 So this is what I put together to try to characterize today's conversation, and I think we can think of it broken up into a number of groupings. So the first one had to do with, you know, what is really the potential of the, you know, natural nature-based climate solutions? And there's, it seems like huge uncertainty. And there are some fundamental ideas, you know, this is a haystack or a silo, and that will have a very big impact on how we eventually end up answering that question. And then associated with that was also the rate of scale-up of these solutions, what's possible. So in the area of the terrestrial ecosystems, you know, things like protecting forests, restoring forests, you know, there seems to be, you know, very significant potential for doing that, and also reducing emissions from land use change, that sort of low-hanging fruit. Beyond this, there are some more challenging opportunities involving enhancing natural sinks, and a great deal of uncertainty around the potential for this, and also just having to deal with things like the variability, as we saw from Rob from year to year, there's tremendous difference in the uptake. We then moved on to talk about oceans, and the key opportunity here seems to be to try to enhance the biological pump, and that the parts of the oceans that are, well, many parts of the oceans are nutrient limited with one thing or another, but the southern ocean is particularly interesting, and it's iron limited. However, there are significant questions about permanence, and if you look over longer time periods, that CO2 that was taken up ends up being recycled and perhaps remitted, and there are also ecosystem impacts associated with large areas of the ocean that are being perturbed by sort of ultra fertilization. So that was a little bit on the science side. On the side of sort of social issues or other things we need to consider, whatever we do, we shouldn't use nature-based climate solutions as an alternative to energy decarbonization. It won't be available fast enough, and at this big enough scale. We also need to think about the water balance associated with manipulating ecosystems, and we saw some really interesting data showing how forests actually, reforestation or aforestation reduced watershed flows in streams and so forth. There's also an issue of cost, equity, and also just thinking about the energy balance, because many of these things have large energy inputs as well. So then more on the social fronts. If we can identify co-benefits, things like preserving jobs, engaging and inspiring the public, that will help accelerate and deploy these technologies. But again, there's a significant moral hazard associated with having people believe that there's a long-term solution that would negate the need for short-term action on fixing the energy system. And then finally, this last idea of two important greenhouse gases that we haven't really talked about, both with significant potential for improvements. So this is sort of a little bit of a mind map. We also do have some very nice collection of research needs. All of this material will be available. We don't have time to go through this today. And likewise, some key takeaways.