A reality check for offshore wind

Skyborn chief executive Patrick Lammers tells reNEWS editor Stephen Dunne why the offshore wind sector is in trouble, how it can be revived and what his company's strategy is for future projects.

Transcript

SPEAKER_01 0:01

Welcome to the Renews Podcast with me, Stephen Dunn. On today's show, I'm in the offshore wind city of Hamburg to investigate what has gone wrong in the industry if it can be fixed. And Taiwan company plans to navigate the sector's stormy season. You are very welcome to this, the inaugural re news podcast. And where better to launch than arguably the capital of offshore wind itself, Hamburg. A re-news pod has been a long time coming. Better late than ever, I say. And I hope you'll come along for the ride in regular episodes where I will bring you the news and analysis that matters in the renewables industry. As I strolled around Hamburg in what was late November with the city's famed Christmas market under construction, it was time to reflect on what has been a difficult year for offshore wind. There is no doubt the sector is in need of some festive cheer. So to find out whether Offshore Wind can get back on Santa's good list, I sat down with Patrick Lambert. Patrick is the chief executive of Offshore Wind Infrastructure Platform Skyborne, a company that has developed and built projects across the globe. So who better than Patrick to give us his views on the state of the sector? Patrick, it's a pleasure to have you as the first ever guest on the ReNews uh podcast. I'm sure among your achievements this uh ranks really highly. How do you feel?

SPEAKER_00 1:54

I I'm afraid so, yes. I mean I didn't know that this is the first time somebody from the wind industry has a blog with you guys, but hey, if I'm the one who breaks the ice, then that's all good.

SPEAKER_01 2:03

Thank you very much. Well, unfortunately, I guess I'm launching the podcast uh at a challenging time for the industry. Today we've published our global offshore wind report in Renews, which shows a really difficult picture in the sector. Construction delays, projects being cancelled, failed tenders, difficulties reaching FID, job losses, etc. You know, this comes from a position a few years ago where the sector was really on an upward curve. So, Patrick, I'm keen to get your view on what's gone wrong.

SPEAKER_00 2:34

Yeah, I think um I don't think anything has gone wrong, really. Um look, in the end, uh you have to produce electrons. That was the whole thing. Clean, green electrons. And you can do that with offshore wind in a very good way. Uh can be a very good mix, uh, part of the mix of the energy household of any country. And I think what has changed is that the overhype and the willingness to go opportunistic audaciously into projects of people who have no credibility of delivering this sort of stuff. I think that was actually has happened. And if that's wrong or right, I think what is right is that there's now becoming capital discipline into this market. I think that in this market is right that we start standardizing and industrializing. We started one and a half years ago with that conversation. I'm happy to see that that narrative is now also the narrative of the OEMs because every time they came with a bigger turbine was really driven by developers who optimistically said, I just need a bigger turbine because then I can make the numbers work for non-existing wind farms for non-existing turbines. So that's not wrong, that's actually what people have done. And everybody was on the bandwagon. I mean, it's people are like that because look at today, everybody's relief as we speak, because Nvidia yesterday posted more revenues than we thought, but the AI is a bubble like that as well. AI, I mean, you go to a round table of Vestas where I was yesterday, people start talking about AI, totally unrelated to where we were talking about. But you know, this is great to talk about AI, and another thing ago, it was really great to talk about offshore wind. Governments. I remember my conversation with the Dutch government or the German government where we would talk about concessions, seabed concessions, and then people in government, but mainly civil servants, and would say, Oh, but the seabed is from everybody, so we should ask money for the lease. Yes, that's a great idea to get revenues. So they got a lot of revenues out there. But they were not real, by the way, but they were commitments, and all those revenues all now went to the state, or let's say in bonds or whatever, or penalties or fees. It all has to come out the selling of the electron. And guess what was already two years a very big ticket item? And before that, in 22, when the Russians entered Ukraine, affordability and security of energy. And you know, if you look at the price which has gone up since that time, and also what the government has lost, all the governments lost in revenue because electricity price was also for a long time an income tool for governments, and they have to get that out. Only in Germany it's 43 billion, which they can't actually get over the electricity bill anymore. So, this is what was really happened. There's not anything wrong, there's a reality check.

SPEAKER_01 5:16

It sounds like the situation we're in is as a result of actions in the industry and actions by government. Where was the original sin? Was it industry becoming overhyped, pushing for larger turbines, continuously slashing the levelized cost of energy, and then governments seeing that and thinking, let's cash in here, or was it the other way around?

