Tag Archives: bitcoin mining

Cedar Falls City Council May 18th 2026 – Bitcoin/Crypto Zoning

Posted on by
Reply

I attended the Monday May 18th, 2026 Cedar Falls City Council meeting to make a statement on bitcoin mining.

You can view the full video here. This is linked directly to the timestamp of my statement. You only get 5 mintues to make comments.

Below is the response to many false claims from the March and April Planning and Zoning committee meetings as well as some proposals about what we should focus on writing into a common sense city code for regulations for any business.

I ended up being quoted on the local news (without my knowledge!)

Local news Article

Simple mining Held an open house the 5-20-2026 where I also spoke to KCRG about zoning rules that would make sense for any business. .

Setting the Record Straight on Bitcoin Mining in Cedar Falls

I attended the April 22nd planning and zoning committee meeting and heard a number of claims about Bitcoin mining that deserve a factual response — and a more constructive conversation about what regulation should actually look like.

I am neither for nor against Simple Mining locating here. If Cedar Falls residents decide they don’t want miners in our city, we should not have them. But decisions should be made on accurate information. I’m a mechanical engineer and financial advisor , and I’ve given three public educational talks on Bitcoin at the Cedar Falls and Waterloo libraries. I’ve done extensive research on the grid through owning an electric car and following Bitcoin mining closely. I have no affiliation with Simple Mining or any cryptocurrency company. I’ve previously been involved in local charities including the Job Foundation, providing financial education to children, and Cedar Valley Gearheads, providing cars for people who can’t afford them. I mention this because Bitcoin is something I’ve determined is genuinely beneficial to the world — enough to speak up about in a public forum where it’s currently a minority view.

What follows is my attempt to correct the factual record — and then offer what I think a productive regulatory conversation actually looks like.

Part One: Claims That Don’t Hold Up

“Bitcoin mining causes extensive e-waste”

Annually, roughly 62 million metric tons of e-waste are generated globally. Bitcoin accounts for approximately 30,700 metric tons — about 0.05% of the total, or one two-thousandth of global e-waste. That’s a real number, but it needs to be kept in proportion. Global E-Waste Monitor 2024: https://ewastemonitor.info/the-global-e-waste-monitor-2024/ — Bitcoin E-Waste Monitor: https://digiconomist.net/bitcoin-electronic-waste-monitor/

“Bitcoin mining is making personal computers more expensive”

Bitcoin miners use ASICs — application-specific integrated circuits purpose-built for mining — not the general-purpose GPUs or chips found in consumer computers. There are roughly 5–6 million Bitcoin miners globally, a negligible share of annual chip production. The claim that they’re competing with your next laptop purchase doesn’t hold up. Source: https://research.grayscale.com/reports/the-power-of-bitcoin-mining

“Bitcoin miners will pollute our water”

The cooling solution referenced at the meeting was described as a biodegradable, corn-based liquid with no EPA reporting requirements for spills. That claim is worth verifying with the applicant — but that’s normal zoning due diligence, not evidence that Bitcoin mining is uniquely dangerous. City code can simply require EPA-approved coolants for any industrial operation without singling out mining.

“Bitcoin mining causes cancer and air pollution”

Bitcoin miners are computers. They run on electricity. They do not combust anything, produce exhaust, or emit particulate matter. There is no direct air pollution from the hardware itself. Iowa generates approximately 63% of its electricity from wind — the highest wind share of any state in the country. If you’re concerned about emissions from electricity generation, the argument belongs at the power plant, not at the mining computers. And if that concern is genuine, Iowa is actually one of the best places in the world to host a miner. Globally, 52.4% of Bitcoin mining already runs on sustainable energy sources, and coal’s share of Bitcoin mining has fallen from 36.6% to just 8.9% in recent years. Source: Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance: https://www.jbs.cam.ac.uk/2025/cambridge-study-sustainable-energy-rising-in-bitcoin-mining/

“A single Bitcoin transaction uses as much energy as six homes”

This is a misleading framing. Bitcoin doesn’t settle one transaction at a time — the energy secures the entire network and every transaction batched into each block. A better comparison is gold: the gold mining industry consumed 132 TWh of energy in 2023. Bitcoin’s estimated annual consumption is approximately 138 TWh — roughly equivalent — yet gold is never asked to justify its energy use on a per-transaction basis. Gold energy source: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2405851324000254 — Bitcoin energy source: https://www.jbs.cam.ac.uk/2025/cambridge-study-sustainable-energy-rising-in-bitcoin-mining/

