69. Green Screen - the carbon footprint of TV

SPEAKER_01 0:03

Hello, welcome to Talking Rubbish, a weekly podcast delving deep into the world of recycling and discussing the truth behind snappy headlines and one-sided stories. In this episode, we will discuss the carbon in TV and film. Our fire extinguishers, rubbish or not, and I have a question about bagging up our recycling. I'm James Piper, author of the Rubbish Book, and I'm joined by Robbie Stanafort. Hi from Rubbish Friend. Good morning, Robbie. Hey James. Happy Bin Day influencers. I don't know about everyone else, but it's been a busy week for us, hasn't it? Oh yes. We've been all over the place. We went to Lucas Aden Uxbridge to sort of do a live episode. We just uh we did a trash talk for them. And it was really interesting because we got to do a bit of a trash talk about sleeves around bottles, which is which actually has proven to be a fascinating topic. I sort of wanted we wanted to show uh do like some rubbish or nots with them, some rubbish questions and a bit of a trash talk. I've ended up coming away thinking, actually, this trash talk is really interesting. Let's let's do it as a proper episode. So in the next few weeks, I think we'll do a uh do an episode about sleeves around bottles, and uh that uh we'll be heavily focused on League Casade because that's where we what we've been doing this week. So thanks to them for having us out and also therefore being the inspiration for a future episode. It's very helpful.

SPEAKER_00 1:17

Absolutely. Clearly, uh we do have a gap in our lives for the scintillatingly doll.

SPEAKER_01 1:23

I was I was listening back last week thinking we didn't mention Ethel every week. Let's stop mentioning her, but then we've we've just thrown that in, she's back. And straight after Lucas Age, you were up to Scotland, I think.

SPEAKER_00 1:36

Yeah, I was at a Chartered Institute for Waste Management uh seminar up in Scotland. So interesting how the different nations of the UK have slightly different challenges when it comes to waste and recycling. So I was talking up there about a whole multitude of things, including, of course, extended producer responsibility, the thing that's going to govern how waste is paid for in the whole of the UK.

SPEAKER_01 2:04

Trash talk.

SPEAKER_00 2:06

Let's talk Albert. You know what Albert is, probably? I do know what Albert is. It's that thing at the end of a, I think, only BBC, but I might be wrong.

SPEAKER_01 2:20

Well, I will let you know whether it's only BBC that will come up as part of this trash talk, I'm sure. But yes, this week we're heading into the world of TV. Just last week I finished the traitors, celebrity traitors. No spoilers here, but I'm sure. I'm sure lots of up influencers were listening. And I was thinking we should do the sustainability of the traitors. Unfortunately, I had this idea too late. I had this idea, and by the time this goes out, it'll be irrelevant. Sort of had the same thought about rubbish or not on a poppy as I was walking in today. I saw so many poppies, and I thought, oh, it's too late to do rubbish or not on poppies. So next year, I think we'll do an episode on the traitors, whether and the sustainability of it, and maybe we'll um, you know, maybe we'll have a rubbish or not in the same episode for poppies as well. But this week we are heading into the world of TV, but just general TV, because next week we're having a chat with Steph um as part of our interviews that we do every five episodes. And Steph is the sustainability manager for various TV shows, and she's worked on things like Rivals, Hijack, and more recently Down Cemetery Road, which is big at the moment on Apple TV. And so, because with our interviews, I really just want to get into a detail. I don't want to spend an hour just talking about the background. I always think it's good for us to do a bit of a basics episode, and so I'm trying to get us all up to speed on how people calculate sustainability in TV shows.

SPEAKER_00 3:39

And when you say all, you mean you're trying to get Robbie up to speed.

SPEAKER_01 3:43

It is true actually. When we set up this podcast, lots of advice was talk to a single listener. Don't, you know, just to imagine in your mind that you're talking to a single listener, and I just get derailed on that because so often I am talking to Robbie. Um, so an average hour of film or TV in 2022 contributed 12.8 tons of CO2. So that's an average hour of TV, and that's about 14 return flights from London to New York. And I guess the sad thing is this is increasing. This is not a number that is decreasing. And I guess that's partly because productions are just getting so much more ambitious, so much more expensive. TV is now way more like film than it used to be, you know, when we think about things like Game of Thrones or even traitors, actually. It's so high, high profile and high production that it's going to have a much higher carbon footprint. But the UK is actually quite low. I I found a report from America called Carbon Emissions from Film and TV Production, which suggested that amongst the members of the Sustainable Production Alliance, the average was 77 tons for a one-hour scripted drama. So that's up from 12 in the UK. And for a temp pole film, so you know, a massive box office hit, that could be as high as 3,370 tons. Oh my god, how long's this film? 10 hours. It is a huge amount of carbon, 3,370 tons. And again, with films, you're gonna have more transport, more locations, so there's gonna be lots of things that increase that carbon footprint. But it isn't if you compare the two, so in the UK, TV is 12 tonnes, sorry, if we compare the three even. In the UK, 12 tons for an hour of TV. In America, 77 tons for an hour of TV. And then what, a two-hour film, 3,370 tons. That is a huge increase when you talk about the difference between film and TV.

SPEAKER_00 5:35

Yeah, and in my mind's eye, I really can't work out where the difference comes from. I presume you're gonna say it's really complicated how to do the maths on this, because I can't think about how the production can be so different between that one hour in the UK and the tentpole film.

SPEAKER_01 5:54

Let's get into it. I mean, it it we're talking about the process between from pre-production to post-production. And I think you're right. I think there is a big question mark as to how it can be so much more. But films will have a huge amount of time between pre-production and post-production. And if you're starting to think about all the editing, the music, everything involved in all that, the data storage, it's gonna start getting quite significant. I guess the traitors is an interesting case study here, actually, just mentioning them early. If we think about TV, it's filmed in a castle in Scotland. I guess in theory, that is one set. You haven't had to build the set. They do build some of it, like the round table, I think, is held just in a big banquet hall, and so that that is actually a set built within the hall that they will dismantle and put back. Because I know it's used for weddings and things like that when it's not um not the TV show. So it is there are sets within the castle, but it is still filmed in a building that already exists. So you would imagine that that would have a relatively low carbon footprint, and again, we'll get into that maybe when it's airing in the next year or so. If you compare it to something like Race Across the World, where you're traveling all the time, it's going to be significantly different between the two shows. However, what I've thought about was actually the US traitors uses the same castle. So here you have two shows that should have a relatively similar carbon footprint, but the US one will have a higher carbon footprint because it's having to fly all the contestants over and all the production crew and everything.