SPEAKER_00 5:44

No, I no, I literally had that conversation years ago already in the Netherlands where people said I want a million per wind turbine and it was just a revenue income, and and and then everybody went on that bandwagon. Then there was a time that everybody was competing with each other for those tenders, and it was like Bonanza because everybody wanted to be in there. Then oil and gas came in because they thought, you know, this is going to be great, people want to have all these electrons. At that point in time, Shell was stating we're going to be the biggest utility in the world. That was a statement of Shell. A good friend of mine made that statement. And, you know, then it gets real, let's say, uh, Rückenwind, as we say in Germany, and then the thing starts flying, right? And then everybody gets into it because everybody sees the same thing. But you have to remember, nothing was really built in that space of oh, we're gonna do the 20. I mean, people are talking about 27 megawatt turbines. Supply chain people saying, What kind of ships do I need to build for that? And you had the cabinet chef of Frans Timmerman saying in a meeting in the Netherlands, oh you know, guys, just build the 27, it's gonna be fine. And then there was a reality check a couple of months ago on what are the real costs of supply chain then? What are the real costs of material? How do you depreciate all your RD? I mean, in the end, it's also a money game. This is an infrastructure. We are an infrastructure platform, we invest in it. It's an infrastructure game, it's long-term, need to be money going in there, lots of money, and the money needs to be able to get out as well. Because who are really the people who invest in this? This is like pension funds, that sort of stuff. So it's also money from normal people who work every day.

SPEAKER_01 7:16

As you say, we're we're in a period of correction or recalibration at the moment in the sector where we're seeing, you know, projects be cancelled and leases handed back, and you know, companies pivoting to networks and things like that rather than new renewables. How much longer do you think this correction period is going to last and how deep will it get?

SPEAKER_00 7:39

Well, I mean, a lot of people ask me in my previous life as well what's going to be the price of electricity and gas, and you know, I can never tell you that because I would be so rich. I don't have to work. Uh I still have to work. How long that will take? I mean, what is very clear, you know, we are of course a GIP BlackRock company. We, of course, our shareholders are very solid people and but they're very straight shooters as well. Now, where you see, for instance, countries compete again with tenders and that sort of stuff, and failing actually, because they lost more or less the plot on how this works, you have also money competing. So, if I look at the amount of money which recently has been ploughed into AI data centers, that sort of infrastructure, I mean that's also a sector where you plow in 40 billion, but you get it back in four or five years. And in offshore wind, with all the regulations, with the very long lead times, with the insecurity of permitting, and if it really comes to permit, with the huge cost of grid, with all the legal cost, and your uncertainty about the European Union giving you another layer of let's say nice regulations on 30% need to be made in Europe and la la la. Actually, putting on infrastructure platforms you set up the supply chain which fits for us, which is really actually weird. You look at money invested, and the first time you get some money back, is between if you're really good and you have really good prices for your electricity, because that was all circles around how much do you get for your electricity. Between 12 and 20 years, then there is also money starting to compete for other stuff. So, in and in that context, I believe that you will see, and also the context of accounting rules. I mean, we live in this world now, this the business grows up. Oh, by the way, it's a company. You will see that a lot of companies have to start writing off what they have investing, and then it all becomes, let's say, non-financeable. I mean, I see developers, which are infrastructure funds, just dissolving companies, and therefore a lot of projects which are still out there, which have a little flag on them with players, will just say no. You're seeing the oil and gas companies just move out. There's one left, this is Total Energy, is a partner we work with. They are, let's say, in it for the long game, very different strategy than the other oil and gas, but they're already out. We know that some of the infrastructure funds they want to quit because there's other money to be made. And I think, therefore, we're not going to see the end of this. And my prediction, the way I forecast, and also how we set up the company, is that this will go on for another two years, and then everything will be weeded out, and possibly the ministries have found their feet as well and get realistic about what is the real cost of offshore wind as part of the energy mix, which you have to have, because we're way beyond the point of that we can go back to fossil fuels. Now we have actually, I think, been over tipped over the tipping point, and we have to start more investing in this now, and for the foreseeable future, that's going to cost money, and that's people need to realize that.

SPEAKER_01 10:39

Looking at this, some people would be forgiven for thinking that the business case is entirely broken in offshore wind. Is it broken and is there any scenario under which we could rebuild the business case to create a sustainable industry?

