# Donut Lab Solid State - The Internet Did it's Thing...

## Метаданные

- **Канал:** Two Bit da Vinci
- **YouTube:** https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W0158iGQbRI
- **Дата:** 02.04.2026
- **Длительность:** 29:15
- **Просмотры:** 214,688
- **Источник:** https://ekstraktznaniy.ru/video/47501

## Описание

Check out Mammouth.ai now and discover the future of multi-AI access! https://mammouth.ai/

This wasn't a test like I was hoping, but good news everyone, I thought this might happen with it being April Fools day. So I've been hard at work gathering all the information I could find for all the theories floating around on the internet. Did my usual deep dive and here are 10 very interesting findings that have made their way around and why people are saying what they're saying.

https://www.researchgate.net/publicat...

Chapters

0:00 - Intro & Episode 6 Interview Recap
2:57 - 10 The Factory - Nordic Nano's Converted Retail Building
6:09 - 9 The Fine Print - Charge & Discharge Rate Gaps
7:30 - 8 The Detective - Reddit Traces the Supply Chain
9:14 - 7 The Deletion - Sana Energy's Scrubbed Comments
11:06 - 6 The Redaction - VTT Report Changes
15:17 - 5 The Cutoff - 90°C Safety Limit Questions
18:15 - 4 The Admission - 100,000 Cycles Was Never Tested
21:28 - 3 The Name - Is It Really Solid S

## Транскрипт

### Intro & Episode 6 Interview Recap []

Donut Labs test six just came out and it wasn't even a test. It fell on April Fool's Day. We kind of didn't know what to expect. Turned out to be an interview that was a little telling. We'll get into that, but we kind of expected this to happen. So, I spent the last week researching everything that the internet has been saying, all the different validation sites, all the theories and claims and discovery and put it together in this document. So, we'll start really quickly with what was covered in the interview and then jump right into everything we found. This might be the most comprehensive report we've ever made. I'm Ricky and this is Two Bit Da Vinci. We scoured Reddit. We tracked all the different sources that we could find and we have stuff from a team called TGD that put together a 190 page report that we were actually quoted in several times which is pretty flattering. And we've also looked at all the different theories out there and stuff. But first, the CEO interview really quickly. Here's what he actually had to say. one, he announced a second battery, a version two battery, which is way better, right? When we're waiting for all the data for the first one, they have a second battery. Now, this kind of bugs me because it feels like that classic like shell game where you're waiting for something and then there's something even better on the horizon. Two, he confirmed on camera that the 100,000 cycles was never measured. He quotes, "Of course not. We would have had to literally start testing it a decade ago. It was a projection from his words, a much smaller number. " So test it X times and then extrapolate out. That's all that was done. Pretty expand. I'd expect nothing less. I mean, I wouldn't have imagined that they've tested to 100,000 cycles. Three, he claimed columic efficiency above one. Then immediately caveed by saying there could be other signals showing capacity issues underneath. Now, we've covered this in previous reports and stuff, and there's a little bit there, but we're going to skip that for now in this video. Four, he again dodged the energy density question. He says, "You never ask a woman her age and you never ask a battery it's weight funny. " But he did let slip that they've already recorded the energy density video. So hopefully that's coming up in a future test. And of course there was some funniness. There was some Finnish humor I think in this video. There's a person off screen saying that engagement metrics require continued ambiguity. So this is the marketing machine at play and that's fine. So five, he was asked how much of this was true cuz again it's April Fool's Day. What if B2 is just an April Fool's joke? The ambiguity clearly is part of their strategy. And then they went on to sell merch. Now, that might not be that interesting on its own. But one of the funniest things, and that's an homage to Ryan from Zuroth, our very good friend, is a tinfoil hat. They have a tinfoil hat for sale on their store. Did you know that? It is a hearkening. He didn't mention him by name, but he said a very famous YouTuber already was wearing a tinfoil hat in one of his episodes when talking about donut. So, now they're selling merch. Honestly, if it wasn't for what I've been working on for the past week, I would have skipped this video. I've kept it very scientific until now on purpose. I didn't want to get into this, but when there's no test data to review, well, I guess we'll have to do it. Number