SPEAKER_00 7:15

Okay, yeah, that's a lot of carbon gone just on the travel budget for however many 50 people or something that it will take to fly over from America.

SPEAKER_01 7:24

Exactly. So even though you're reusing sets. And I actually don't know how these carbon calcs work with reusing of sets. Like if you have a this is a question we should ask Steph next week. I'll just make a note of it. What happens when you've got a show that reuses sets to pay half the carbon emissions? Or does everyone take all of the carbon emissions again and again and again? And therefore that would be that's quite an interesting thought actually that I haven't had before. Anyway, so today we wanted to talk about the Albert certification. And as you said, Robbie, that is the thing that appears at the end of a show, and you are extremely likely to see, in fact, you will see it at the end of every BBC production, but you might also see it in other channels. And it's just at the very end of the credits, there'll be a screen that comes up, a title screen that says who the production company was, and normally in the bottom left it will say Albert, and it will have a little footprint. Um, and that is to say it was an Albert certified production. And we are asking the question: does it help TV clean up its act? And does having a certification improve things? Do you know why it's called Albert, Robbie?

SPEAKER_00 8:23

I I literally have no idea. I'm thinking Albert, Albert, Uncle Albert from Only Fools and Horses. Is that showing my age? That's the only Albert I can think of.

SPEAKER_01 8:33

It's funny actually, because I probably heard about Albert for the first time, maybe 10 years ago. I think I went to an event in London and they had the people from Albert doing a presentation on how to improve sustainability in TV. And I don't think they ever said where it came from. I've only found out from planning this episode. It is called Albert because it came into being through the BBC. It was actually an employee called Richard Smith at the BBC who decided they needed a tool to track carbon, and he did it for EastEnders. And East Enders is famously filmed in Albert Square, so they called it Albert.

SPEAKER_00 9:07

There we go. Okay. I got it about one second before you said it, after saying East Enders.

SPEAKER_01 9:14

Yeah. So every time you see Albert at the end of a show, you'll know that's actually come from Albert Square in Eastenders. After the BBC developed it, so they uh Richard Smith created it, he was an employee of the BBC, basically head of sustainability. He created it. The BBC actually thought, well, this is a really useful tool, but we shouldn't be the only ones to use it. We should give it to everyone. So the BBC gave it to BAFTA, which is the British Academy of Film and Television Arts. So they represent the whole industry, and they decided to roll it out as something that every channel could use. So it's not just a BBC initiative now.

SPEAKER_00 9:46

Okay, great that it expanded beyond just the BBC because obviously that's tiny compared to the global TV shows that are getting made now.

SPEAKER_01 9:56

It is basically, it's very simple. It's a carbon footprint calculator for TV productions, but it is the largest sustainability program in global TV. So it's not, even though it's kind of UK focused, it is the largest globally and has around two and a half thousand productions that get registered each year or get accredited each year.

SPEAKER_00 10:15

And presumably someone from each production is going through the painstaking process of registering all the things that they're doing. You know, it's quite an endeavor, I should think, for 2,500 to be accredited. Exactly.

SPEAKER_01 10:28

And Steph, who we're interviewing next week, did this for rivals down Cemetery Road, these shows. That's what she was doing, working out how much carbon they were using, where they could improve, um, and where they would offset versus basically reducing. There are two parts to it. So there's a carbon calculator and a carbon action plan. So the carbon calculator is just going, okay, if you choose to serve veggie meals instead of beef, this is the difference. And then it sets kind of rules and numbers for what could be saved or not saved, depending on the choices that you make. The carbon action plan is actually the thing you have to complete that allows you to display the Albert logo at the end of your show. So you start off doing your calculations and then you fill in an action plan to say, okay, we're gonna only serve veggie meals. We're going to use electric generators. And the last question, because I had to look through the carbon action plan, the last question says, Will you offset your emissions? Now I read that this was mandatory for UK productions. So to be accredited, you had to offset your emissions. But when I was speaking with Steph actually in prep for this, she informed me that's actually no longer the case and the offsetting is voluntary.

SPEAKER_00 11:34

Oh, maybe we'll find out why next week then.

SPEAKER_01 11:36

Yeah, I couldn't quite understand it because okay, let me give you an example of how much money it costs. So the offsets, if you choose to do them, are done through Ecology, who we mentioned in episode 49, our carbon episode. They have a program called Creative Offsets, and that costs £10.50 a ton. They had a calculator on their website, and to put it in perspective, if I was working on a £1 million project, which was scripted on location, so had travel involved, and it was £1 million, it would cost me £400 in carbon credits.

SPEAKER_00 12:05

Wow, okay. So it's not ridiculously expensive, let's say.

SPEAKER_01 12:09

I don't know why it's not mandatory. It's a ridiculously small amount of money. Just make it mandatory. So I think it used to be, I don't think it is anymore.

SPEAKER_00 12:16

I'm also not quite sure about the titling of these creative offsets. Isn't like creative accounting something that means not doing accounting right? These creative offsets, I'm not quite sure where they come from.

SPEAKER_01 12:31

Very true. And after the carbon reductions and offset is complete, your production can be awarded a one, two, or three-star certificate. And the star rating is based on how many questions you committed to in the carbon action plan. Um so if you say I'm gonna do all these things and improve all these things, you can get a three-star certificate. If you only do a few of them, you might get a one-star certificate. And the BBC, as you've identified, requires all its programs to be certified. So there is you cannot put a production on the BBC without being certified. So if you're watching a TV program tonight and it's on the BBC, wait till you get right to the end of the credits and you'll see the Albert logo with a footprint. If you're on ITV, Channel 4, Netflix, Sky, any of those, there is a chance, but it is not mandatory. Um and just to give those numbers, in 2023, 3,03 film and TV productions submitted carbon footprints and 2,451 were certified. So that begs the question: why isn't everyone getting certified? It's a very good question. And one I had as well, because I thought, well, if you don't have to do the carbon offsets and all you have to do is the action plan, why is it not everyone? Why would you go through that process and not be certified? So I had a little look. Um, it could be a regional thing, that's the first thing. The calculator, the first part, is available globally. Anyone can use that, but the carbon action plan isn't everywhere. So what you might have is some countries where people have done the carbon calculator, so therefore they've classed as submitting their carbon footprint, but they're not allowed to be certified because they haven't done the action plan. And then there are some basic things that you need to achieve to be certified. There's some kind of absolute showstoppers in the action plan that if you do them, you automatically can't be certified. So an example of that is if you're filming something in the UK, you are not allowed to use domestic flights. So if we think about the traitors, they're not allowed to fly the contestants from London to Scotland, they have to take the train or drive in order to be certified. And if they were to fly, that would automatically mean they weren't allowed to be certified.

