Bart Kelleher: There is and it’s actually a decision, so we’re not looking to say, okay, we are striving to have a ballast-laden ratio of X across the fleet. As a matter of fact, it’s very much a trading decision that is made almost voyage-by-voyage.
Unidentified Analyst: So what is the highest voyage you’re seeing on some of that? Because right now, in the examples you gave, they’re both 9:1, do you see that go up, down, pretty heavily by?
Bart Kelleher: Those are probably some of the more €“ those are examples on the high end, but it’s kind of €“ it’s obviously visualizing when these things stack up really well. I’d say if your base case is a laden leg for ballast leg for a crude tanker, let’s say, it’s 50-50, I think the average laden balance ratio for product tankers is roughly 60%. And I think over the last year, we’ll probably be in the 75% range there. But it really depends on kind of what profitability dictates. There might well be cases where taking a longer ballast into account just makes more commercial sense and then we do that. But I’d say, to answer your question, I would like to think that as we stress further towards nonpetroleum-based cargoes, they can move quite different from your standard petroleum-based trades, which usually starts with a big refining hub, Northern Europe, U.S. Gulf, Middle East, maybe China, maybe Singapore, you will find, I think, ways to quite naturally cut those ballast legs.
Again, just because it makes commercial sense rather than kind of us looking to kind of move that KPI up or something similar.
Unidentified Analyst: That makes commercial sense, I mean, it’s obviously not black or white here. But as environmental regulation comes in, it’s hard to tell it’s going to happen with that ratio to go either way.
Bart Kelleher: That’s correct. And I think if you were to know €“ really dig into the mechanics of the CII rating, which is in place of this year, some of it can be quite counter-intuitive where not necessarily the €“ yes, the trade that the most carbon efficient could actually still end up getting penalized. So you’re right. I mean there is a lot of complexity, especially once you factor in that as of next year, of course, Europe has the shipping or highly likely to be including Europe in the carbon trading scheme. But very likely, a lot of the other jurisdictions are just waiting to see how this plays out in Europe, and we think there’s going to be a lot of regional jurisdictions with similar carbon taxes in North America and other parts of the world as well. So you have a real crazy mosaic of different carbon-related taxes as well, which is going to skew that picture of ballast, laden in the long-term. That’s vision of an answer. A lot of
Unidentified Analyst: I’m taking out of this. I mean, it’s how do you systematically create system where you’re okay through all this crazy mosaic.
Bart Kelleher: And I think that’s part of the reason why a lot of what we do in terms of setting up our organizational focus is to really €“ so we don’t lose sight of this because a lot of this we need to catch on the forefront and it needs to be kind of come part of sort of our muscle memory in terms of how we trade our ships, operate them. And just even what we discuss on a daily and weekly basis, this has to be a part of it. Thank you.
Unidentified Company Representative: I think earnouts being modest. I mean, that uncertainty on the regulatory side, in other words, it adds volatility and the team is set up to trade in that volatility.
