Ravi Srivastava: Leo, this is Ravi, again. So the capital needs for this these solutions are very, very low, especially compared to our E&P program. There’s no – at this stage no incremental capital is planned for 2024.
Leo Mariani: Okay. That’s great. Thanks.
Operator: The next question is from Bertrand Donnes with Truist. Please go ahead.
Bertrand Donnes: Hey, good morning guys. Just wanted to shift gears real quick on to the activity curtailments. Maybe just get your thoughts on why you – why you kind of stopped at 11 wells. I would think there’s some argument that your hedging is insulating you but probably another side of that is why don’t you just pocket the hedging gains, also curtailed production. We had a quite recent drop. But just any thoughts on are you are you more inclined to hold at this level? Or are you kind of seeing prices and thinking about dropping more?
Ravi Srivastava: Yes I think so. Right now we’re kind of sticking to the guidance we gave. We’re going to hold the 11 deferrals for now. It’s something we constantly watch in terms of the discrete decision on those wells. It’s a function of you’re coordinating with the operations team on where there’s a clean break in terms of which wells you can stop on versus which ones might already be in process. So there’s no real magic to that other than taking up its operations to get to the best answer overall from a free cash flow basis.
Bertrand Donnes: What about actual means shut-ins or any of that kind of activity.
Ravi Srivastava: Not caused by this time, most of our wells run a very low variable costs. So we’re still making pretty healthy margins on those. As you pointed out, we’re getting pretty close to hedge levels that we have very little in terms of urban volumes. I’m sorry kind of just work and maybe the some bonds we have into the hedge book.
Bertrand Donnes: That makes sense. And then just to pile on to the new tech, maybe just a little bit of a different approach to this. In the prepared remarks you referenced the potential to be a meaningful free cash flow contributor on the DWS side. I just wasn’t sure in my reading too much into that versus the new blue agreement? Or is there a tangible difference between the two?
Navneet Behl: I would say, but it’s something we talked about a little bit. They both have very large addressable markets. I think the market for flowback is little more developed, right? It’s very identifiable. And we think we’ll probably ramp quicker into that market because it is an activity going on. And it’s a clear superior technology to deploy CNG and LNG. We’ve been pushing on those. There are markets for those currently with a lot of the electric frac fleets and market penetration there. We’re optimistic on, but it probably a little bit slower than deep. Well, that’s why we made that comment. That makes sense. Ravi, do you want to add anything.
Ravi Srivastava: That’s absolutely correct. I think under the flowback market is something that we can penetrate into very, very quickly and CNG markets that take a little bit more time to us.
Bertrand Donnes: Understood. Thanks guys.
Operator: [Operator Instructions] The next question is from Jake Roberts with TPH & Company. Please go ahead.
Jake Roberts: Good morning. I just wanted to — I just wanted to touch base on the kind of the preliminary 2025 outlook. Just curious with the activity levels assumed in that $550 million program? And then maybe, if you could provide any color on the kind of the price outlook you might need to see to trigger that incremental 50 beyond the $500 million you’ve spoken to about relative to maintenance?
Ravi Srivastava: Yes, it’s the same underlying activity set that we talked about on the last call that we’ve been guiding to kind of that $500 million run rate. All you’re seeing there is the shifting of those 11 wells that we deferred into early next year. If we were to ramp back up from call it this 555, 560 area back to that 580 target so that’s all we’re trying to indicate there. And we’re going to watch where kind of the pricing develops to. I think we’ve got a lot to be learned over the summer here in terms of how sustainable the production drops are hot summer is. There’s a lot of factors that will go into the ultimate planning for 2025. And once we’re in a position to firm that up, we will.
Jake Roberts: Great. Thank you. And the second question, looking at slide five of the deck with the debt stack kind of now really weighted to the first part of the next decade. Just curious, if it changes the philosophy around the duration of the hedge book as we as we enter the back half of this decade?
Ravi Srivastava: Yes. No, great question. So there’s definitely the balance sheet and hedge book are correlated or have a relationship. I think what we’ve talked about in the past on hedging is that we’re looking to shorten up the overall length of the book historically. We’ve got around five years. We’ve been kind of watching the books come in by 12 to 18 months. So we’re still very much in the camp of hedging going into the near term here, but just trying to maintain flexibility in kind of the outer years as we see the volatility continue in our space, particularly some of the projections you’re seeing in power demand and gas demand, we’ll make sure that we’re able to capture those through our hedging program but not getting too far out.
Jake Roberts: Thank you. Appreciate the time.
Operator: This concludes our question and answer session. I would like to turn the conference back over to Tyler Lewis for any closing remarks.
Tyler Lewis: Thank you again for joining us this morning. Please feel free to reach out if anyone has any additional questions. Otherwise, we look forward to seeing with everyone again next quarter. Thank you.
Operator: The conference has now concluded. Thank you for attending today’s presentation. You may now disconnect.