“Bitcoin mining strains local power supplies and raises electricity costs”

This is the opposite of how these arrangements typically work. Large miners operate on interruptible contracts — they’re required to curtail operations during peak demand periods, which actually relieves grid pressure when it matters most. A stable, predictable industrial baseload like a mining operation helps subsidize the grid infrastructure that all ratepayers benefit from — including the capacity to run peaker plants like the new CFU facility when they’re genuinely needed. CFU stated at the last meeting that flexible industrial loads like these can help lower average electricity costs by reducing purchases during expensive peak periods. As Cedar Falls purchases more power collectively, we also gain negotiating leverage that benefits everyone on the rate.

One more thing that rarely gets mentioned: Bitcoin can actually reduce emissions

Some Bitcoin mining operations are deployed specifically to capture methane from oil fields, landfills, and agricultural waste that would otherwise be flared or vented into the atmosphere. Methane is roughly 80 times more potent than CO₂ as a greenhouse gas over a 20-year period. By combusting that waste gas to power mining instead of letting it vent or burn off uncontrolled, these operations actively reduce overall warming impact. The White House Office of Science and Technology Policy acknowledged in a 2022 report that certain crypto mining operations using vented methane may, in some cases, produce positive climate outcomes. Source: https://bidenwhitehouse.archives.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/09-2022-Crypto-Assets-and-Climate-Report.pdf

“Bitcoin creates no value — it’s just gambling”

Whether you personally value Bitcoin as an asset is one question. Whether it creates real-world value is a different one — and the answer is clearly yes.

In Virunga National Park in the Democratic Republic of Congo — Africa’s oldest national park — excess electricity from hydroelectric plants powers a Bitcoin mine. Revenue from that operation funds park infrastructure, conservation efforts, and staff salaries. Source: https://www.weforum.org/videos/bitcoin-mine-power/

Gridless, a company operating across rural Africa, partners with small hydro and renewable mini-grids to subsidize local electrification by purchasing excess power when community demand is low — making those projects economically viable. Source: https://gridlesscompute.com/ — Additional reporting: https://crypto.news/how-a-shipping-container-and-bitcoin-saved-a-struggling-african-hydro-project/

The Human Rights Foundation, a nonpartisan organization supporting dissidents worldwide, has made Bitcoin central to its financial freedom work. In authoritarian regimes — Venezuela, Nigeria, Russia, China — Bitcoin provides a way for activists to receive donations, pay staff, and operate without funds being frozen or confiscated by governments. That is not a fringe argument. It is documented, peer-reviewed, and real. Source: https://hrf.org/program/financial-freedom/bitcoin-development-fund/

Part Two: What We Should Actually Regulate

Noise concerns are legitimate zoning concerns and should be evaluated seriously — but that’s a separate question from whether Bitcoin itself is uniquely harmful. Consider the “no engine brakes” signs posted around many cities. The goal isn’t to ban engine brakes — it’s to control the noise they produce. An engine brake can be made quiet. The law should target the outcome, not the technology. The same principle applies here. Write standards that any business must meet, make the consequences clear, and let engineering solve the rest.

Audible noise

Set a specific decibel limit measured at the property boundary or at a defined distance from the facility. Don’t write an impossible standard, but a reasonable and enforceable threshold applies equally to any future occupant of the site — not just miners.

Infrasound

Sound below 20 Hz isn’t captured by standard decibel meters but can be felt as vibration at high intensities. Large cooling fans can produce it. Standard noise ordinances don’t cover this — city code should specifically address infrasound limits if this is a concern, because it won’t be regulated otherwise.

Visual screening

Concerns about visual impact — equipment, shipping containers, signage — are normal zoning considerations addressable through screening requirements, setback rules, and landscaping buffers. Nothing unique to mining here.

Water and coolant use

Mining operations typically run closed-loop cooling systems with minimal water discharge. Code can require EPA-approved coolants for any industrial operation and mandate closed-loop systems. Ask the applicant for the exact product specification — that’s a standard engineering question, not a scandal.