### 10 The Factory - Nordic Nano's Converted Retail Building [2:57]

10, the factory. So, this is where the world's most advanced battery is going to be manufactured, right? Donut Lab's investor letters obtained by Finnish broadcaster YLE promised gigawatt hour production capacity and scaling from 1 to 100 production lines. Donut Lab told Misco Electric at CES, our very good friend, that they're at 1 gawatt hour of capacity and scaling up. Reddit and Misco Electric traced the actual production to Nordic Nanog's facility in a mantra, Finland. Reddit user Ona Liquid Rock drove past it and posted videos. So, this is the active video that he posted. We'll put links to his videos as well, but this was a couple of months ago in the heart of winter. And there it is off here in the distance. You can see right here. Now, this is interesting because it's a former Laplandia border duty-free shop that went vacant when Finland closed the Russian border in 2023. The municipality invested €400,000 for a 25% stake. Now, based on Nordic Nano's financials, it's been assumed that this would be their production line. This test series has been incredibly fun to research. And when it comes to research, there's a new tool I think you're going to love. This is Mammoth. And instead of paying 20 bucks a month for Gemini, chat, and claude, Mammoth is a platform that gives you access to all the best models in one place, whether it's for text, images, videos, research, or reasoning. The interface is clean and familiar. But check this out. When I was researching this script, I use Perplexity. But I can easily reprompt my request and pick a new model like Claude Opus 4. 6 and compare the results side by side. For images, Nano Banana is really good, but I can easily compare to others like stable diffusion with the same prompt. Now, Mammoth even supports video models like VO3, Grock video, and Sora for high-quality videos for your next project. Create custom Mammoths with unique system prompts for the things that you do most. I have a custom mammoth for research and another for designing thumbnails. The user prompt is a part we type in chat. It's the what, but the system prompt is the why and how. It tells the AI how to act and think, like, be my lead researcher or you are my chief software engineer. And now you can share your custom mammoth. So, create once and share with your friends or team. If you like command line AI tools, there's Mammoth Code that installs just like codecs for cloud code right in your terminal. And they even have API keys if you're building an AI powered app. So level up your AI game, bringing the power of the latest and greatest models in one place using Mammoth AI and get started today using my links in the description. Huge thanks to Mammoth and you. Now back to the show. Now, why does that matter? Many, many great companies have started in garages, right, in very humble beginnings. But CL has 100,000 employees. QuantumCape spent 2. 4 4 billion and still hasn't reached full mass production. When investor letters say gigawatt hours and the reality is three employees in a converted retail building, that gap is big enough to bring up. We've toured battery lines at QuantumCape and at LG in Michigan. We're talking billiondoll investments in the cleanest rooms you've ever seen with the most controlled environments. It's a very difficult thing to make batteries. Now, again, none of this is exactly confirmed. This just comes from like financial reportings and different deals that people have pointed out online. I'm not making any claims about validity or truth. I'm just going through the list of things that people have found out. Okay. Number nine, the fine print.

### 9 The Fine Print - Charge & Discharge Rate Gaps [6:09]

Donut Labs website says full charge in less than 10 minutes and a CES tomo said zero to full in as low as 5 minutes. The VTT data says 7 minutes and 57 seconds. It's all over the place. But the point is it is difficult to nail down exactly what manufacturers mean. You've all seen, oh, you know, full charge in less than five minutes. Do you mean zero to 100, 10 to 90, 20 to 80? Everybody does this a little bit differently. A common standard is probably like 10% to 80% because the last 20% you probably don't want to supercharge if you're on a road trip. Donuts tests were still pretty impressive. They held that full 11C for quite a bit, but the average rate over the entire cycle was 7. 5 C. But here's the bigger gap. We went through all five BTT reports. every discharge of the healthy cell. Every single one. Discharge. Was it 1 C or 0. 5C? The slowest rate possible. Test five did discharge at 5C, but that was on a damaged cell with a broken pouch as a safety demo. And it lost 55% capacity. If you're buying a Verge motorcycle, the first customer who will actually have these cells, you care about acceleration. You want a motorcycle to be fast. That discharge rate matters. And that hasn't been tested very much. So, it was a data point I hadn't really noticed until I started digging into some of these numbers. But charging speeds, yeah, they've done that very well, but not this charge. Number eight, the detective. Now