SPEAKER_00 14:34

Oh gosh. So this week's episode of the podcast wouldn't be allowed to be certified then, James, because I had to take a flight up to Scotland due to timings. Slap on the wrist for me. We're still certified.

SPEAKER_01 14:47

You and I are still sat in Bristol right now. If you were sat in Scotland doing your recording, I would agree with you. And whilst it is global to an extent, uh my understanding is Albert is very UK focused, and there are equivalents around the world, so there's things like the Green Product Green Production Guide in the US, EcoProd in France. Most broadcasters around the world will expect some sustainability reporting as standard. And I guess just pausing here, it's quite good, isn't it? Because our podcast, what I want to do is find things that I've never really thought about. And I think for me, this is one of those things. I I watch TV much less than I used to now I have a young son. I've never really thought about the sustainability of it. And it's quite reassuring to me that there are these kinds of programs in place that hold people to account and also stop them doing things that you would say are just uh pointless, like flying people up for a TV show when they could just take the train. It's really nice that there's someone in there saying, actually, let's make sure we don't do this. Whether it causes people to reduce their carbon or not, that's a different question, which we'll come on to now. But it's nice that it exists. So, where does carbon come from on TV? Let's think about the main things. I guess the biggest chunk by far is travel. Um, around 50% of a production's carbon footprint comes from travel and fuel. And this could be way higher. If you think about a documentary series like Blue Planet or Planet Earth, you know, they're having to fly people to the remotest places on the world to film for months. It's going to be very significant, that travel cost and that carbon associated with it.

SPEAKER_00 16:20

Yeah, and in a way, I suppose being place-based and then having to build stuff is probably less carbon intensive than flying around the world, I would have thought. You know, just the logic of filming in one location, as you mentioned, with the traitors, say, in Scotland in one castle and build a couple of sets, it's surely gotta be a much lower carbon way of producing that show than say flying them to different locations to do each of the tasks uh every day.

SPEAKER_01 16:52

I think so. And we say food waste is the most important thing to increase recycling rates. Well, travel is the equivalent for the TV industry. According to the Albert report I was reading, just 1% of travel was electric in 2022. You then have things like power consumption, so onset lighting, the generators they use, they use very old school diesel generators on a lot of these productions. Again, super quick wins just to upgrade some of this stuff and get a bit more modern with the the stuff that you're using. Materials we talked about, so set builds, costumes, props. That's actually something I want to talk about in the future because there's some really interesting things around what they do with the old sets and costumes. And I think we can we can have a good interview on that in the future with someone else. So I'm gonna just hold that one for another day. But as I said at the beginning, it's not just filming, there's also post-production, which is extremely energy intensive with large amounts of data storage. I was having a look, I don't think Albert take that into account. Uh what they do, so from what I understand, what they do is they ask how long did you spend in the post-production suite? And then they sort of apply on average. They go, okay, well, if you spent 10 hours doing post-production, this is how much power you used. But of course, it's going to differ massively across different productions, where you're based, what electricity you're using, where your data storage is. So I definitely think they need to get more accurate in working out the post-production piece. It shouldn't just be a this is how many hours I spent, so therefore this is the energy.

SPEAKER_00 18:15

And I suppose it's about the particulars of what you were doing with AI and things, as we know, that five seconds you spend doing some sort of an AI prompt is way more energy intensive than just a normal Google search. There must be an equivalent for the type of programs that you're using when you're in that post-production phase.

SPEAKER_01 18:34

When we talk about carbon from TV, it's also us and distribution, which again is not part of Albert, but might be in the future. The certification only takes into account pre-production to the end of post-production. But I found some research from Future Source and Interdigital that suggested that TV and video streaming industry accounts for 4% of global emissions. Okay, so us watching TV is double the entire aviation industry.

SPEAKER_00 19:02

Really?

SPEAKER_01 19:03

Whoa. That's crazy, isn't it? And I can't believe they're not taking that into account. You know, if you decide to put your show out on the BBC and on BBC iPlayer, does it, and it's focused in the UK, that will have a big difference to something that goes on Netflix around the world, you know, and when the BBC have a massive hit like the traitors that lots of people are watching worldwide, it'll be very different to a daily Extenders that's got a UK focus. Data requirements for airing that will be so different. I definitely think that needs to be taken into account when we're working out the sustainability of a production. So we've talked about those things in terms of getting the certification. So those are the things that create carbon. In terms of getting the certification, these are the things you have to look at. So when you're looking at pre-production, you have to do carbon estimates before the shooting starts. You have to make decisions like am I going to use electric cars? Are we going to use reusable bottles and cups? And I know Steph will talk about that next week. Are we going to avoid diesel generators? Around 70% of productions use diesel generators in 2022. When we get onset, are we going to use low energy LED lighting? Digital cool sheets rather than paper. Is the catering going to be veggie vegan versus meat? Just 4.4% of productions were completely veggie or vegan in 2022. So I know, and Steph, I'm sure, will tell us next week, that is a hard thing to do. It's hard to get people into veggie and vegan. She was actually telling me as I was prepping for this that if she tries and makes a production go veggie or vegan, people will order their stuff off deliveroo because they're so angry at it. So you end up increasing carbon because people ignore the food, so you end up with more food waste. But also they're deliverooing their own meals. And so you've got like the transport associated with a new meal that you hadn't even planned for. So it's just bonkers, isn't it? The studio, when you're on set, the studio setup's really important. Um when I had a look, just 14 studios in the UK were running on renewable electricity compared with over 2,000 that are not renewable.

SPEAKER_00 20:55

Wow, why is that? I'm absolutely shocked. I thought that would be like a quick win, and you can get tariffs that are relatively comparable on price. That seems crazy. I would agree with you, yeah.

