 I would like to turn to the audience. I have two voices here. First, the lady in the second row, then the lady in the first row, and then you. Please, Marie. And if you would briefly introduce yourself, please. Okay. I'm Marie Rogé-Bilois. I'm a producer from Cameroon. Thank you for your very inspiring and fascinating panel. After having listened to you, one of the major issues here is still environmental problems. And you alluded to that, and I'm sure you are aware of the controversy about the electric battery, and that is not that clean. You know, all the kind of problems it's posing to environmental carbon footprint, you know, when you compare it to the traditional batteries, et cetera, et cetera. So, how come that, I would say, the electric battery has been developed full-speed despite of that. Everyone is in that front. France has allowed for billions, developed, et cetera, et cetera. How come? And how do you intend to solve all those problems? So that is one of the first questions. The second one is how can you enforce the need to have a fair share in the value chain for the producing countries like DRC, African countries, whoever they are? Because everybody knows that there's a huge problem. I like the reference to the Ogoni. But who can enforce that? That should we rely on the goodwill of the actors of the chain? Or should we think of a governing body to enforce a better reputation? Thank you. I suggest that we collect a few voices and then turn back to the panel. Lady in the first row, please. Thank you very much. I appreciated the word of Mr. Corbero. These cell phones and all these very high-tech industries are happening because the mines and minerals are coming from southern countries, African in particular. And when I hear you, I mean, you're saying the right thing, but why it is not happening in the field? Why it's a completely different story? Environment, she said about it, but the worth is, and there is a responsibility from the African states, who are overwhelmed by so many problems, and sometimes it's difficult for them to enforce their own legislation. But it doesn't even make sense for me from an economical point of view. You operate, mining companies you rely on, are operating in low-less environment, child work, of course, polluting the lakes, and no investment whatsoever within the community they are surrounded by. So it doesn't make much logic for me because the next step is they're going to be sort of kicked out of many places with the new generation of leaders coming in, in Africa, because this is not going to last. So I think you guys who are at the end of the spectrum should talk to those companies, that are your providers, because you might be running out very quick. Because this is not going to end, and this is the major, major outcry of the young generation of African. Being looted, because that's the word, and nothing is being done, but when we are in for us, the right things are said, but never done. So what are your takes on that? Because what you see is what is going to happen in Niger. Unfortunately, a company invested there, and now it's going to be a lot of problems because the new military regime is focusing on them, but they should have prevented that. Had they done the right things, I don't think it would have happened. But this is going to be a general trend in Africa. So your industries might quickly be at risk because you will not be having, at the same cost, in the same condition, the product you need to develop your industries. So what's your take on that? Because the talk is there, that's what Marie-Rosie was saying, but it doesn't change over six decades, but it's going to stop because now it's really, really the hot topic. And if somebody like me is in power, I can tell you that it's going to be one of my priorities, because it cannot last. It's impossible. Thank you. Well, thank you. Thank both of you for your comments, and when I said we carefully balanced the panel, we did, well, at least one mistake. We should have had someone from the global south here on the panel on these issues, and therefore I'm particularly grateful. The microphone goes to this gentleman there. I'm particularly grateful that you raised your voice and that you did so quite forcefully. I take two more voices and then turn to the panel for a final word. It's the gentleman here and the gentleman in the fourth row over there. Okay. I'm Daniel Landler from Paris, and I have a question which is a real question, an honest question, not an implicit reproach. Whenever everyone on the panel seemed to take for granted that demand was inelastic so that by 2030, 2080, there would be the need of so many billions of tons of this and that. As if it were a law of nature, it's not a law of nature. It's at most a law of statistics with a little bit of implicit sociology. How are you going to take into account the fact that maybe by 2030 or 2050, people will decide not to have an EV and have a bicycle instead? And again, I'm not being ethical or anything normative. I just want to know, how come you don't seem to want to take into account the fact that the demand is not rigid? Thank you so much. Please hear Arash. Thank you very much. Arash Duro here from Dubai. I think it was very clear from the discussions how critical these materials are for strategic industries like energy, renewables, et cetera, AI, robotics, you name it. What I was kind of missing is the financial aspect of it all. So you mentioned Dr. Copper, one of the most critical materials and so on. But when you look at geopolitics, to me the most significant, most critical metal that's not even on the EU list of critical materials was gold. When Russia invaded Ukraine in March, the ruble dropped almost historic lows. Immediately following that, Putin came out and said he's going to pay 5,000 rubles per ounce of gold. Now, from March 2022 to June 2023, the ruble appreciated 158%. So there was an effective temporary gold standard for three months where he stabilized the currency and essentially negated the sanctions for a while. Now that sent a message to China, especially after the freezing of the Russian funds, where China has gotten a message that they cannot rely on the US dollar as a reserve currency going forward if they have intentions of doing whatever they want to do. The BRICS recently came out and said they want to come out with their currency perhaps backed by gold. There's been record buying by central banks, especially in Russia and China of gold. I haven't heard gold mentioned anywhere. I don't hear it mentioned anywhere in the EU. It's always about renewables, et cetera. If you don't have the financial bedrock to finance all of