Well, we think it provides a much more accurate description of the surveyed area. Why? First, because it is an averaging event. If you go to the field and collect a sample for later measurement or directly measure the hydrocarbon level in the field, you get an instantaneous measurement. We know from the literature that soil gas composition changes throughout the day due to temperature changes, moisture content, barometric pressure, planetary positions, etc. Microbes are present in the soil as a result of millions of years of hydrocarbon microseepage. Yes, the MET signal will vary throughout the year, but percentage wise less than the variation of soil gases. Secondly, our process allows for optimization or enrichment of the signal we measure. In processes that use chemical detection of gases, the level of hydrocarbon decreases during analysis. There is no way to amplify the signal, it only gets smaller during the analysis process. Thus, their error bars get greater. In the MET process, our signal gets stronger during the analysis and thus our error bars should be smaller. Do other methods report this high rate of technical success? Only one other process, to our knowledge reports as high of success rate as we do and it is also an averaging method. Unfortunately, you need to install and leave the collector in the field and then return to collect and process. EBT's process is significantly faster, does not require going back to a location in the field and is priced at 4 to 8 times less than the other technology.