SPEAKER_01 21:07

And I think that trend will change. I uh it has to, you know, things have to become more renewable. So that's when you're on set, when you get into post-production and delivery, you're asking things like can the production work be done remotely rather than everyone having to come into an office? What's the data center efficiency? Again, only a third of production offices were running off renewable energy. A quick win, just transfer that over. You know, it's it's really, really odd. And one of the things that Albert does that's really important is training. So they do a lot of editorial and production sustainability training. And it is important that you engage with that in order to be certified. So if someone's working in the TV and film industry, they will have to go through some training programmes as part of accrediting for Albert. Which is great because hopefully that stops people ordering things on delivery, for example. If they're not happy with the veggie option, maybe for that one meal they'll put up with veggie because they'll understand that it's got a lower carbon footprint. I was trying to find a case study, and actually one of the ones I thought was quite good was Sky's A League of Their Own. Do you watch it?

SPEAKER_00 22:05

Not heard of it. What's that one?

SPEAKER_01 22:07

You haven't heard of a league of their own? Okay. Never heard of it. All right. It's a uh football commentary show, I think. So on Sky they talk about it's like a bit of fun and it's uh I don't know much about it either. I was relying on you to be honest. Like amateur pundits type thing. Uh I don't even know if it's amateurs, it might be professionals. Hang on. Who's in the league of their own at the moment? God, this is the blind leading the blind, isn't it? We have no idea. Isn't this terrible? I should have looked this up. Uh I've never even heard of it. Are you joking? Oh my goodness. It's is it still presented by I think it's presented by James Corden and Romash Ranganathan. Uh but here on Wikipedia it says it's had people like Freddie Flinthoff, Jamie Redknapp, Georgie Thompson, John Bishop, Jack Whiteall. Okay, but it's like a game show type thing, yeah? Yeah, were they yeah, I think so, but focused on football. Anyway, that's enough about what a League of Their Own is, which is not where I thought we were gonna focus this discussion. Um, they have reduced their carbon footprint by 47%. So they were down at 2.29 um CO2 per hour produced. So CO2 emissions per hour produced. And what they did was they said no domestic flights, we've got to be using public transport electric vehicles. They said be free catering, no single-use plastics. Gets my usual pause of why plastics not packaging. Uh local hotels with green and eco-credentials, and they donated the unwanted sets, props, furniture, and costumes. Now, it is worth pausing here to say emissions are so linked to the genre, and an in-studio production is always going to be one of the lowest. So we just have to say that. But that reduction of 47% is still significant, and I think it's really good just to see those things that they focused on.

SPEAKER_00 23:53

Yeah, no, it's a great effort. I'm quite interested to see rather than going fully veggie or vegan, they've just gone beef free, so at least they can try and make steps in that general direction.

SPEAKER_01 24:03

In the Albert report, they talked about, you know, they've got the carbon impact of beef versus chicken versus fish, and it is, as we know, it is significant. Albert also have this thing called planet placement, which I thought was worth us focusing on because I really loved it. So this was about how often, basically, is the planet mentioned in a TV show? Yeah, so how often do we as viewers experience something related to climate change or the environment as we're watching TV shows? And so what they said in this report was 36% of productions said they had props, backgrounds, or actions that related to sustainable lifestyles, and 39% had climate, sustainability or environment as part of their dialogue. And for children's programs, this was significantly higher. About 65% of children's programs had climate, sustainability or environment as part of the dialogue.

SPEAKER_00 24:52

That's brilliant. So, like subliminal messaging that is actually good for people, as opposed to nefarious product placement.

SPEAKER_01 25:00

What a brilliant idea. Exactly. They call this planet placement. And did you know actually Succession? Have you watched Succession? No, but I have at least heard of that one. Okay. I can talk more on this because I love it. But yes, Succession, so the story that is unrelated to Reaper Murdoch, uh, but the one that Reaper Murdoch refuses to allow any of his exes to talk about in the press. Um did you know Succession had a plot point where a character called Greg was disinherited by his grandfather? And basically his grandfather announced he was going to give his fortune to Greenpeace. And according to The Guardian, that led to more than 22,000 people looking at how to leave money in their wills to Greenpeace, which was a tenfold surge in traffic. And it led Greenpeace to actually change their handle on X to Gregpiece to capitalise off the publicity.

SPEAKER_00 25:46

Gosh, doesn't that just show you what the effect it can have? You know, this placement in TV. I cannot believe that. That's astounding. Hopefully, some people did leave it in their wills rather than just Google it.

SPEAKER_01 25:58

Although I found, I mean, it was quite a negative plot point. It was like the grandfather going, You're disinherited, Greg, and everyone's going, Oh, I'd like to disinherit my grandson or granddaughter. Let's um yeah, let's look at how we do that. I asked Steph about planet placement because I found it really interested. And she's she pointed me in the direction of subtitles to save the world, which is another report that Albert have done, which looks through production subtitles to look at how much they talk about the climate. And this is compare, they compare it to things like mentions of dogs or the NHS. So, of course, I had to go and read that report. I had to see what they were saying.

SPEAKER_00 26:37

Oh, brilliant. So you're gonna tell me that they mentioned dogs way more than they mentioned climate change, aren't you? Yes, unfortunately so.

SPEAKER_01 26:44

So in the latest version of the report, which was the year 2020, so it's big on COVID, uh, climate change was mentioned 12,715 times. Dogs were mentioned 286,626 times. Oh my word. And the NHS, bear in mind this is COVID, was mentioned 90,885 times.

SPEAKER_00 27:06

Okay, so we need to get up those climate change mentions in the future, surely, in those subtitles.

SPEAKER_01 27:11

In 2020, climate change was mentioned a similar number of times to the words Shakespeare, furlough, and vegan.

SPEAKER_00 27:20

Vegan's pretty good, but yeah, I'm not sure Shakespeare. Good for the culture, not necessarily so great for the planet.

SPEAKER_01 27:27

I can tell you it's a hell of a lot better than 2018, where it was said 75% less climate change in 2018. Okay. Which was similar to the words rhubarb, zombies, and urine.

SPEAKER_00 27:42

Oh my word. Rhubarb, that is not a very well-mentioned word. Was there a rhubarb growing documentary or something that you have to do?

