In terms of the green ammonia, it seems like they've already walked away from that. From the onset, it seemed more like a PR-driven ESG initiative?

It's a PR exercise, and I'd say it's more of an accounting exercise as well. The total tons they've produced is not significant, it's around 20,000 or so, which is less than one normal-size vessel export. It's more of an accounting exercise: they perform the hydrolysis through a small portion of the process, but that gets thrown into the broader production network. It then becomes an accounting exercise for how much green hydrogen went into the process and how much comes out. It doesn't go through a separate track in the plant. There's a separate front end that creates the green hydrogen, which then reacts through the normal process.

Generally, the market seems to value CF as a highly commoditized, highly replaceable commodity production company. Our view is that you can't simply build an ammonia plant and start competing with CF overnight. Can you speak to whether the downstream advantages and the network truly represent a competitive advantage, or whether a new entrant could easily come into the market and compete?

CF has plants in the growing region, which are more expensive to build than plants on the Gulf Coast. Their distribution network of terminals, especially on the ammonia side, is irreplaceable. No one has built a new ammonia terminal in a very long time, and people aren't building them anymore due to the risks associated with it. CF and Koch have the vast majority of those ammonia terminals along the river system.