Cedar Falls Planning & Zoning Commission: March 25, 2026 – Bitcoin Mining, Zoning, CFU Power Plant.

Posted on by
Reply

Separating the Issues in the Cedar Falls Mining Debate

After reviewing the Planning & Zoning meeting from March 25th, 2026 where Bitcoin minnig, Zoning and a new CFU powerplant wer dicussed, it’s clear that several different issues were being discussed at the same time. When those get mixed together, it becomes difficult to evaluate the project clearly.

I think it helps to separate the discussion into four distinct categories.

1. Zoning & Land Use

This is the most important and most durable question.

Concerns about noise, building type (containers vs. permanent structures), water systems, and proximity to neighborhoods all fall into this category. These are not Bitcoin-specific issues — they apply to any industrial use.

If the concern is that this site should not be rezoned from light industrial to heavy industrial, that’s a legitimate argument. It sets precedent and affects long-term land use decisions for the city.

2. Power Plant

There are also concerns tied to the new power plant itself — environmental impact, scale, and whether it should be built at all.

That’s a separate policy decision.

If the concern is emissions or the role of a peaker plant, those questions should be addressed directly:

  • When does the plant run?
  • What is the cost of running it versus buying power from the grid?
  • How often is it expected to operate?

Those are important questions, but they are not inherently tied to Bitcoin mining.

3. Governance & Process

Some of the strongest concerns raised were about process and oversight.

The city, CFU, and the applicant are closely connected, which raises reasonable questions:

  • Is there sufficient independent review?
  • Has there been a third-party analysis of costs, noise, and environmental impact?

These are solvable issues:

  • Independent studies
  • Clear contract structures
  • Ongoing monitoring and transparency

4. Utility Economics (Where Bitcoin Actually Enters the Picture)

Only at this stage does Bitcoin mining itself become relevant.

CFU described miners as an interruptible load:

  • They consume electricity when it is cheap and abundant
  • They shut off when prices spike or the grid is stressed

This matters because utilities buy electricity at varying prices. If a flexible customer uses low-cost energy and avoids high-cost periods, it can reduce the utility’s average cost of power.

As one CFU representative explained, this dynamic lowers the average cost of power by reducing the need to purchase expensive electricity during peak periods.

That doesn’t guarantee lower bills, but it does suggest that mining — when structured correctly — is not inherently a cost burden and may improve system efficiency.

A Simple Test

One question that helps clarify the discussion:

If this facility were in a fully enclosed building, met all noise standards, and used a closed-loop system — would there still be strong opposition?

If the answer is yes, then the issue may not be the impacts themselves, but the perception of Bitcoin.

Closing Thought

There are legitimate concerns in this discussion, particularly around zoning, noise, and long-term planning. But many of the arguments raised in the meeting were not aligned with how the system was actually described.

If this decision is going to be made well, it should be grounded in:

  • land use
  • infrastructure planning
  • contract design
  • and measurable impacts

Not generalized assumptions about Bitcoin.

Link to the Cedar Falls Planning & Zoning Commission: March 25, 2026 where bitcoin mining, zoning and he new powerplant are discussed.

I also use the below link

YouVideoToText

to generate a transcript. You can then investigate the transcipt with ChatGPT or other LLM’s.

I have also already generated that PDF if you just want to download it yourself.

transcript Cedar Falls Planning &Zoning Commission March 25, 2026Download

Bitcoin Is Good for the World—In Ways Most People Haven’t Considered

Posted on by
Reply

Bitcoin Is Good for the World. Here’s the Case Most People Miss.

The typical Bitcoin conversation goes like this: someone brings it up, someone else calls it a scam or an environmental disaster, and the conversation collapses into noise before anything interesting gets said. What gets lost in all that noise is that Bitcoin is quietly doing things that genuinely matter — things that have nothing to do with the price chart. Specifically:

  • What Bitcoin mining is doing to stabilize the power grid
  • What it’s doing to reduce emissions in the atmosphere
  • What Bitcoin is doing to subsidize the creation of green energy assets (solar, wind, hydro)
  • What it’s doing for people living under governments that would rather they had no financial options at all

The Grid Problem Nobody Talks About

Here’s something that doesn’t get enough attention: the modern electric grid has a flexibility problem. Renewable energy sources like wind and solar are intermittent by nature. The wind doesn’t blow on command. The sun doesn’t shine at peak demand. So grids end up with these awkward mismatches — too much power when nobody needs it, not enough when everyone does.