SPEAKER_01 27:52

No idea. No idea. Don't they say in films and TVs, if you're an extra and you're in the back, you have to say rhubarb over and over, and it looks like you're talking to maybe the subtitles were picking that up. It was just all the extras going rhubarb, rhubarb, rhubarb, rhubarb. I remember that from my like year nine drama lessons. So Planet Placement, which is the one I was most interested in, is actually just one of four initiatives that Albert run. And we'll talk more about them next week, but they've got one called Green Rider, which is a project to get the stars of a particular show to ask for environmental initiatives as part of their contract. I'm sure Steph will have um information on that next week. Creative Energy, which is a partnership with Ecotricity to deliver 100% renewable energy to productions, which we sort of mentioned is a really important thing that needs to happen. And Screen New Deal, which is a roadmap to net zero by 2050. So a report on best practice. So those are the four things that Albert has outside of their certification.

SPEAKER_00 28:49

And so we're gonna find out how in future to have a green rider when we go to places like LucasAid with the podcast, are we? Instead of demanding only blue MMs. I would like an electric golf buggy to pick me up, drive me into the offices.

SPEAKER_01 29:08

I love it. I could walk, but you know, electric golf buggy. So I guess the question, Robbie, is does it work? Despite this accreditation, carbon use does appear to be increasing year on year. Now, I've got a few thoughts on that. This could be because the reporting is getting better, and there certainly was a discussion about that with transport. They they're getting better at estimating the carbon costs of different things. I suspect it's probably partly as well because productions are just getting bigger and TV is becoming more like film. I mean, I'm personally very excited for the new Harry Potter TV series, which is being filmed in the UK, but of course, that's basically like film now. That's as high quality as the films were 20 years ago when they started coming out. So I think it is just worth acknowledging that the carbon of TV is increasing because the productions and expectations from us as viewers are increasing.

SPEAKER_00 30:00

Well, let's just hope that Harry Potter set isn't using diesel generators then.

SPEAKER_01 30:04

I guess it's good that these things are visible and accreditation does require you to be honest and requires reductions and offsetting, at least opens people's eyes to that. I suspect without it, without the accreditation, we would not see the focus that I know people like Steph give this and you know the real drive to get people to have veggie meals and to take electric cars and all that kind of stuff. So when we hear some examples from Steph next week and we get into the detail of this, I think it's just worth us reflecting on would those things have happened without this certification. And as we've said across many episodes, just to wrap up, sustainability requires cultural change, not just a checklist. Um, and I'm super interested to find out next week if what we're seeing in TV and film is cultural change or if it's just people doing it because they feel they have to tick a box. Some more EPR developments, Robbie, following on from our discussion about sausages. We've had British Glass urging packaging producers to think twice before switching from glass. And this is a real problem, isn't it? The tr the challenge with EPR is this weight differential, which means that lighter weight stuff is cheaper than heavier stuff. And so we are starting to see companies move from glass bottles to things like tetracartons or plastic bottles.

SPEAKER_00 31:28

Yeah, I think it's one of those things that's just gonna rumble on uh in the coming years as all of these producers of packaging think how are they going to reduce their bills? Um British Glass have maybe come out and sort of tried to get on the front foot because things will maybe change in the future, but as it stands, it is just a weight-based target and it is more expensive per tonne.

SPEAKER_01 31:55

And I guess British Glass are saying there will be regulatory and market changes that will rebalance things. So if you just react to your EPR bill, which went out in October, if you just react to that, when things start to get rebalanced, you're gonna find that you wish you hadn't moved away from glass. That's their view. And we had an environmental lawyer get in contact and say, thank you so much, Anita, for sharing this and others. Lots of people messaged about this, but in episode 66, we were talking about pre-consumer waste, uh, specifically that rocky recycling truck. And I mentioned the definition of recycling was the action or process of converting waste into a reusable material. I mentioned that offcuts are considered waste when we were talking about the definition of recycling. This is not strictly true, and I think we're gonna have to do a whole episode on this, Robbie. Like what is waste? Because it's really, really complicated. And I guess the simplest way of explaining this is legally there is a rule that offcuts created in your own factory and then re-melted and used in the same manufacturing process are actually byproduct, not waste. Ah, so they never actually become waste, according to this lawyer. Exactly. So, and this is because when they introduced the plastic packaging tax, we ran the risk of everyone going, I've got 30% recycle content, just by creating more offcuts in their factory that were 30% of the weight and then putting it back in. So they said actually, when they were creating that tax, they said, let's redefine what waste is and let's not include that. Now there is a loophole here, which I don't think I'm exposing. I think everyone understands this loophole exists, that one factory could create offcuts and another factory could create offcuts, and then those two factories could swap their offcuts and both have created waste because it's not the same factory. You know, that's how they define it as the same factory. The trouble with all this stuff is you create horrendous loopholes that people like to expose. So if I've got that wrong, Anita, please feel free to write in. It's really, really useful to have an environmental lawyer checking in on us, Robbie.

SPEAKER_00 33:55

Gosh, yeah, that's the best possible person for additions and corrections for sure. Thanks, Anita.

SPEAKER_01 34:06

As always, we'd like to take a moment to thank our sponsor, EcoSurety, who are on a mission to rid the world of unnecessary packaging. They help brands navigate the tricky world of extended producer responsibility, but that is not all. They also collaborate on some incredible recycling projects and consumer awareness campaigns for those tough to recycle materials. If you're an organization looking to make smarter packaging choices, check them out at ecosurity.com. And the best thing you can do is share our podcast with your friends and family and also leave us a review. It really, really helps us to grow. The algorithms love it if we get reviews saying people enjoy the show. So thank you for doing that. And if you do it, you could be Robbie's review of the week.

SPEAKER_00 34:42

So this week's review comes in from Sneer. I don't think they're sneering at us. I think they're probably sneering at some other people, judging by uh the comments that they've left. And the headline is that they're angry. You've made me angry on my dog walks. I can't help but judge people now on their dog poo bags. Great podcast, so informative, sharing all the tidbits you share. Look forward to bin day each week.

SPEAKER_01 35:10

My actual bin day is Friday though. I panicked, you know, because I get emails saying you've got a new review. It comes through and it comes through on our website. And I saw one that just said, You've got a new review, angry exclamation mark. And I thought, oh my god, what have we done? But you know, I'm sure we've made lots of people angry on their dog walk, sorry about that. And you can follow us at rubbishpodcast, you can email talkingrubbishpodcast at gmail.com or you can WhatsApp us. Also join our Discord, it's the easiest way to engage with us and listeners of the show. And the link to all of those things can be found in our show notes. Rubbish or not, today's rubbish or not came from me walking through the woods in Bristol because I was thinking, I have a few rubbish or knots in my mind that are worth doing. Um, some of them I'm still waiting for some info on, so I was struggling a little bit. And as I was walking through the woods in Bristol, next to a bin was a fire extinguisher. And I thought, wow, what how did that end up there? First of all, you thought, what the heck is that doing there? Then I thought, great rubbish or not. And actually, very useful for me because I do currently have a fire extinguisher in my kitchen that needs to be recycled. Ah, why is that? Someone in our house who should remain nameless. Let's, for the purposes of this podcast, call her Nellie, set fire to our oven.