these industries, let's be honest, the energy industry in Europe is highly subsidized and it relies on the primacy of Western financial institutions almost finished to actually finance these industries. So what about gold? Where do you see that? Great questions, great statements. You have now the difficult task to answer in everyone has 30 seconds. So just take one question which you think is there were many statements also. So go ahead, we start with Jonathan. Let me maybe tackle a few topics that the ladies in the front mentioned and I think it's a very important topic that requires a lot more discussion and a lot more engagement. And it's a very complex topic. So I'll just pick a few of the things that you mentioned. So first of all, with regards to dirty mines and the pollution, there is no ambiguity on understanding what a clean mine is and what a dirty mine is. There's very rigid global standards that need to be followed and there's a whole ton of experts that go into the nitty gritty of doing this. Now, whether this is done and followed, that's a different topic. And here I totally agree. It must be enforced and must be leveled and we need to have more balancing and more audits. But you need to differentiate between industrial scale mines, semi-industrial artisanal mines. And the second topic of yours was with regards to a more fair value distribution along the supply chain. This is what I mentioned as well in my brief speech. I fully agree. The answer to that is not a simple one. We see tendencies of politics to enforce more resource nationalism, increase taxes and tariffs, usually with quite the opposite effect. I think what we need to do is, and it's both the individual companies as well as industry organizations to invest heavily in the communities itself. It's about the creation of jobs. It's also the creation of alternative livelihoods. Just to mention a few things. Thank you. Philippe. Excuse me. Just about what Mr. Anders said, how do we forecast demand? I do perfectly agree with you. Elior said that you shouldn't look at past with today's eyes. It's wrong to look at the futures with today's technologies. It's clear that we don't know. And I'm a bit, I take what is on the market as far as forecasts for 2040-2050 are concerned. I don't know if my grandchildren will have cars. Maybe cars will disappear. You're right. We'll be all cycling or we'll try to walk and so on. And well, the only thing I'm pretty sure of, there might be some batteries. Will there be lithium or nickel or cobalt or anything else? I don't know. I'm pretty sure that copper will be extremely important Don't imagine a world without electricity. And for the moment, well, you're more scientific than I am. It seems to me that copper, you can't escape it. By the way, gold, we can get rid of it. It's Keynes who said it was a barbaric relic. Gold isn't, it's a nonsense. You know what Warren Buffett said. It was completely stupid to go so deep underground and to get gold and then to bury it in the vaults of central bounds. So gold is completely stupid. Right now it's verging $2,000 an ounce because there are some troubles in the world. So it's a good indicator. But it's a much stupid investment because when you invest in gold, you freeze your money. Money has to circulate. Money has to be invested. Money has to create wealth. Gold destroys wealth. So by the way, we'll have private talk with my African friends about the share. Thank you, Christophe. Yeah, thank you very much. So maybe I'm going to be back on the environmental issues and social issues with regards to mining activity. So I fully agree with what you both mentioned and thank you very much for your comment, which was very fruitful. I want to say that first, we aim to develop any new man at the highest environmental standard as possible. And it's not only a claim. I mean we are developing the regulations and the regulation will apply not only for mines in Europe but for any material entering in Europe. It's what we call, for instance, the battery passport in which we will be described the environmental footprint of the material which are used. And they will have to be at the highest standards otherwise they will not be able to enter on the European market. So it's a way, it's not the only one, but it's one of the ways to try to develop the highest possible standards. And regarding the fair share, which is also very important, any project that we are developing in the country, it's not only a mine, it's a mine with all the transformation industry around in order to relocate the highest part of the added value in the country. And for instance, the agreement which has been signed in DRC some years ago is within this framework. So we will build some plans in DRC, not only mining. Thank you. Nicolas. Maybe to Daniel's point, I fully agree. I think that's what I was trying to say on strandedness of assets as we go forward because both innovation and your right social behaviors. So I agree. This is one of our concern as energy players. Not much we can do now, but you're absolutely right that we should be very careful to not lock in too much position in this. I fully agree. To the point of fairness, I will use Jerry Myron's comment in margin call. We'll have to pay and I genuinely think so. I think yesterday and when we talked about transfer from no rich economies to developing economies, we need to pay the real price of this energy transition that we are fueling. And for that, I think it needs it means higher royalties potentially that stays local locally. It means that we need to probably subsidize so that also local populations, it has an impact on electricity prices or anything. It needs to be subsidized by the richer economies. People will say that this is not acceptable from the Western point of view. But this is absolutely acceptable because this is exactly what we need in terms of international cooperation in my view rather than just giving money. It's better that we invest that money locally on by remunerating the real price of what we are asking as a material. Thank you. I think this was a great panel, great speakers. One disadvantage which you pointed out very clearly with your remarks here from the first and second row. We are still too Eurocentric in what we are doing. We have less and less people, relatively less and less power in the world, but we believe that we are still the core of the world and that is wrong. And therefore, it is I think one message that we take. Well, if we do this again, I would definitely ask for an African or an Asian voice here, perhaps not only one but two. And that is what we learn. Thank you very much for your attendance and your interest.