Air Products and Chemicals Inc to Discuss its Joint Announcement with Yara International ASA Summary

The following is excerpted from the question-and-answer section of the transcript.

Question: Jeffrey Zekauskas - JPMorgan Chase & Co - Analyst : Is the -- does the carbon capture stream in the end belong to Yara? Or is that a separate profit stream that would belong to Air Products?

Question: Jeffrey Zekauskas - JPMorgan Chase & Co - Analyst : And is the poor space capability, 5 million tons? Or in theory, can the poor space hold, I don't know, 10 million tons. Is there a size of that capability?

Question: John Mcnulty - Bank of Montreal - Analyst : Eduardo, it sounds like you still have at least a little bit of wood to chop before you get to kind of mid-26%. I guess what do you see as the biggest hurdles in getting to FID at this point? Is it more on the construction cost? Is it some of the air permits? I would think the air permits are just a matter of time. But I guess, can you help us to think about maybe what you see as some of the bigger hurdles?

Question: John Mcnulty - Bank of Montreal - Analyst : Okay. Got it. No, that's helpful. And then I guess, just as the follow-up, for the NEOM side, it sounds like the production part of the project is largely kind of in stone at this point. I guess, can you help us to think about the capital that Air Products may need to put to work on the distribution arm, whether it's or your side of it or even anything to help with Yara bringing their production or distribution side of it -- excuse me, bringing their distribution side to the market?

Question: David Begleiter - Deutsche Bank AG - Analyst : Eduardo, back on the carbon sequestration, do you expect to manage that portion of the project yourself? And if not, how much of the $85 per ton credit do you expect to realize?

Question: David Begleiter - Deutsche Bank AG - Analyst : And again --

Question: David Begleiter - Deutsche Bank AG - Analyst : Yes. How much of the $85 per ton credit would you expect to realize? Is it a -- LSEG STREETEVENTS | www.lseg.com | Contact Us consent of LSEG. 'LSEG' and the LSEG logo are registered trademarks of LSEG and its affiliated companies. DECEMBER 08, 2025 / 2:00PM, APD.N - Air Products and Chemicals Inc to Discuss its Joint Announcement with Yara International ASA

Question: David Begleiter - Deutsche Bank AG - Analyst : Got it. And just to be clear, how many tons of CO2 is this -- will this project produce?

Question: Duffy Fischer - Goldman Sachs Group Inc - Analyst : Question just on the economics. If you do go forward with Louisiana, and let's just say it's at the midpoint, $8.5 billion, that makes your cut about $6.4 billion, should we think about the traditional 10% EBIT return for every dollar of capital, so that would be $600 million to $650 million of EBIT accretion when the plant is completed. Is that kind of the right ballpark?

Question: Duffy Fischer - Goldman Sachs Group Inc - Analyst : And then on the NEOM offtake agreement, do you guys bear all the risk of price and Yara will basically just take a fee on selling it? Or what's their incentive to try to grow that market themselves? And will they take any of the risk on pricing or margin?

Question: Patrick Cunningham - Citibank Cameroon SA (Douala Branch) - Analyst : And maybe first, just on Louisiana on -- I guess for the performance level requirements to secure investment in ammonia production, what does this mean for the timing of when you would receive the cash investment from Yara?

Question: Patrick Cunningham - Citibank Cameroon SA (Douala Branch) - Analyst : Understood. And then just in terms of getting green ammonia landed in Europe and eventually converted to hydrogen later in the decade, if you do land further agreements that justify moving forward, does Yara have right of first refusal on distribution, shipping of that ammonia overseas? Or was any of that covered in this agreement?

Question: Christopher Parkinson - Wolfe Research - Analyst : Eduardo, if you mind me asking, were you regionally hopeful that you would have partnerships announced on the CCUS side this morning, and therefore, kind of getting -- projecting your total CapEx, including what's already been spent below the $5 billion marker? Or are we thinking about that the wrong way?

Question: Christopher Parkinson - Wolfe Research - Analyst : Got it. Helpful. And then just a rent question. One of a competing project was recently, let's say, delayed indefinitely, which had a -- what I'll refer to as the plethora of MOUs on the ammonia side, specifically for Japanese energy transition. Is that announcement essentially too little too late? Is that something that you could consider with your partner for kind of further assessing the overall market for blue ammonia over the next few years? Or is this just you have an agreement that's progressing well over the next six months, and that's basically the only item that you're currently focusing on?

Question: John Roberts - Mizuho Securities USA LLC - Analyst : Is Yara precluded from moving green ammonia to Europe if a customer wants to build their own cracker or do a JV cracker?

Question: Christopher Perrella - UBS AG - Analyst : It's Chris Perrella on for Josh. Just a follow-up on the Darrow project for the 20% of the ammonia that you're taking, when you guys do the math in the economics, are you expecting any premium for that being blue carbon hydrogen in the project returns? Or are you basing the base return on gray hydrogen?

Question: Christopher Perrella - UBS AG - Analyst : All right. And just a quick follow-up. How much of the Darrow CapEx out of that $8 billion to $9 billion have you already spent for that?

Question: Christopher Perrella - UBS AG - Analyst : Is any of that eligible for -- or you would get CapEx from Yara for any of that to reimburse what you bought? Or does that come later in the process?

Question: Vincent Andrews - Morgan Stanley - Analyst : First, I just want to clarify the $8 billion to $9 billion, if I heard the answer correctly. That would not include any CapEx for sequestration, but your point was in the incremental CapEx for sequestration would be incurred by a third party. Are both of those statements correct?

Question: Vincent Andrews - Morgan Stanley - Analyst : Okay. And then secondarily, the press release indicates that Yara will pay approximately 25%. So is there any meaning behind that approximate? Is there a ceiling on the amount of CapEx that they would be responsible for in the event that there's a material CapEx overrun? And secondarily, will there be any limitations on Yara in terms of what they can do with capital between now in the time that they would owe you payment in terms of the minimum balance sheet leverage level or maximum balance sheet leverage levels or anything like any security that's going to be provided to you? LSEG STREETEVENTS | www.lseg.com | Contact Us consent of LSEG. 'LSEG' and the LSEG logo are registered trademarks of LSEG and its affiliated companies. DECEMBER 08, 2025 / 2:00PM, APD.N - Air Products and Chemicals Inc to Discuss its Joint Announcement with Yara International ASA