SPEAKER_00 36:48

Oh dear. So it's a used extinguisher. There's nothing left in it, no.

SPEAKER_01 36:54

It is used. I can tell you that all of the whatever it was that was inside it went into the oven. And while we put out the fire quite successfully, we have not been able to use that oven since. So, Robbie, the fire extinguisher that's currently in my kitchen, used rubbish or not?

SPEAKER_00 37:12

Gosh, that's a very complicated thing. I'm sure it's not just a lump of metal that you can send off with the rest of your tin cans and aluminium drinks containers. So I'm gonna say it's rubbish in that you can't recycle it at home, but I think you've definitely got to take this with the rest of your kind of household waste that you need to take to your local recycling centre or council site and let them deal with it. I mean, it's loads of metal in this thing. They're pretty heavy, aren't they? Or is that just because it's full of liquid? Maybe they're actually not very heavy once they've been used, but surely those metals will be recycled. So I'm gonna say it is an or not because it's recyclable.

SPEAKER_01 37:57

Yeah, okay. I agree. I think and and hazardous, it's worth saying, it's under pressure. Some of the chemicals in it aren't great. So the first thing to say is, as you've said, don't put it in your household waste. Do not think, oh, this is aluminium, I'll put it in with the cans. It's pressurized extinguisher. It will be a disaster in your household waste. So don't do that. Like our old friend, the hot water bottle, they have expiration dates on them and they need to be changed roughly between five and twelve years, depending on what's in them. Do not empty it yourself unless you're using it in an emergency. Don't go, oh, this one's expired. I better empty it like I would my can before I take it to the tip. They don't want that. And we don't want those chemicals out. Some fire extinguishers, particularly the older ones, contain forever chemicals as part of their foam, and we do not want that entering the water course. I actually didn't have a chance to head to my household waste recycling centre, slash dump slash tip. So thanks to Jack from Bristol Waste for this information, as always. Very, very helpful. Really appreciate you um helping me out with this. It is treated as hazardous waste. Now, there's a bit of a side note here, because it's my understanding that household waste you bring to the household waste recycling centre is not legally classed as hazardous until you hand it over. Why is that? Well, because if you try, let's say you I mean, we could take this with like asbestos in your house or something like that. I personally would always get a professional to remove asbestos. But in theory, you could take asbestos to your to your household waste recycling centre, you double bag it, take it, put it in the asbestos bin. It's the same sort of thing with a fire extinguisher. Now, if you're moving hazardous waste, you need to be accredited as a hazardous waste transporter or a hazardous waste carrier.

SPEAKER_00 39:37

Of course, yeah.

SPEAKER_01 39:38

And if you're bringing it to your civic community site, your household waste recycling centre, you're not going to be accredited. And it would be unfair for them to find you on the way there if it's got a place for it in the centre. So what they do is they say, this isn't hazardous until the point you hand it over. And when you give it to us, it's now hazardous. We should recognise it's hazardous and treat it carefully and make sure we're, you know, very careful in transporting it. But you're gonna have all sorts of things. You know, gas canisters for barbecue is another good one. You go to your local centre, you buy a gas canister for a barbecue. You shouldn't need a hazardous waste carrier's license to bring that home. And so there's this exemption for household things. So when residents come to the household waste recycling center, bring in their fire extinguisher, they will, according to Jack, for in Bristol and I'm sure in most of them, there will be cages clearly marked fire extinguishers, and they just place them outside the cage, let someone know, and then an operative will unlock the cage to put them in. Um and that is how household waste will be treated. Uh businesses have a slightly different thing. So that's if you're a household businesses, um, any fire extinguisher covering a public or commercial premises will normally be serviced annually. And during that process, any expired units will get replaced, and whoever's doing the servicing will normally take away the old extinguishers, either for a small fee or as part of a servicing agreement. But if you have one in your house, like I currently do, you can drive it to the Household Waste Recycling Centre, and there will be a special place for fire extinguishers where they will then be sent off for recycling. Rubbish news. COP 30 is currently on in Brazil. Um we haven't done an episode on COP. I I keep thinking, should we do one? And then I think there are, and I'm gonna come on to it in a second, very good podcasts that cover the COPS. And you know, we could we could do it, but actually we should maybe leave it to them.

SPEAKER_00 41:28

Maybe next year we'll do something on the COPS so far it's been a bit of a cop out.

SPEAKER_01 41:33

Well, the yeah. The trouble is we have like big topics like toilet paper to discuss, and I can't I don't think we should be replacing it with the cop. Come on, we've got to do that wrapper around the Lucas A bottle, James. So yes, COP30 is on in Brazil, and as this episode goes out, it possibly will be wrapping up. Speaking of rappers, they'll be on their last day, I think, or second to last day. So COP stands for Conference of the Parties. It's an annual event where 197 countries get together. Though not quite, because notably this year, I don't think there are going to be leaders there from America, China, Australia, Indonesia, many others. So there's lots of leaders not heading out there this year, which is a real shame. So this year they're holding it in Bellum, which is quite symbolic as it's close to the mouth of the Amazon River. However, there's n because they're holding it there, there's actually not enough accommodation. So I don't know if you've seen the pictures, but the delegates have been housed on cruise ships, and it's quite jarring to think as I always say, you know, when they bring people to these events, and it's like we're having an event to talk about the environment, and you just think the carbon associated with this event is mad. And I feel like this picture of seeing a load of cruise ships, you know, parked up ready for their delegates to attend this conference for me personally is quite jarring. I think generally the cops do good things, and you know, it is an opportunity to agree to things like increasing funding to developing countries and making carbon commitments. So I think it's good that these things happen. As I said, I debated doing a trash talk on it. I think maybe next year we'll cover it when we've got a gap in our in our schedule, but just to promote outrage and optimism. So our friends at Outrage and Optimism, who once promoted Talking Rubbish. So uh, you know, we really, really like Outrage and Optimism, and and we've promoted their podcast before as well. They are the official COP30 podcast. So if you want all the details and all the behind the scenes, that's where to head over to. So Outrage and Optimism, who are the official podcasts. Slight side note. I cannot believe for this month they haven't rebranded themselves Outrage and Coptimism. Can you imagine? Can you imagine if someone asked us to host the Crubbish convention and we didn't rebrand Talking Crubbish? Like, what a missed opportunity.