SPEAKER_00 10:57

Well, I mean, if you I mean if if the business case will be broken. So, what's the business case? The business case is what's the capacity you're going to build from how much capital and what is the price you get for your electrons over what time? It's a very simple equation. We still see in the market that we can get a good price for our electricity over longer term, but we also see that a lot of people will not be able to do that. And that's just the way the electricity market works with all the regulations around it. Offshore wind is always going to be more expensive than onshore, and therefore, you know, it has a higher capital need, and therefore, you need to get more for your electron, or you have to get a contract for difference. So you actually always play in a bandwidth, which actually makes your business case work over the long time. And if you don't get that done, there will be no offshore wind. People will not plow in the money, or the government have to say, I will do it myself, which I can't see them do that. So that needs to get very clear because otherwise all those business cases will die. And therefore, these projects will be cancelled. All the investments which you have been doing will be written off. And and I mean, if that's too much to write off and you can't sustain your organization anymore, you will go broke and there will be no companies.

SPEAKER_01 12:16

So, Patrick, it sounds like there is a role for government in how we revitalize the offshore wind sector. And my question to you really is how do we rebuild offshore wind?

SPEAKER_00 12:28

If we use the word rebuild, I think that's not necessary because I think there's a lot of uh parts in there which are fully functioning, but they function against a certain cost, and they function with a certain risk. So if the government, it's very simple, sets out a framework in which we can operate in, let's say, a way where we have we know what the risk is we're actually going into, we know what the financial framework around it, what the regulation framework is around it, then it can function. If they set a framework which is far from realism, where you, for instance, said I want a billion for concession fee, um, I'm not gonna support any pricing with CFDs double-sided, which on the long run will actually press suppress prices for the consumers. Um, when they say we will give every day a new regulation and we never give you certainty about the permit, then certainly nobody will invest because this sector is now getting mature. So it needs to be very clear what the framework is going to be, and then you have a choice: do you want to compete in that framework or not? And this is what the government needs to do: they need to get really real on the cost as well of their of the grid companies and how much return they can make, and what is the efficiency and effectivity of those companies, because that's getting way out of control as well, and that will be all impediments for a successful offshore wind sector which provides you with security of supply.

SPEAKER_01 13:54

In January, the heads of the North Seas governments will meet in this city in Hamburg, and Wind Europe has you know said that we need a new deal for offshore wind. What you've just outlined there, are they the key elements of this new deal, or is there anything else that you need from governments?

SPEAKER_00 14:13

No, I what I really would like is that we get realistic stuff. So, yesterday as well, there were still a lot of people completely believing in you know, you can't see offshore wind without hydrogen. So if you have negative prices, the the negative price is not base load prices, guys. I mean, people need base loads. Um, hydrogen is still 18 too much more times more expensive than gas, will be competing for a long time. So, governments need to be get sobered up on what is really possible. They need to, you know, in shoulder lock make sure that they actually set a framework whereby they abide to their own laws, but you know, to make sure in a European way as well that we get an idea on how we can do this. I mean, they've done that before also in the oil and gas industry, it's very clear how that works, but you see that they now take different ways in that as well. As me, you're from Ireland, so you close you're on the British Isles, if you like it or not.

SPEAKER_01 15:09

But I know that's not that's not acceptable.

SPEAKER_00 15:11

Yeah, but I mean I mean you look at look at that as well. You see countries, you know, they see the opportunity to take profits from that, and you know, the whole sector just leaves. And that will be exactly the same for offshore if they take a lot of profits out of it, and they don't set a framework in which you can have a forecastable return on your on your money. I mean, there will be no investment. And the let's say the private money which is out there, it's much larger than the public money, which you have to get via taxes from a country. So if you underwrite certain risk, you will get that money released, and it will take different returns than you maybe now see at very high risk. High risk, high return. Low risk, lower return. So that makes also an electron cheaper. It's it's a capital game, it's infrastructure, and countries need to understand it. And it will be fantastic if the North Sea, I think it's really an opportunity, it always has been an opportunity for the countries surrounding the North Sea to take that as an energy hub. You know, there's a lot of infrastructure already there. It's also nice to have a real good control on there with our little Russian friends uh, you know, going around in those places. It's already, you know, for a long time very clear what belongs to who in the North Sea because of the oil and gas exploration since the 60s and the 70s of the last century. So there's all the things already that are fundamentals, but I need to start really getting real on what kind of risks you can offload to people like uh Skyborne or not.