### 8 The Detective - Reddit Traces the Supply Chain [7:30]

this is some of the best internet sleuththing I've ever seen. User Rectator on Reddit discovered a Spanish company called Santa Energy making claims identical to Doughut Labs and found references to two SGS German test reports on their website. Reddit user Signz tracked down the actual PDFs on a partner website belonging to Next Eco CToding AG sales arm. Now there's two reports in April and December of 2024 on a 24 amp hour cell. Same capacity class is supply chain as Donut Labs VTT cells. Now that December cell is where the mass data comes from. Remember that number for later. Then Signz contacted SGS corporate security directly and the April report confirmed it was true. So the April report was genuine. The December report SGS flagged as not an original SGS document. Someone had anonymized names post issuance breaking the digital signature. Now this matters because in the April report on the eyewitness list, Ernst Holesenbine from CToding AG is sitting in the same room as Robert Erman from Holivolt. The strongest physical evidence linking these companies to the same cell technology. This matters because the theory is that Holy Volt was licensing some kind of a technology from CT codings AG and that was what Donut is now using. But then that all kind of fizzled and they broke the joint venture and Donut Lab stepped in. Again, this is uncorroborated and not verified. But Donut Labs has never acknowledged where their technology comes from. Their own investor letters say acquired access not we developed. Reddit traced the supply chain the company wouldn't disclose and authenticated the documents that prove it. So that is interesting. This is the power of the internet. The internet can be good. It's not just

### 7 The Deletion - Sana Energy's Scrubbed Comments [9:14]

all doom and gloom. Number seven, the deletion. On February 24th, Sana Energy's director, Javier Cool, appeared on Donut Lab's Reddit page as Hyo Sana username. For three hours, he answered questions openly. confirm CT coding AG as the IP holder of the technology behind Donut Lab shared cell dimensions posted a 100 cycle chart and when pressed on energy density admitted the battery had somewhat more than 300 W hours per kilogram not the 400 that donut claimed within hours every comment was deleted every LinkedIn post was scrubbed and Santa requested the entire Reddit submission be removed the moderator's take was this very forthcoming cheerful guy got told by his very secretive bosses as DT coding to remove the information. On LinkedIn, Santa had posted the same SGS report claiming 452 watt hours per kilogram. The report measured 297, which is a 52% inflation on the numbers. And this wasn't isolated. Nordic Nano erased their product page, the one listing 50,000 plus cycles and 400 watt hours per kilogram. When Reddit user Olgar Mans found an ESA presentation with CT codings logo on Nordic Nano slides, it was taken down and user Rectator warned, "Be careful with posting materials not seen before online. Every time the community surfaces of connection, the evidence gets cleaned up. " Now, one deletion might not mean all that much, but this is kind of a pattern. We're seeing deletions and removals across Reddit, LinkedIn, corporate websites, ESA presentations, and web archives. and that might tell a different story. Now, again, I didn't see this actively happen. I didn't see the information and then refresh and see it disappear. This is just what's been reported. I'm not positive, but it's one of the interesting stories that I've come across that has a ton of comments and up votes and activity.

### 6 The Redaction - VTT Report Changes [11:06]

Number six, the redaction. Now, this to me is the biggest concern, and this one I can verify because I actually looked into it myself. In Donor Lab's episode 2 video at exactly 51 seconds they show the VTT report on screen. Six differences on page 4. Page 5 6 7 8 and 9 and 10 are identical and then one difference on page 11. So on the left here the video draft is what they showed on screen in their video and this is the published PDF that we've all been looking at. On screen their report said conduct independent performance tests on the energy storage devices. What was published? conduct independent high temperature discharge performance tests on the energy storage device. So from plural to singular. We'll talk about why that's important. Change two. Identified a solid state battery cells. The customer provided three visually identical cells for testing. And what was in the published document says identified as a solid state battery cell not cells. Three visually identical cells were provided for testing and labeled DL1, DL2, and DL3. Change four. This is removed. One cell was subjected to charge performance tests reportedly separately and another cell was subjected to low temperature discharge tests reported separately. The same cells were used for high temperature and low temperature discharge tests. Finally, each cell was subjected to different tests conducted in parallel, all of which began with an initial capacity test. This report presents the results of the high temperature discharge test performed on cell DL2. Just to bring this all together on page 11 there's one change to keep the singular and plural uniform the devices and cells go to device and battery cell singular we have been asking for that cold weather test because in engineering you want to put bounds on a problem right if you wanted to know is somebody old or young well how what is the youngest person who is the oldest person then I can tell you if I don't know who the oldest person is 34 is that old I don't know how old are the oldest people so that high temperature and low temperature test would have given us that bound. We don't have the low temperature test. And now we know that they actually did it. In this report right here, you can see it says another cell was subjected to low temperature discharge test. It's right there. It's right there in the original report. This is not theory or conjecture. This is in the video from their test, too. But the final report removes it. Now, when I saw that, I was really mad and I wanted to make sure that we weren't being duped because if you can't trust the report, then what are we doing? I've been doing what exactly, right? It does sound to me like there was a cold weather test and they've either removed it and they're going to share it with us later or the high temperature test destroyed the cell and the cold test couldn't be done or the test result that they got from the cold weather test was not favorable and they're decided not to show it. It's one of those three things. And I'm also a software engineer, so I'm doubly OCD about this. But when you're going to document, you have to have version control. Revision A, revision B, right? Version two. Why? Because if I sent out a preliminary report that someone is using and it has the number 5. 2, but then I made a mistake and I fixed it to 7. 2 and I didn't change the revision number, that person might operate with bad intel. They might think that a number in a report is there, but not be correct. So that's why if you ever look at like code compliance or anything else, you'll always see like Rev A, Rev B, Rev Z, Rev 52. This is really bad science etiquette. This bugs me because they've changed their report for some reason and not done that. Now, I didn't have enough time to do the same kind of everything on screen and not for every single time they've shown something. So, anybody in the comments, if you've done the same exercise to compare what was in the report to what was on screen and you see any other discrepancies, let us know in the comments. But this does bug me. I have to give credit to Reddit user Siron QLED for spotting this first. When he mentioned it, it sounded like it couldn't be true, so I had to verify it. And yeah, they did change it. So, why this matters is just trust, right? The trust in the report. If other things have been doctorred or they've changed things, then we've got nothing. Like if we can't confirm something