SPEAKER_00 43:50

Come on, guys. You can have that one for free, guys. And so this week, gosh, this came through from Paul M. On our Discord, and it was a BBC news story. It was all over the place. There was also a little bit of TV footage, uh, like an ITVX news segment, and it's a guy called Stuart Atkinson, who is a self-proclaimed lover of the mundane. He must be a influencer, this guy, because he has produced a calendar of bins, of wheelie bins. So literally 12 different local authorities that he's picked. Predominantly they all seem to be in the northwest. So he's not he's from Manchester, he's not travelled very far uh to get these pictures of bins because he just thinks that this is a top topic that people are going to want a calendar for. And gosh, I must admit, I really want a version of this calendar. He's previously done calendars on pylons, M60 junctions, so he does really like the mundane. So probably love this podcast, to be fair. And he works for a hazardous waste company. So if you know Stuart Atkinson, I'm sure someone in our network, uh, one of the influencers must know him, then please tell him to get in touch with a podcast. I would absolutely love to get hold of one of these calendars. And I literally can't find it. You know, I'm trying to source one of these things uh because all I can see is news stories. But anyway, these calendars, it every month is a local authority. So one example was Bolton, uh, another Salford. And he's even put in his uh interview that they've got a cheeky pink lid. So I went and had a look at this cheeky pink lid. So it's a black wheelie bin with a pink lid, and it's for the food and garden waste. So quite striking that bin in Salford. Uh, and he's got all sorts of stats around the capacity of the bins uh for each of these local authorities per month. So well done, Stuart Atkinson, and thanks, Paul M on Discord uh for bringing it to our attention. That's absolutely spot on.

SPEAKER_01 45:57

Rubbus question. There was a chat over on Discord about bag recycling. Now, this is something I actually don't consider often. Because we have separate bins in Bristol, right? So we have to sort everything, you know, into our green, black, blue bins. Very, very unlikely to use a bag to contain recycling, like a carrier bag or a bin liner. However, in areas where they have a mixed wheelie bin for recycling, so you just have like a general bin and a recycling bin, I guess it is more tempting to use a bag. I've never thought about it. But if you're not kind of doing what I do, which is in your kitchen have lots of bins, taking those bins out to put in lots of bins, what do you do? You might have a bagged recycling bin and a bagged general bin in your kitchen, and so you just carry the bags out. So Louise on Discord was mentioning that in her area, most people use bags and they're not refused, even though the council requires items to be loose. So she was asking, well, what happens to the bags? What happens to the bagged waste? Do you have any thoughts on this, Robbie?

SPEAKER_00 46:57

So this is interesting. When I lived in Monmouthshire, I did have bags. We were supposed we were supplied with bags. And I always wondered, what are they doing with these bags? Now, presumably they must have some sort of bag splitter in the operation at the Murph. And you and I recently visited a Murph up in the sort of northwest of Bristol with Suez, and you posed the question to them on this one.

SPEAKER_01 47:26

I did, yeah. So thank you, Joe, for taking the time to answer. Now, again, this is a bit complicated because we're just talking to one Murph. Okay, so every MERF operates differently. So uh, but I will say what he said, and then we can explain why that might not be applicable to where Louise is based. So, as a rule of thumb, this would be treated as contamination, a bag. There is a chance that the pickers in the pre-sort cabin open the bags, but this is not required by Suez, and it would be a case of the picker being proactive, and that would only happen when the belt is relatively clear. And from what we saw, Robbie, it doesn't feel like the belt's clear very often. It was so busy.

SPEAKER_00 48:03

That was a busy old belt, yeah, with so much stuff coming at such a rate of knots as well, to bother to have the time to pull out a bag, especially if it's a black bag and you've got no idea what it is, it's very unlikely that that'd get split.

SPEAKER_01 48:17

So, in this particular MERF, what they're gonna do is if they see a bag of stuff, they're gonna take it and throw it away. Now, there is an exception, of course, with like Flex Collect, which we talked about before. So, where a local authority provides a bag, which would be Flex Collect, that's different because they will have a specific bin for that bag. They will go, okay, we'll take that off the line, we'll put that in this hopper that is the Flex Collect hopper. So that's different. But I think in the main, if you're using your own bag and it ends up at a MERF that doesn't have a bag splitter, doesn't have a process, first of all, to remove the bag, it's just going to get taken off as contamination. Now, this Murph we visited, Robbie, was largely for commercial contracts and overflow for local authorities. So it was not built to cope with a specific set of household material with a specific local authority contract. So Joe did say there will be other plants that Suez operate that do have bag splitting because the contract that they have is with a council that requires you to use bin liners. And that bit is the most important bit. There will be plants and MERVs with bag splitters in. But my view is using bags increases the risk of contamination and bad recycling. Because if we go, oh, it's all hidden in this bin liner, I won't bother washing it, cleaning it. I'll try and get some stuff in there that isn't really recycling. No one will know. Bin liners have a tendency to make us a bit more lazy with our recycling. And you know, me having to manually sort everything into bins every Wednesday night causes me to really make sure things are clean when I'm putting them in the bin, make sure they're they're the right material. So my advice is probably not to use bags. You know, it's a waste of material. The bag splitter's just gonna rip them off, they're gonna get sent for incineration. I personally think we should all be bagless. But as always, you should check with your local authority because there will be situations like Flex Collect where a bag is preferred and actually part of the recycling process. And probably your example of was it Mummasha, where they're providing you a bag, they will expect you to use that. Residual rubbish. This is something that has happened to us this week that has made us feel like an emoji. And I think the best emoji I've got is well, I've got two actually. I've got the yum emoji, the oh, that was delicious emoji, and then the angry emoji. So if I was texting you my feelings about this, Robbie, I would send both those emojis. And that's because I have been to Burger King this week. Burger King have introduced the Wagyu Burger, endorsed by Gordon Ramsay, not made by Gordon Ramsay, just endorsed by him, and part of the Gourmet King range. And this was actually my sister. She texts me saying, Have you seen the packaging around the Wagyu burger? So rather begrudgingly, Robbie, I had to do my homework and eat a couple of burgers this week. Couldn't be a vegan to do this podcast, could you? We wouldn't get any of the research done.