SPEAKER_01 16:41

Are you encouraged that already some governments seem to be moving in this direction around, you know, consistent two-sided CFTs? Germany, the Netherlands are starting to look at things or starting to look at risks offshore, like the wake effect issue in the North Sea, and try to tackle that. Is that something that encourages you?

SPEAKER_00 17:01

Yeah, I've no, but I think that is all a really a necessity. And I think the sector, there's companies like us, Wind Europe, our lobby lobbyists, need to work with governments to get that to a good narrative. Because the people in the countries need to start understanding that as well. Um the the energy markets and the energy world is already very complex for most people in our country, and nobody really gets interested because it doesn't really do well on TikTok or Instagram, the energy market, you know. So there's not a lot of people really want to, and you know, electricity, you need it, but you don't want to think about it. So let's let's face that. But we need to get the narrative out there, what's needed over a long time, and by when we are completely secure of you know, green energy for an affordable price with a certain security, and what does that mix look like for the country around the North Sea? And I think that's where offshore is a chapter they should really get their arms around. And I think as well, if they don't get it right, they will have to get it right in two or three years because all those targets they have will not be met, and that will be a giant wake-up call. So for me, it's also a bit comfortable because if you if you don't do it, then it will bite you anyway, and you will have to come back to the sector.

SPEAKER_01 18:17

And yet we see some projects and leases being designed around the terms you've just described, like the French auction A07, two-sided CFD on offer, but now the no developers or infrastructure companies showed up to bid. We see Orsted in the UK with an index linked CFD walk away from Horn C4. Why is that still happening if governments are doing their part?

SPEAKER_00 18:45

It's uh very much apparently not making the business case work. So either the CBED is not good enough or you can't optimize enough on that seabed or on that plot, either the grid costs are too high, uh, and that sort of stuff comes into play as well. So you have to do the whole end-to-end. And if somewhere it gets really out of whack with normality because of the location, that location then doesn't work with that CFD. It's just that simple. And I think a lot of people therefore will have to look also what is yes now real quality of the sites which are out there. And I think a lot of sites, also here in the German Nazi, they will not happen. They will not happen.

SPEAKER_01 19:26

There is if we're to have a New Deal, any deal has two sides. We've talked about the industry's role in creating the situation that the industry finds itself in, and we've talked about the government's role and what it needs to do to create the terms of a New Deal. But what does the industry have to do to be part of a New Deal to get the policy certainty it needs?

SPEAKER_00 19:52

What must industry do to I I think that that's where our narrative of Skyborne fits. I mean, we need to first of all engage with the governments to make sure they understand where we are. So you need to standardize, you need to industrialize, and the governments need to really be clear about okay, how long does a permit take? What do I give you facilities and harbors, and you know, how do I get all those costs and lead times down? Because I mean, if you have a lead time of 10 to 15 years, that already implies a huge risk because you don't know what the world looks like in 15 years. And you actually have to qualify with a technology which in 10 years is completely outdated. So I think where the industry can demonstrate we are fast, like I already said. People thinking about a nuclear power plant, I tell everybody, guys, give me a permit today, and within two years I built you a gigawatt. And I think that's where the governments need to start thinking about what the government's velocity is. How fast are they, so we can really get that going? Because the lifetime of a wind farm is 35 years. Even if you have uh uh the right-wing people saying we're going to build everywhere nuclear, well, by the time they have finalized their nuclear plans, I mean we've run out of lifetime in our wind farms and everybody's happy. I don't believe they will, but anyway, because I think still offshore wind is much cheaper than nuclear. So, uh, but we already have produced then for 35 years clean energy for in an affordable way, which I think is a very good alternative to all the other stuff.

SPEAKER_01 21:23

Wind Europe talked about offering the government the the carrot of a 30% reduction in offshore wind costs by 2040 if a solid pipeline of mostly CFD-backed uh volume.

SPEAKER_00 21:37

No, but that will cost something you say, well, you have to reduce. That will happen anyway. If you have, let's say, standardization, you can have everything you can think about the mono piles or the jacks, the transition pieces, maybe no transition at all anymore, the turbines, the blades, that industrialization. I mean, that's going to happen when you make very clear what you can build. If the government will say you can build between 15 megawatt and 18 megawatt, and not more, not higher, that's it. And I think that sort of framing sets out all the wild ideas is going to be gone. People going to also OEM is going to say, okay, I'm going to invest now in a factory, it just spits out turbines. So this feeds nicely. They have been investing all the time in RD to get the next big thing. I mean, electricity is a commodity, therefore, commoditize that supply chain.