The traditional fix involves “peaker plants” — gas-burning facilities that sit idle most of the time and fire up when demand spikes. They’re expensive to build and costly to run.

Bitcoin miners are different.

Unlike most industrial loads, they can scale down quickly when the grid is stressed and ramp back up when surplus power returns. That makes them one of the few large energy buyers that can absorb excess power without demanding constant priority from the grid.

A Duke University Nicholas Institute report found that the U.S. grid could accommodate 76 gigawatts of flexible load — roughly 10% of peak demand — with expected annual curtailment of just 0.25%.
👉 https://nicholasinstitute.duke.edu/sites/default/files/publications/rethinking-load-growth.pdf

That matters because electricity demand in the U.S. is rising again, driven by AI data centers, manufacturing, and electrification. Traditional data centers require continuous power and add stress at exactly the wrong times.

Bitcoin mining is the opposite.

It soaks up energy when the grid has too much and steps back when the grid needs relief.

It doesn’t just consume electricity — it makes the system more flexible.

And this isn’t just theoretical.

At a recent city council discussion in Cedar Falls, Iowa, the local utility (CFU) explained that their Bitcoin mining partner actually helps lower electricity costs for residents.

Their reasoning was simple:

  • The miner uses excess power when it’s cheap
  • It shuts down when power is expensive
  • That reduces the utility’s need to buy high-cost electricity

As one CFU representative put it during the meeting (timestamp 2:05:57):

“That lowers the average cost of power because we’re buying a lot less.”

👉 https://youtu.be/JcxxYyh2FoI?t=7508

That’s the part most people miss.

It’s not true that Bitcoin miners automatically raise electricity prices.

It depends entirely on how the contracts are structured.

In Cedar Falls, the utility itself is saying the opposite:

👉 The miner helps lower average costs for residents.

That’s not a theory.

That’s happening in practice.

The Methane Story Is Even More Interesting

If you’ve heard that Bitcoin is bad for the environment, you’ve probably heard the energy consumption number. What you likely haven’t heard is what Bitcoin mining can do with one of the most potent greenhouse gases on the planet: methane.

When oil is drilled, natural gas often comes up with it. In places where there’s no pipeline infrastructure nearby, operators may vent it or flare it. Both are bad outcomes. Methane has a much stronger warming effect than CO₂, and imperfect flaring leaves a meaningful share unburned.

The White House Office of Science and Technology Policy acknowledged this directly in a 2022 report:
👉 https://bidenwhitehouse.archives.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/09-2022-Crypto-Assets-and-Climate-Report.pdf

Bitcoin mining offers a third option: put that gas to work.

Companies such as Crusoe deploy systems that use otherwise-wasted gas to generate electricity on site.

One widely cited analysis estimated that:

➡️ 9,482 tons of CO₂-equivalent emissions can be reduced per megawatt per year

👉 https://dergigi.com/assets/files/2022-09-03-arcane-research-how-bitcoin-mining-can-transform-the-energy-industry.pdf

Peer-reviewed research has also shown Bitcoin mining can help finance methane mitigation at landfills:
👉 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959652624029652

Instead of releasing methane, it gets destroyed — and turned into useful energy.

Bitcoin doesn’t just use energy — it can clean up wasted energy.

Bitcoin Is Quietly Funding the Green Energy Build-Out

This is the angle that almost never makes it into mainstream coverage, and it’s arguably the most important one for long-term climate outcomes.

Building a renewable energy project is expensive and financially risky. One of the toughest windows is the period after the project is capable of generating electricity but before it is fully interconnected and earning reliable revenue from the grid.

During that phase:

  • Energy is being produced
  • But there may be no reliable buyer

That’s a problem.

A Cornell-led study published in ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering found that Bitcoin mining can materially improve project economics during this phase. In Texas alone:

  • 32 planned renewable projects
  • Could generate $47 million in additional profit
  • By using Bitcoin mining before grid integration

👉 https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acssuschemeng.3c05445

It also works after grid connection.

In parts of Texas, electricity prices can go negative.

Why?