### 5 The Cutoff - 90°C Safety Limit Questions [15:17]

we have nothing like a ground truth, then this is kind of a moot point. Number five, the cutoff VTT test one, the safety system cut off at 11C charging at 90° C. That's the standard lithium ion cutoff. And this could have just been a lab test limitation that they didn't change, but our friend Ryan Enis from Zeroth who has a PhD in this stuff, he mentioned that was one of the first things that told him this might be a lithium ion battery. So that 90° C safety limit, was that imposed by VTT as just how they operate or was it imposed by Donut? We don't really know. Donut says that they didn't impose that. But VTT test 2, the cell discharged at 100 plus degrees CC and the pouch lost its vacuum. Right? The seal was breached. In test 5, the CEO explained, "These industry standard pouch materials are simply not designed for the 100° C that our batteries can take. " Now, the community tested that claim. John Sullivan heated a 5-year-old off-the-shelf NMC cell to 100° C for 30 minutes. The pouch survived fine. Reddit user Reddit Mutter cited IEC62133, a major international battery safety standard which requires surviving 130 degrees Celsius for 10 minutes for certification. Now, ready user Mixmaster INI, who works with solidstate batteries, says standard pouching material is stable well above 100°. We use it at around 120 for days. I'm not sure about that, but why would a Donut Lab cell fail where a 5-year-old generic cell didn't? Either way, they used worse packaging than a commodity cell. In our research for test two, we came across some data that helped us understand the pouch laminate systems. We don't know for sure how they did it, but what typically is done is the outer layer is a nylon and it can withstand 220° C temperatures. Then there's an adhesive polyurethane. It's a cross-link and it doesn't melt. It's rated to bond the nylon to the aluminum and that's also highly rated. Number three is a barrier. It's aluminum foil rated for over 600° that wouldn't fail. So the weak link in this train is number four, the adhesive number two, which is a polyolin, and that melts at 85. 4°. So that led us to think that might have been what happened, and the anatomy of their pouch construction that would uh have caused problems, but clearly that isn't a problem for other cells. We've seen other people reach those temperatures safely. So that brings into question, how good is their manufacturing process and their knowhow, right? Their technical knowhow. Building batteries is done by like a handful of companies on Earth for a reason. It's really hard to know how to do it well. So was this just like a prototype cell and they didn't really put too much thought into it? Did they do it on purpose to show that it was safe even if the pouch was destroyed? But that makes me wonder, why not do like a nail penetration test, right? something really vis like that would be must see TV. If you could see a nail penetrate the battery and nothing bad happened, why have such a subtle pouch damination? Anyways