SPEAKER_01 22:29

On the back of the idea of offshore wind and electricity being a commodity, Skyborne has identified what it believes is a strategic move in the sector. Can you tell us a little bit more about Skyborne's strategy and exactly how it's going to execute?

SPEAKER_00 22:44

Yeah, I mean, it's also a bit like where we are fortunate to have a little heritage. We have, let's say, good projects we've done, they are running, we have we are with very solid partners in France, in Taiwan, in the US, so you know, and we are more or less on state-of-the-art of the technology you need. So we said we're going to look at first of all sites where there's proper government in place, where there is, let's say, as much as possible framing in place. We look at sites if they are really fitting to our strategy, which is fixed bottom. 15 megawatts, but not over that, not any silly stuff. Existing technology, so no floating or anything exotic, we don't do. We take, therefore, then in a de-risk mode, every 12 to 18 months an FID on the project and therefore ducktail continuously our supply chain. So if we are then with one project finalizing our fundaments, we move our team to the next project. So we have no underutilization of our organization. Therefore, we can be much leaner than anybody else. Um, and you know, we can attract capital because also of our parent company in a way that nobody else can. So I think that's a very healthy strategy, it's a very simple strategy, everybody can understand it. And then you need partners as well. So we look for partners where we work with uh we found already a few, and and that's why Jenneker, for instance, is a very high-quality project.

SPEAKER_01 24:08

Using Genneker as an example, uh, can you give me some specific ways in which your strategy has come into force around that project?

SPEAKER_00 24:18

Well, I think I think, first of all, if I look at let's say we we've we have 100% of that project and it's almost a gigawatt. So we also know you know, and it's under a special regime because it's near coast. So we also have to carry the cost of half of the grid and the substation. So that's a lot of money. On the other hand, we don't have to pay a lease fee, but we you know, we as Skyborne we have been years and years and years developing this. It's a fantastic high-quality project. The Baltic Sea also has some, let's say, quality better than the North Sea because we have less wake. And also, when the wind has passed, the prevailing winds are west, southwest, west, northwest. When the windfield has gone over the North Sea, it will end up with us. So, you know, the prices will be better for us because there's much more capacity on the North Sea. So, from that end, you know, it's it's really in the winter, maybe you have the east winter, and we're the first one to profit. So, from that end, I mean it's a good project. We look at people to find out. So, I can't give you names because of the confidential, but we look at people still want green energy for their business, uh, and those sort of people look at it. But everybody's also looking at okay, how do we how can we get in and what is the business case? Nobody gets in anymore at a seven or eight percent. Everybody's looking north of ten, and that sets the sort of prices of the electron. There is appetite, I think still healthy appetite, but also because this is a very high-quality project. We have fantastic engineers in our house here and fantastic developers. It's really, yeah, there's always risk, but I mean this is a low-risk project because we've done so well and we're looking for the white seabed, the right configuration, that sort of stuff. And our partners are with us there. So there is still appetite, European, even Asian appetite here. Our strategy is we want to be as much as possible, let's say, in the country where we operate. So we have selected also German local suppliers. We have therefore selected the local harbors to do that. We also look abroad. If it's let's say pieces of stuff which is a commodity, we look abroad to actually be that supplied, and you know, and then it has to weigh up to the transport cost. Um we have very clear conversations. Everybody knows that Siemens is going to uh deliver those windtbines on the possibility we actually contract it with them 14 megawatts, they want to deliver 15.5 because of a power package. We look at it, but you know they need to be able to deliver it. We have deep conversations with them on that. We have also built together 50 Hz offshore substation and finance that for a large part. So I think that's where you see our really our uh strategy work. It also works because we have a project organization with a lot of skyborn people on skyborne payroll, and where we say okay, this is too much uh volatility. We actually have external consultants help us. But that's a minority, it's really our own people, and we will move that people once they've done Jenica to the next project. So, this is where you see our strategy in action.

SPEAKER_01 27:15

You recently visited uh Mingyang in China. Can you tell me about what you saw on your visit there and how the rise of the Asian OEMs and Asian fabricators fits in with this idea of relying on proven technologies, standardized technologies that are well established?