  • Too much power
  • Not enough transmission
  • Not enough local demand

When that happens, producers may be forced to:

👉 Sell electricity at a loss
👉 Or shut down production

One West Texas solar plant had to sell 10.1% of its energy at a loss because of this.

Bitcoin mining changes that.

Instead of dumping excess energy into an oversupplied market, the plant can redirect that power into mining — creating a buyer of last resort and a price floor for surplus energy.

In that case, adding Bitcoin mining increased total site revenue by 3.7%.

👉 https://finance.yahoo.com/news/theres-no-catch-bitcoin-mining-200335729.html

Bitcoin turns stranded energy into revenue.

And that makes more projects viable.

Money as a Tool of Oppression

Most people in the developed world think of money as a neutral tool. But in many countries, financial systems are instruments of surveillance and control.

That’s why the Human Rights Foundation has spent years supporting Bitcoin tools and education for activists, journalists, and dissidents:
👉 https://hrf.org/program/financial-freedom/bitcoin-development-fund/

Bitcoin allows people to:

  • Receive money
  • Send money
  • Store savings

Without needing permission.

In 2026, HRF announced a new round of funding supporting projects helping billions of people living under authoritarian regimes:
👉 https://hrf.org/latest/hrfs-bitcoin-development-fund-announces-support-for-26-projects-worldwide/

Not as speculation.

As survival.

The Part Most People Miss

People tend to look at Bitcoin through their own lens.

They interpret it based on what they already understand — their background, their assumptions, their biases.

Some see a speculative asset.
Some see an environmental topic.
Some see a political idea.
Some see a technological curiosity.

But that lens often misses what’s actually happening.

Bitcoin is creating a new kind of demand for energy — one that is flexible, location-agnostic, and always willing to buy excess supply.

At the same time, it’s creating a form of money that doesn’t rely on permission.

Those two things don’t seem connected at first.

But they are.

And together, they’re quietly improving how energy is used, how infrastructure gets built, and how people access financial systems.

That story doesn’t show up in the price.

But Bitcoin is slowly improving the world — one miner and one transaction at a time.

Open Letter To Iowa Representatives about Bitcoin

Posted on by
2

I have written the below open letter to my Iowa representatives about Bitcoin. I have also emailed it to them with a link to this post so they are able to get to the links below. I encourage you to go to your own representatives websites and email them this also.

I am writing this letter to you directly, you can also find the text below with links to specific articles I recommend you read. https://mywheellife.com/2023/12/18/open-letter-to-iowa-representatives-about-bitcoin/

Senator Grassley, Senator Ernst and Congresswoman Hinson

I am writing to you concerning Bitcoin in general and Senator Elizabeth Warren’s “Digital Asset Anti-Money Laundering Act” in particular. 

I would like to first refer you to the video “Elizabeth Warren’s Anti-Bitcoin Agenda with Perianne Boring” on the “What Bitcoin Did” podcast. 

“Warren’s bill, the Digital Asset Anti-Money Laundering Act, aims to solve a problem that no one has. It that would classify nearly all crypto industry participants — from wallet providers to miners to validators — as financial institutions, subjecting them to the onerous compliance regime of the Bank Secrecy Act. Under this bill, a teenager running a bitcoin mining rig in his basement could be subject to the same compliance burdens as JP Morgan Chase and Goldman Sachs.

But wallet providers, miners, and validators are not banks. They do not hold custody of assets. They certainly should not be collecting or storing the sensitive personal financial information of individual users of an asset. They merely provide infrastructure — the open-source software and computing power to help secure the network. Much like Microsoft, which also supplies a lot of software and cybersecurity products to financial institutions, they are not financial institutions. 

It would be impossible for the industry to comply with Warren’s requirements, and she knows this. The point of her bill is not to improve national security or stop money laundering, but to kill digital asset innovation.” – The Hill

Please also investigate Elizabeth Warren and her collusion with the banks and SEC. I am concerned she is not regulation in good faith. 

Lawyer Says Senator Elizabeth Warren Conspires With SEC Chair Gary Gensler, Violating Her Oath

I want to encourage, you, my representatives, to learn about Bitcoin and it’s many benefits.


I also want you to learn about the benefits of bitcoin mining and it’s ability to mitigate emissions. Specifically, please learn from Daniel Batten and his work into bitcoin mining reducing methane emissions. 