### 4 The Admission - 100,000 Cycles Was Never Tested [18:15]

interesting worth pointing out. That brings us to number four, the admission. Episode 6, the interviewer asks, "Have you measured 100,000 cycles? " And CEO says, "Of course not. We would literally have had to start testing like a decade ago. " The number is, in his words, an estimate projected from a much smaller number. So, Michael Sura at Electronica Design did the math. 100,000 cycles at 10 minutes each would be 694 days of 247 testing. Nordic Nano was founded in 2024. So, that would be physically impossible. They could not have tested 100,000 cycles. Not a big surprise. We knew they probably didn't. And German battery researcher Dr. Wim Son caught something nobody else did. VTT's protocol pushes exactly 26 amp hours every cycle, regardless of what the cell can hold. If it degraded to 24 amp hours, the protocol still forces 26 in. Excess goes to side reactions. Degradation becomes invisible and no final reference cycle was run to check for such damages. Right? So why does this matter? Well, 100,000 cycles would mean the battery outlast anything you put it into. And the CEO confirmed that it's a projection. The prototype data covers. 3% of the claim and the test protocol can't detect failure modes that it's supposed to measure. So again, just a level of uncertainty that we can't really wrap our heads around. So this is the actual page there from the TG report and it kind of lists some of the largest, longest lasting cycle batteries out there. LTO is a really good chemistry for this. Uh very fast charging, good cycle life up here. Toshiba 30,000 cycles. CL Shen singing batteries that are LFP around 5,000 and it kind of goes down from there. and uh the claimed versus actual and it's a logarithmic curve. One of the most interesting insights from the TGD report is that the 100,000 cycle claim and the 400watth kilogram battery claim almost certainly describe different batteries. At CES, Donut claimed 100,000 cycles. We can promise that. And that was in the context of data centers where you might be charging and discharging several times a day. Separately, where specific energy or gravimetric energy density matters, the marketing showed 400 watt hours per kilogram for vehicles. Two statements, two context combined into a single spec sheet. But to me, it kind of read like two different things and they were saying, you know, it could do either of these things, but not that one battery could do either of those things. And then today with the double battery, I don't know. The platform CT codings high low matrix, if that is in fact what this is, can print different paste formulations with different inks to make different end products. The TGD report lays that out. So the VTT cell could have been one thing and not another or different cells. Maybe not. We don't know. But there are some breadcrumbs. Nordic Nano's website before they erased it listed 50,000 cycles. Don Lab claims 100,000. The number apparently doubled during the technology transfer. if Nordic Nano is responsible for this battery. In episode 6, the CEO confirmed two batteries do exist. There's a version one and a version two. And he was pretty insistent that the version two batter is not like some 2030 thing, but that they'd be in production in 2026, like this year. Number two

### 3 The Name - Is It Really Solid State? [21:28]

the name. From the first VTT test, every analyst who looked at the voltage curve 3 to 4. 3 volt said the same thing independently. Zeroth, our friend, said a match for NMC lithium ion. Ryan from Zeroth extracted an internal resistance around 2 milliohms, right, based on the voltage and what we knew from a couple different data points and claimed that it was right in the middle of liquid electrolyte NMC territory like the most common batteries that we have today for high uh power applications. Now, Quto controls independently got a similar value and a similar assessment. Every line of evidence just made it look like a lithium-ion battery. But Nordic Nanozone profile on battery tech says carbon nano tubes coated with titanium oxide and a sodium electrolyte. So then we compared sodium and we talked about trying to make it work. Like is there a chemistry of sodium that could make sense here? But they told us at CES that there's no lithium in the battery, right? That was my point was okay if there's no lithium then what else could it be? Then the language quietly shifted. No lithium became not lithium ion, which is a huge difference. Not lithium ion allows lithium in a different format like a solid state electrolyte or something else like that wording slowly changed over the course of CES unveil to now. This gets into the I think some of the like confusion and lack of clarity. There's some complex stuff happening here, right? NASAN which is natrium super ionic conductor is named after sodium because it was discovered in sodium compounds first but the same framework actually works for lithium ions as well and different variants like LATP is one of the most studied salt electrolytes in the world. This gets to something I've heard a lot which is what if the technology is licensed and they thought it was lithium free but they got the wording wrong. I mean it's complicated. there's sodium in the name and maybe it got people thinking sodium ion or or anything else. I was thinking sodium because if it's not lithium then what is it right? How can you get 400 watt hours per kilogram? Is there some way to make this work? Honestly, it just feels like there's so much technical debt and there's so little details that we're trying to interpolate in between and fill in the gaps. And okay, this one is fun. Uh it didn't make the list. This is an honorable mention, but a community member found a battery cell on Alibaba from a manufacturer called HH Power. The dimensions are 172x74x 10. 4 mm. It's a 24 amp hour cell and it's NMC chemistry. It's marketed as solid state. The dimensions match almost exactly what Santa Energy director confirmed. Now, does this prove that it's the same cell? No. No, it doesn't. Standard NMC cells come in standard sizes. a screen printed cell could be engineered to match any form factor. But 91 upvotes on Reddit and 124 comments later, it became the post that defined the subreddit. Why it matters? Well, even if it's not the same cell, it just goes to show how funny that is. I would have never thought to go on Alibaba and see if I could buy this cell. It would have never crossed my mind. But the internet is undefeated that way. Finally, number one, the weight. The number one question from every comment section

