And we look at those markets and we say, there’s great subsurface potential within the sedimentary basins, within the state, or within this region. They have access to natural gas coming from Appalachia, they have access to gas coming from the Rockies, or coming from the Permian. And we say those are perfect market to decarbonize their grids by just replacing their aging coal and gas plants with NET Power. Take advantage of the subsurface that nobody’s taking advantage of and decarbonize their grids, probably a whole lot faster than other areas that have taken a renewables-only approach. So, it’s a really interesting dynamic that the power of our technologies really unlocks for us and our future customers.
Noel Parks: Great. Thanks a lot. It is a helpful distinction that you made there. And, early in the prepared remarks, I think there was a mention of just different technical task, I guess more on the design engineering side. And for example, as mentioned further refinement of the plant controls of our architecture with Baker Hughes. I was wondering if you could just talk about some of those initiatives. What’s involved? Are these lengthy product processes in any way — unexpected compared to what you were looking at earlier in the year?
Brian Allen: Yes, sure, Noel. This is Brian. No, nothing unexpected. I think anytime you change turbomachinery, every OEM has different strategies on things like how they cool third turbine or how they start and lignite, just fundamentals of how a turbine operates. And so we have to account for those in our plant design or plant controls, which is great. So we’re making those controls updates, which will then port over the long term to the utility scale design because that turboexpander, that turbomachinery will have a similar architecture and similar strategy. So it’s really more of a, in terms of the controls, real-time updates as the development progresses. But I would say also as we make some modifications to our plant moving the CO2 compressor and whatnot, there’s always more — when we designed the plant originally, there’s things we learned and different measurements we want to take.
So we’re taking the opportunity to upgrade some of our data acquisition, just for enhanced analysis of the cycle.
Operator: Our next question comes from the line of Wade Suki with Capital One.
Wade Suki : Good morning, everyone. Thank you for taking my questions. I guess just to go back to the supply chain constraints that you kind of discussed earlier in the call. Any update you can give us on cost for SN1 or even more broadly as you think about the OP1?
Brian Allen: Yes, this is Brian. I’ll address the first one. So we’re still in the middle of the FEED with Zachary. We are getting initial information from long-lead suppliers, but we’re not at a point yet where we’ve really gotten, I’ll say, firm negotiated bids that will keep progressing through the FEED in some — probably all the way through mid-next year. Certainly, it’s something we’re watching. And I’ll remind you that we’re in also a value engineering and optimization exercise here. So we’re not just a taker of price. I mean, we — our cycle sets the entire plant design and there’s things we can change and trade-off. So as we keep continuing the FEED process with Zachary and interface with Baker on much of the major equipment, interface with the ASU supplier, interface with our major heat exchanger partner.
All of these things were really optimizing the overall plant design and thus the cost. So that will really come together at the end of the targeting mid next year.
Wade Suki : Great. Thank you. And maybe could you give us some anticipated time — promise not to hold you to it, but anticipated timeline for OP1, just broadly speaking?
Danny Rice: Yes. So I think it’s really interesting. If you look at just the schedule that we have right now for some Project Permian online ’27, beginning at ’28. So we’re talking about four years from now. I mean OP1’s going to be in a position — and possibly OP2 and OP3 as we’ve started to finalize those ones. Now, those are all being positions where assuming that we can get the requisite Class II Class VI permits in place as those just kind of bottlenecks within the EPA for Class VI approvals start to get worked out and you get to that reasonable two to three year kind of time from submittal to approval, which is kind of what the EPA is targeting. You can see a place where those projects are ready to go, like ready to be turned online shortly after serial number one.
And so ultimately, it’s going to be a judgment call for us on how soon after serial number one, do we want to get OP1, OP2, OP3 online. And I guess the obvious question that response would cause is why wouldn’t you guys get it on right afterwards? And I think it’s really a function of making sure that we have as high enough of a confidence in the expected performance of Project Permian before we start ordering the equipment and start really finalizing the design of those follow-on projects. And I think we’re going to learn a lot as we go through this La Porte demonstration testing with Baker over the course of the next 24 months. That’s really going to bring up just our confidence level in the performance of serial number one because it’s just going to be scaled down components that Baker is going to be testing.
That will be really, really good read-throughs to Project Permian. And so as we start to get into this process, this competence will start to build in advance of Project Permian coming online, that will probably want to take advantage of being able to start to bring a lot of that backlog earlier into the end of this decade. So I guess the short answer is you could see it online a year after Project Permian if you wanted to take some technology risk, depending on our competence level. Or you could see it being a year and a half or two years after Project Permian, if we don’t want to take any sort of commercial risk and really know that this project’s going to be able to have all the guarantees and work exactly as performed. But the nice place that we’re at because Brian and the team are really designing this to be a standardized plant design.