Flared Methane as a Sustainable Power Source for Cryptocurrency Mining

I would also like you to learn from Alex Gladstein about the human rights benefits that Bitcoin provides. He has already tried to speak to congress on this.
Human rights advocates tell Congress bitcoin is essential in countries with ‘collapsing’ currencies

As my representatives, I encourage you to learn about Bitcoin and be a champion and advocate for it. 

Sincerely

Axel Hoogland

Tesla Should Accept Bitcoin NOW!

Posted on by
Reply

As both a Tesla shareholder and a Bitcoin holder, I think it’s time Tesla starts accepting bitcoin for payments again.

Tesla currently holds hundreds of millions of dollars in Bitcoin on their balance sheet. 

Tesla accepted bitcoin for Tesla purchases for a very short time in 2021 but then quit accepting it due to concerns about the emissions from bitcoin mining.
His “rules” laid out above in a tweet June 13th, 2021 was that Tesla would resume accepting Bitcoin when bitcoin mining was using greater than 50% green energy. It has been clearly shown by the Bitcoin Mining Council that bitcoin mining is 59.9% green! 

“Based on this data, the global bitcoin mining industry’s sustainable electricity mix has improved marginally to 59.9% and remains one of the most sustainable industries globally,” the report stated. – Bitcoin Mining Council

Direct link to Bitcoin Mining Council Q2 2023 report. 

This is well above the goal set by Elon for Tesla of 50%. Because of this, I think Tesla should immediately start accepting Bitcoin for payments again.


Of course Elon could be waiting for “reasons”.

One might be that he expects whenever Tesla starts accepting Bitcoin to have a small flood of buyers. He might be waiting for this until a time that he perceives that he needs a small demand boost? This is my only speculation on why he hasn’t started accepting bitcoin yet.I hope Elon will have a chat with Michael Saylor (Chairman of Microstrategy, the largest corporate holder of Bitcoin and also an instrumental figure in the Bitcoin Mining Council) soon!

So Elon, what are you waiting for?

Bitcoin Blocks and Fees

Posted on by
Reply

Bitcoin at it’s simplest is a ledger keeping track of transactions. On average every 10 minutes a new “block” of transactions is validated. Using this link you can watch as transactions are added to the next block. I think it’s truly mesmerizing. I think it needs to be made into an easy to watch app or screen saver (hint to someone). It is essentially watching each bitcoin block be organized. Transactions are added to the block and finally confirmed.

There is a lot of interesting data in each bitcoin block. 

Bitcoin miners validate a new block on average ever 10 minutes. Each block confirms the transactions that have happened in that time. Money sent from person X to person Y. 

You can also learn how much is paid in block rewards (currently 6.25 BTC every block) and in block fees. 

It does cost money to send your bitcoin from your wallet to someone else. You might think that’s bad since you can send money via your bank account to people now and “not pay a fee”.

But that is where you are wrong. Banks have tons of fees, from monthly fees to the “fee” of paying you 0% interest. 

Every time you swipe a credit card you are paying approximately a 3% fee. The price is just baked into the price of whatever you are buying as sellers assume you will be using a credit card at this point. 

Here’s all the data from a specific completed block. 

Block 767418

A total of 12,419.79 BTC ($222,022,574) were sent in the block with the average transaction being 4.4515 BTC ($79,577.28). ViaBTC (the miner who solved the block) earned a total reward of 6.25 BTC $111,728. The reward consisted of a base reward of 6.25 BTC $111,728 with an additional 0.1489 BTC ($2,661.81) reward paid as fees of the 2,790 transactions which were included in the block.

6.3989/12,419.79 = 0.000515 *100 = 0.05% of the value of the money sent was used to pay fees. 

As you can see the total of 12419.79 BTC were sent during that 10 minutes worth $222 million dollars. Users were charged 0.1489 BTC which comes out to a 0.0012%! That is insanely low.

If you were paying that percentage to send $100 it would be $0.001 dollars. 1/10 of 1 penny!

If you compare this to a credit card transaction at 3% that would cost you $3 vs $0.001 for a transaction. Imagine if everything we did got 3% cheaper overnight? Why haven’t more sellers adopted BTC?