SPEAKER_00 51:02

Absolutely not. And your sister didn't text me too, but I must confess, in this last week, I was on the go and I had this exact Wagyu burger, so I know exactly what you're about to talk about. I didn't think you ever went to Burger King. I never, ever, ever go to Burger King. I literally had one this week. That's so funny. And what did you think of it? Would you have given it the Yam Emoji? I would definitely give it the Yam Emoji. It was actually a much better burger than the average. I think it was the branding of the Wagyu that tempted me over the pret next door, basically.

SPEAKER_01 51:36

Now that is interesting and worth us thinking about. But I agree with you. I thought it was delicious. Now, Burger King usually wraps their burgers with a bit of greaseproof paper. Not the Wagyu burger, because they want to demonstrate this luxurious feel. It came in one of the thickest cardboard boxes I've ever seen. And the opening experience was incredible. You know, for a fast food chain, I'm basically given a box, you know, a cube, and you open up the lid and suddenly this thing unfolds and the sides come down and the front comes down. It looks amazing. Visually, it looks amazing. It feels very premium. That's great. They're packaging for the high-end market for that look and feel. But my goodness, that is a lot of extra packaging. And I wanted to work it out. So I went and bought a Wagyu burger. It had, and I got the scales out. You got the scales out. Brilliant. Oh, well done. These scales are paying for themselves. I'm delighted. Every week. The Wagyu packaging. So the packaging around the Wagyu burger weighed 31 grams. And the normal burger, a normal whatever you would order that came in grease proof paper, would typically come with 3.8 grams. So the Wagyu burger was about 10 times more packaging than just a normal burger. Now I was trying to work out the impact of this. I did some quick and crude calculations, but Burger King say globally that they have 11 million visitors a day. So that's around the world with 19,000 restaurants. So I work that out of 579 visits per day per store. Now, of course, that's going to vary by size, country. So this is super crude. But if Burger King tell me they have 11 million people walk through their stores and they've got 19,000 stores, I can estimate 579 visits per day per store. In the UK, there are 554 stores. So in total, if everyone bought a burger, which of course they won't, some will buy chicken nuggets and other things. But let's imagine everyone buys something and buys a burger. We're at 320,737 burgers a day in the UK. That's a lot of burgers. Now there are no stats on how many Wagyu burgers they've sold, but I did find a stat that speciality burgers like this are normally about 4% of sales. So if that's true, in the UK, approximately 13,000 Wagyu burgers are sold every day. Now I can believe that. As you've said, you've never had a Burger King. We have both had this burger this week. So we're over-indexed in this burger. 100% of Talking Rubbish co-hosts have eaten a Wagyu burger this week. So I'm thinking it's more than 4%. But in the UK, 13,000 Wagyu burgers sold approximately. That means with that packaging weight difference, every three days, a ton of additional cardboard is sold. A ton of paper and cardboard that did not need to exist, had they wrapped it just in creaseproof paper, is sold every three days. Just from UK sales. That is five trees, 26,500 litres of water, which is 66,000 medium Burger King drinks, if you're interested. And 7,600 kilowatts of energy to create a ton of cardboard. If you convert that energy into calories, to just create the packaging needed for Wagyu burgers every three days would be the equivalent of eating over eight and a half million Wagyu burgers. Whoa. That is the decision they've made by going for thick cardboard boxes. So I have to say the burger was delicious, but I do not believe there is anyone who has one who says, gosh, you have to order one because it's got this amazing box around it. Other than your sister to you. Yeah, other than my sister, because I do a podcast. In my opinion, we have to stop this luxury equals heavy packaging. It drives me insane. If you want a luxurious experience, there are other ways of doing it. And to be honest, just the word Wagyu is doing it for you, and just the promo and the way you're promoting it is doing it. You've already made the order at the point you're given the packaging.

SPEAKER_00 55:35

Well, it worked on me, and I had no idea what the packaging was. Exactly. Yeah, there you go. You're a great case study. And so this one, in terms for me, in terms of an emoji, I think it's that like geek emoji, uh, is definitely the one uh that this stirred up in me because I had this very long trip up to Scotland early in the week that we keep referencing, had a burger on my way. And I was watching, and this is what my YouTube algorithm throws up for me, a 20-minute video on how to turn single-use vapes into a power bank wall. Now, got to insert a don't try this at home message. Uh, it was clearly a qualified electrician who was taking lots of safety precautions. But it was so enthralling and interesting to watch this guy literally empty out a container of used vapes that he had got from a local waste management company, and he referenced them and said that they had uh done all the due diligence to get hold of these vapes, and he was testing them, seeing which ones still had enough life in them, and he created this home power bank wall. So I'm sat uh watching this video in sort of the airport, well, not the lounge, just the open waiting area, watching it on my phone with my headphones in, and there was a lady sat next to me, and her emoji was raised eyebrow shocked at me spending 20 minutes. I I just got this, you know, that horrible feeling when someone's watching from over your shoulders, and she definitely did raised eyebrow shake of the head. What is the world coming to with this man watching a 20-minute video on turning vapes into a power bank walk? But it is amazing how one man's rubbish can be another man's rubies. So don't try this at home, but go try find that video. I found it enthralling.

SPEAKER_01 57:28

I had a similar experience this week. Nothing to do with recycling. I found an in-house Waffle House training video, and it is 25 minutes of how employees of Waffle House lay out a plate depending on what the customer's order is. If you've got 25 minutes in your life this week, first watch, no, if you've got 45 minutes, watch Robbie's video, then watch this Waffle House because it is unbelievable the complexity. Like there's people commenting going, I'm a rocket scientist and I don't have a clue how to do this Waffle House training. It's it's amazing. I'll put both in our link tree because you know it's worth watching. But my friends were like, you need to get a job. You can't spend 25 minutes watching a training video for a company you will never work for, have no desire to work for, but now you know how their in-house training works. Get a proper job, James. I like podcasting. As always, thank you all for listening. Thank you so much for the reviews and engagement. We just love getting the opportunity to do this podcast. Join our Discord, follow us on social media at rubbishpodcast. You can email talkingrubbishpodcast at gmail.com or you can WhatsApp us. And everything we have discussed today can be found on our link tree. The details for all those things can be found in our show notes. Other than that, all that's left for me to say is see you next Winday. Bye.

SPEAKER_00 58:46

Bye.