Jeremy Tonet: Got it. Understood. Maybe pivoting towards Missouri here and the IRP, what has been the reaction to the proposed Missouri IRP here? How have conversations with stakeholders been trending over time?
Marty Lyons: Yes, I think the conversation that’s been had within the state is very much a balanced one. I think that some of the things that we put into this IRP as opposed to our prior one was the addition of 800 megawatts of gas simple cycle in 2027. And we made a couple of adjustments to, first of all, the timing of one coal-fired energy center to push that out for a couple of years and with it push out a 1,200-megawatt planned combined cycle plant. And then I can say we also move forward some of the battery storage technology we had planned by about five years. And I think the conversation has been balanced because in doing this, what we’re really doing is putting — stressing the fact that our integrated resource plan really represents what we believe to be the lowest cost approach to transitioning our portfolio of energy centers over time and maintain importantly, the reliability that our customers expect and as we do that, making sure that we’re being good environmental stores.
We’re able to add those resources to bolster reliability, while still hitting carbon emission reduction targets that we’ve discussed previously of 60% by 2030, 85% by 2040, and ultimately, that net zero. So again, I believe the conversation has been really balanced because of that, our focus on affordability, our focus on reliability, while still hitting our targets in terms of environmental stewardship.
Jeremy Tonet: Got it. Make sense. Very helpful. I’ll leave it there. Thank you.
Marty Lyons: Thank you.
Michael Moehn: Thanks, Jeremy.
Operator: Our next question comes from David Arcaro with Morgan Stanley. Please proceed with your question.
David Arcaro: Hey, good morning. Thanks so much for taking my question. Wondering if you could just speak a little bit to — related to the CCNs and renewables in Missouri, how competitive are renewables currently? And just what’s your latest in terms of how you’re positioned to compete for company-owned generation versus contracting?
Marty Lyons: Yes. With respect to the Missouri renewables, earlier this year, the Missouri Public Service Commission approved to solar projects that we had proposed, both the Huck Finn and the Boomtown solar projects together, there are about 350 megawatts of investment. And those are projects that we will be constructed and that we will be own, and we expect closing date on those to be Q4 of 2024. So a good step forward in terms of commission approval of projects consistent with our IRP and our ownership. We also filed for CCNs this year for an additional 550 megawatts of solar projects, four projects in total. And that’s going to be proceeding. We expect a commission decision on that early next year. And again, we do believe it’s in the best interest of our customers and communities long term for these projects to be constructed for our ownership.
In our Integrated Resource Plan, we didn’t change the amount of our anticipated and planned overall renewables versus our prior IRP, we did include an expectation that the costs associated with those renewables would increase. However, those costs are being offset by the impact of the higher production tax credits and investment tax credits that are available under the Inflation Reduction Act. So when we go to — when you look at the IRP, which we laid out the timeline on Slide 10 that we provided. What you see there is a really good balance of the growth in renewable projects, but also investments in assets that will preserve reliability, as I mentioned a second ago, both the gas simple cycle, the gas combined cycle, some of the battery storage technology that’s really going to ensure that we continue to have a reliable system.
But the important thing is that this combination of resources, along with the continued investment, ensuring the reliability of our existing dispatchable assets, both our Callaway nuclear plant as well as our coal assets through retirement. We really believe that this represents a least cost plan for providing energy to our customers in Missouri and preserving again, the reliability that they expect. So again, the CCNs that we’re proposing for the renewables really fit with execution of this IRP. And then with respect to your last question. While you can’t rule out the possibility of PPAs. What we’ve really demonstrated over time, if you look at some of the renewable projects that we’ve put into our portfolio and have had approved by the commission, is that we really do believe in the long term that our ownership and operation of these assets provides the long-term lowest cost for our customers.
David Arcaro: Great. Thanks for all that color. Very helpful. And I was wondering if you could also touch on your expectations here for load growth going forward. We’ve seen weather normal loads still trending down through most of the year. I’m wondering if you could give your perspective on when that might settle down and outlook for industrial sales to within that?
Michael Moehn: Yes, you bet. Good morning, David, this is Michael. Yes, this year has obviously been a little interesting. You see some of the decreases in residential. I think we attribute that to a couple of things. We had some significant storms number of them over the summer that certainly contributed a bit to that. And then also, we still just working through, I think, the going back from working at home into the office. And so you’re certainly seeing that transition as well. And it continues to throw the number around a bit. We’ve — obviously, we’ve had some extreme weather here and there, which always factors into kind of how you think about this on a normalized basis, but you try to get it as close as possible. I do think it is beginning to level out as we kind of look forward.
And I mean, again, I think I pointed out, if you look at our residential side of things, I mean, you’re seeing about 3% growth relative to where we were kind of pre-pandemic. And the other positive is we actually have customer growth year-to-date, too. So ultimately, you believe that’s going to continue to transition into some sales growth. I think on the commercial side, we continue to see some positives. I mean the industrial line noted that obviously we are impacted by the strike at GM that was going on for some period of time that obviously seems to be concluding. There’s actually an expansion that has occurred there and so we should see that be a positive element going into the remainder of the fourth quarter. And then I think there’s some positive developments that we’re seeing just broadly on the industrial side as well that are adding some little growth.
So I mean as we look out in the future, I think we still stick by this about 0.5% kind of load growth over time. I think that has the ability, hopefully, to move up as some of this industrial continues to evolve, but that’s where we are today, David.
David Arcaro: Okay, great. Thanks so much. See you soon.
Michael Moehn: You bet.
Operator: Our next question is from Paul Patterson with Glenrock Associates. Please proceed with your question.
Paul Patterson: Hey, good morning guys.
Marty Lyons: Good morning, Paul.
Paul Patterson: Just wanted to — I apologize if I missed this, because I did have some tech problems. But the — Darius, was asking about the competitive bid, and I was wondering, do you guys have any data that you guys provided or can provide on kinds of what kind of returns you’re seeing in the competitive transmission versus just in general?