SPEAKER_00 27:37

Yeah, I mean I mean, first of all, if you're let's say leading a company and you're closing your eyes and you sit in your office, you go nowhere, and you talk to yourself, you're always right, but you won't get far as a company. That's first. So I always venture out and go foraging to make sure I have the eyes everywhere and ears and you know see the world because you cannot ignore China, it's a massive production powerhouse, obviously. And what did I see? What I saw is actually quite interesting because we we spent a lot of time on the road as well, because the locations were far from each other. You sit three and a half hours on a very ultra modern highway with almost no people on it. I passed a lot of uh uh buildings and housing blocks totally empty and commercial uh real estate as well. I see them building massively infrastructure stuff out, and you really wonder if that's all being used. So, there it is. On how healthy is that economy, really. And if you come to Ming Yang, first of all, very pleasant people, impressive campus they have. Um, they have a lot of demonstration kits and maquettes and a lot of LED big screens. I've seen I've never seen a big screen like that where they have it's all wind and green energy, hydrogen, ammonia. I mean, really a bit 2023 narrative. And I had good conversations with the senior management. I had a look on how they make their blades, which are very long and very big, but they're made in the same way as anybody else, it's like very artisan still. A lot of people there, no robotization. We did see the Nazells on the inside from the 18 megawatt uh turbine. Well what struck me as a standardized, very uh lightweight build. The Germans would say Leichtbau, yeah. Um, which was very interesting to see. We didn't see the assemblage, so I couldn't see how they mount the thing together. I don't know who the supplies are, where they get, you know, they're all pitching, whatever hydraulic from. And I also made very clear to them: if you want to deliver in Europe, you have to start producing in Europe. And anything you put in there an instrumentation can communicate with China will not happen. So, and and I believe now the Zeemans and Vestors are the ones now talking because GE really doesn't work in the space anymore. That's not enough for a healthy supply chain. If you look at the growth, even if we say a lot of the projects don't work anymore and they will not happen, you still look at the growth of this business as compared. Founders are still very big. And they cannot bite it off. They have to build extra factories and do they have that money? Siemens haven't been in a very good place for a long time. It's looking better for them now. Vesos has been struggling for a long time as well, is looking better for them now. But I mean you need some more competition because if you have no competition, people will get lazy and you know probably also end up in two fat organizations with less quality because there's for for for customers nowhere to go.

SPEAKER_01 30:30

And yet, Europe, through various regulations, like the Net Zero Industry Act, is trying to regulate to encourage the use, let's say, of local companies in one way to do it.

SPEAKER_00 30:45

What does Europe do anything else than regulate? I mean, they they put this frame on us again. Yes? Thank you very much. And then I asked the so what question. If you go through, let's say, the elements was being produced in those things, the things being produced in China as well, in Vestas and the Diemens. I mean, but a lot of stuff is already happening in Europe. This the 30% need to be happening in Europe. Okay, thank you very much. So now what? And there's one thing in the China visit, actually I thought it was very interesting talking to these people about because you see all the news, and we were talking to a lady who was originated in Hong Kong and lived in in China. And she said, Well, you know, uh, because you all the propaganda of Taiwan is actually part, and everybody from Taiwan wants to be part of China, and that sort of stuff. And so it's it's pretty much propaganda everywhere and and let's say managed. But what I think I think something the governments can learn in Europe, and also the Europeans, Union and what and Commission and whatever, she said, and struck me with she said, Well, it's it's difficult, but it's pretty clear that they are here for us, the government. That's the narrative they play for us, and they do a lot of stuff for us because it has become much better than I was very young. Our governments ask us to do all the time things for them. Companies do things for them, set up supply chain do for them. So, what don't they do for us? What does the European Union do for us as a company or as a citizen? I think that's a good question to ask. And maybe also people who listen to this blog, if they start voting for parties that they think, what do they do for us? Because this is really important. We have to know, as citizens, we need to set the future and not wait for the big bureaucracy to do it for you. But that's a very personal belief of me.

SPEAKER_01 32:20

Well, on that question, Patrick, we will bring it to a close. Thank you very much for being the first guest on the Renews podcast.

SPEAKER_00 32:25

Well, I think I hope we get a lot of listeners and reactions and we can learn. So for now and again, thank you very much.