hydrogen will go right through metal. Every high-speed hydrogen train that's ever been built has run once, set a record and then shut down.

Greg Vezina: 23:11

Okay, why Grade three math it costs 10 times as much to use it versus clean diesel, supposedly Well the fact of the matter is is that the hydrocarbon combustion technology is so clean, it's so good I mean, it is very good. So the best applications, I believe, are hybrids. And there's one very important reason An electric battery system will lose as much as half of its energy, providing heating and cooling for the battery and the vehicle. A hybrid has a small internal combustion engine, very inefficient, wastes 70% of the energy in heat. So having a small internal combustion engine and a smaller battery allows you to run 50, 100 kilometers on the battery. But if you need heater cooling stream heater cooling it comes from waste heat from the internal combustion engine.

Greg Vezina: 24:10

There is a place where it will work, but wait, hydrogen is $30 a kilo retail. That's equivalent to gasoline at 30 bucks a gallon. So while it's a nice thought and a nice experiment, the bottom line is where hydrogen is going to be used, is where it can be used, and it ain't going to be used for personal passenger vehicles, in my opinion, until you can fill your vehicle up with water. Once you can fill your vehicle up with water and turn it into hydrogen, that's when it will be used. But to be honest, angela, before that, we will put diesel in a truck. We will use light to crack the diesel into pure carbon, run that engine on hydrogen and then when you fill up your diesel truck, they will pay you for the carbon you made cheaper than they can make it in a factory and ship it.

Greg Vezina: 25:04

And that's what photochemistry is. And that's the second technology we've developed. We developed a way to make ammonia very cheap green using electricity, or to make ammonia cheap using cheap hydrogen, using a third of the energy that you use with today's technology. But on the other side, at University of Toronto, we're working on photochemistry, and simply what that means is the world today is run on heat and electricity, thermal chemistry and electrochemistry, and 80% of it comes from hydrocarbons. We can either find a way to make those without pollution or find a way to not even use them, which you can do with light and LEDs that run 24-7. All of a sudden, we can refine oil and everything else without carbon pollution. Now you can do exactly the same thing at end use. You can still use the existing pipelines and infrastructure that we've got a half a quadrillion dollars invested in for the next 50 years as we evolve.

Greg Vezina: 26:05

So again, people got to understand that we're spending millions of dollars doing basic research at a university, not commercial, not technology readiness level seven, eight, nine, one, two and three. Why are we doing it? To be honest, angela, because nobody's doing it. Companies don't invest in basic, fundamental science. Today, you know where the greatest inventions in the world have all come from Basic science. So we got a win with ammonia, but we got a bigger win with using light to replace all heat and electricity generated from hydrocarbons. Now it'll only take 50 years for that technology to be adopted by industry and consumers, because the sector is so big. But to finish back to your point, yes, yes, yes, there are many places where we can use emerging technologies or even old technologies with existing technologies in combination to reduce emissions, to reduce costs and to reduce imports.

Angela Walker: 27:13

And that's what we want, isn't it? We want to reduce emissions, we want a cleaner, greener fuel. We know that the planet's in crisis, um, with all these emissions that we're creating, um, and you're saying that all the research is being done at a university level. Is there any way that we're gonna see this kind of research, um sped up so that we can see this cleaner fuel like rolled out sooner? Because the longer that we wait, the longer that we can see this cleaner fuel rolled out sooner. Because the longer that we wait, the longer that we leave it, the more damage is being done and the harder it's going to be to turn it around.

Greg Vezina: 27:49

I'm actually very, very positive. For the first time in 40 years, there is a race. There is a Manhattan project going on in both ammonia production and utilization, but, more importantly, in photochemistry. There are 50 countries in the world that use photochemistry and light to clean water in ways that could never have been done in the past at cost a fraction of anything we do today. So there are emerging technologies that will allow us to get there, and the secret, as I've said in the beginning, is will the government please get out of the way?

Greg Vezina: 28:35

Put a real price on all pollution, not just from hydrocarbons, from petroleum. What about hydrocarbons elsewhere? Don't call renewable natural gas green. All you're doing is stripping the gas off a garbage dump and leaving all the garbage and claiming you're making improvement. That is total BS. So I think we have reached the point, as I said, where money counts, where the economics count, where balance of trade counts, where imports and exports count and where governments actually are starting to encourage industry to dive deep into these emerging technologies. Hydrofuel is about to announce an agreement in the EU with a major European university to develop, co-develop, the work we're doing with the University of Toronto. I can't release details now, but we're featured at the Canadian Hydrogen Conference in Edmonton, alberta, april 23rd to 24th and there will be some announcements there.

Angela Walker: 29:37

Oh, that's great news. I want to just come back to what you were saying. So really, you would like to see governments around the world putting in place penalties for polluters in order to encourage more investment in green energy. Is that your point you're making?

Greg Vezina: 30:04

for a life cycle accounting. I'm not paying for somebody else's pollution. You pay for your own. For example, to be hysteric, I have a car that runs on nuclear waste. I want a permit. Well, the government say, fine, it's a million dollars a mile. Sir, how many miles would you like to drive your nuclear waste car? Nobody, nobody, should pay for someone else's price.

Greg Vezina: 30:24

What we need is a real price on all pollution and then let the marketplace decide Because, remember, consumers will go to the lowest cost option. If the lowest cost option is because the government subsidizes an industry to pollute, instead of making the industry pay for it, where they're going to go, let capitalism do what capitalism actually can do Find the lower cost options, get out of the way. And you know, in the EU you've got a price on carbon of even $20 a ton. Well, make it apply to everybody, not just hydrocarbons and, to be honest, these. And you don't need it. And, to be honest, these emerging technologies don't need a price on carbon. The economics are becoming so astounding that they won't even need it. The loss of productivity to the price of pollution in economies. Everyone will move to the right solution if they have a clue of where it is Right now. We don't have that knowledge, but we're getting there.

Angela Walker: 31:37

Greg, how can people find out?

Greg Vezina: 31:38

more about Hydrofuel Canada and the work that you're up to? Well, thank you for the question. The best place is on our website, which is nh3fuelcom or hydrofuelcom, which will flip you over, and then just look at the news feed. There's details of our maps tech. There's details of our collaboration with the University of Toronto. There's the research we did at the University of Ontario, colorado State, georgia Tech. What's there is the proof is in the pudding, and if you want to know the truth, you've got to go and find the scientific research. You've got to look at the science, and science is more about proving what doesn't work as opposed to what does, and that's what we really, really think needs to be done. We need to prove what works.

Angela Walker: 32:20

Greg, thank you so much for joining us. Thank you Well. I asked the Canadian government for their response and they sent me this statement. It says Canada's hydrogen strategy sets out a framework for Canada to be a global hydrogen leader, cementing this low carbon, zero emission fuel technology as a key part of our path to our climate targets. Our country has the potential to be a long-term, stable and reliable global supplier of clean energy such as hydrogen. Advancing the development of hydrogen production and its derivatives, including ammonia, the Canadian government statement says, will support Canada's clean energy transition, boost our economy, create good jobs and foster innovation.

Angela Walker: 33:02

Nr can invest in research programmes and activities to enable and support the development of clean energy infrastructure, and you can find out more about what the Canadian government has to say on their website. I'm going to put a link to that in the show notes. Also put a link in the show notes to Greg Fazzona's hydro fuel website as well. Thank you so much for joining me. You've been listening to angela walker in conversation. Please take a moment to subscribe, comment and like this podcast. That means the algorithm will show it to more people and I hope you've enjoyed the program. You can find more of my work on my website, angelawalkerreportscom, until next time. Take care.