### 2 The Weight - The 312g Measurement [24:42]

every Reddit thread, every analyst for months is just weigh the cell. What are we waiting for? Just do it. Across all the reports, VTT never does. The CEO dodged it in the interview. You never ask a woman her age and battery its weight. But SGS Germany did measure it, or the supposed cell that this is based on. In the December 2024 report, Reddit users Signz and Rectator tested a CT coding prototype cell from the same supply chain as the VTT cells. The mass was 312. 619 g. Zeroth independently estimated that the cell weighed around 315 based on the prototype and the dimensions and what we had available to us. Two different ways of looking at this within 1% of each other. It's interesting. At BTT's 91 W hours as total capacity, that puts it at around 291 W hours per kilogram. At SGS's voltage window, 268 for their claimed 400 W hours per kilogram. The cell would have to weigh 228 g, but their cell is about 37% heavier. The smaller April 2024 cell measured at around 297 W hours per kilogram and the larger December cell 268. The thing with specific energy or gravimetric energy density, I had a comment tell me to be clear on those terms, is it typically doesn't get better, right? When you first test it, you're testing like the least amount of things you need to be able to test it. But by the time it reaches consumer grade, where you have pouches to deal with, the weight goes up and so the the density goes down, the numbers the final numbers go down. It is worth reporting that of all the things that

### 1 The Verdict - Trust, Science & What's Next [26:14]

I mentioned, only really one thing I can prove, and that is that they changed that report for the cold weather testing for some reason. I'd love to reach out to them and get an answer for why. Maybe it's coming up soon and they wanted to have more fun with it. But the rest of this stuff is kind of internet soothing, right? There's no one's verified this, but building batteries is really hard. You don't just grab a couple of buddies and start a startup and build batteries. We've had companies who have raised billions go bankrupt and not be able to figure this out. That's what led people to think that they're acquiring this or licensing a technology from somebody else who's figured something out. But Donut is like the master marketing arm building hype and stuff and they are good at that. But I will say I'm not sure if we'll follow up any further because I didn't love how this one went. I thought it was too much filler and not enough science. If you give me a good amount of science, I'll tolerate the rest of it. But I don't know. If you guys comment and tell me that you want me to keep going, I will. But there is some good news. Our next video is not going to be about donut. We're covering some really awesome wind powered techniques for sail ships. I know we used to use wind for ships all the time. We're making a comeback with some really cool, awesome engineering tech. Also, as you can imagine, in front of me here is a treasure trove of information. And if you want to access some of these reports or findings and things I put together, join our mailing list. We'll put out an email with links to everything and join our Discord. Huge shout out to CK and Corgi Wrangler who've been very active in our Discord. We've had some fun conversations. We'll keep it going. This is clearly interesting. I just don't want the spectacle to overshadow the science. For me, that is when I will stop covering this. As long as the science and the engineering is sufficiently interesting for me to keep doing it, I'll keep doing it. But as always, we've gotten this far because of the community component to this. Our findings, our videos have been cited in a bunch of stuff. I actually didn't even know about this, but people have shared LinkedIn posts and reports that have come out with our names all over them. Um, it's been an honor to do this and we'll have fun and keep doing it if you guys want us to. But hopefully the next test or the next test is in 2 weeks by the way. And hopefully it is substantial. A cold weather test. I want to see that. That would really change my mind. But so but let's keep this going. Let's be active in the comment section. We read all these comments. We see what you guys are saying. It helps us form our narrative of what to tackle, what insights to try to bring to all of you. And the community component to this has been amazing. As much as this has been about marketing from Donut, I think it's also us curious sustainable energy nerds who've really come together in a really cool way and it's been fun to see. So, keep it going. And if you think we've earned it, hit that subscribe button and the bell icon so you don't miss our future videos. We have some really awesome stuff planned, not just around donut, other cool stuff, too. But, as always, thanks for watching. Check out this video next and I'll see you next