So these jurisdictions that are new to us, these new DOS utilities, they operate in strong jurisdictions that recognize that part of ensuring the sustainability of their energy systems and their economies includes ensuring they have a transparent, predictable and competitive regulatory regime. So we’re really, really excited about bringing them in as quickly as possible, integrating them smoothly and looking towards where else there’s growth.
Jeremy Tonet: Got it. Makes sense. Thank you for that. And just second question real quick here. I suppose you’re not going to give us everything that’s going to be happening at the Analyst Day, but just wondering if there’s any foreshadowing or overall objectives that you see for the upcoming Analyst Day that you want the investment community to come away with.
Pat Murrayaa: Yes, well., You are right. We are not going to give you an insight here that would not make March 6 that much fun actually. But look, the fundamental fact is, and I don’t believe that currently the stock reflects it in any way [indiscernible] perform is that we’ve got a growth plan that extends beyond the 3-year forecast that we put out and our expectations. I don’t think that’s being realized in the market, both from an efficiency perspective, in terms of the blending and extending of growth with the new assets that we picked up and that we’re building. And we’re really going to walk through that for all of you and how all of these pieces fit together. And I’ll just — I’ll give a brief example. Rebecca is looking at to say, don’t give too much.
But just a brief example would be think about Ohio itself, you’re just talking about the utilities. We have all of our businesses located in Ohio. It’s a good example where we see opportunities to provide customers, shareholders and stakeholders with real value added. So we have liquids lines that serve refineries there. We have gas transmission that goes through Ohio. We’ll have a great utility there that wants to see growth and Matthews get renewable assets there. So we think that is a real opportunity to create value on all fronts, and I don’t think that’s being realized. So that’s the thesis, and that’s what I want you to walk away from March 6 with.
Jeremy Tonet: Got it. Thank you for that.
Operator: Your next question comes from the line of Rob Hope from Scotiabank. Your line is open.
Robert Hope: Good morning, everyone. A bit of a broader question from me. In your conversations, you’ve talked about some good regulatory jurisdictions versus a more challenging decision from Ontario. Historically, Ontario has been seen as a relatively pro gas and relatively good regulatory regime. So when you look forward, especially given the fact that you will be introducing some incremental jurisdictions here. How do you ensure that the good regulatory jurisdictions stay that way? And then as you move forward, how do you expect to continue to interact with the government and regulators such that they see the value and need of the natural gas systems.
-Michele Harradence: Sure, I can take that. Well, first of all, let’s be clear, Ontario still is progress. I mean that’s — I think if you take nothing from the statement from the Minister of Energy, take that, I’d also refer you to things like the powering Ontario’s growth plan that they have. So — but at the end of the day, I think with all of these jurisdictions, one of the things we really believe is that strong local presence is important. So we will — we have and maintain very strong local leaders of each of these utilities. So the Vice President and GM for Ohio, Utah and North Carolina, they’re there. They’re very well known by the regulators, well known by the folks in government in each of those jurisdictions. Just like our folks in Ontario are very well known and well respected.
I mean it’s really important to us to be seen as trusted advisers to be transparent in our dealings to do what’s best for the communities we operate in. I mean we think of ourselves as being in service. And in fact, that service name is in some of the utilities name. So those are all critical. But in order to ensure that we make the transition smoothly, it’s been very important for us to go out and meet with the regulators. I personally met with the head of every public utility that we are — that has jurisdiction of the assets we’re acquiring, whether that’s Wyoming, Utah, North Carolina, Ohio, I’ve met with their staff. I met with various members of government Grade Greg, I think you’ve met with at least two of the governors. You met with Ohio and you and I met together with Utah.
I think I’m meeting with North Carolina here in a couple of weeks, the government of North Carolina met with the [indiscernible] Governor of North Carolina a couple of weeks ago. I mean, that’s an important part of it that they understand who we are, that we’re credible that we’ll do the right thing by these jurisdictions. And I can tell you, all four 4 of them, what they talked to me about is wanting to ensure that gas continues to be delivered reliably and affordably. And that’s something that is a real advantage that all of these utilities have. I mean if you look at the storage, we haven’t talked about our [indiscernible] storage facility because maybe we haven’t had the extreme cold that we’ve had in the past. But Dawn has continued to just set records out of Ontario.
Ohio has what is the sixth major pipelines that are serving it. Utah with the Wexpro asset, again, that really — all of those things really help keep the price stable, keep it affordable, keep it reliable. Same thing in North Carolina. We’ve got an LNG facility there and we will have an LNG facility there. I can’t get ahead of myself and we, of course, the folks in North Carolina are proposing a second one. So that’s really what they care about. It’s important to keep those relationships open. It’s important that they know that they can reach out to us at any time, and it’s important for us to be listening closely to what they want for their people.
Greg Ebel: Robert, I think you’ve taken it up to the overall Enbridge level, I think whether it’s Synthes business, Colin’s business, you’ve heard both Michele or Matthews, I think we work real hard at our regulatory relationships we have to, much harder than we did historically because of some of the, what I’ll say, confusion about energy transition. And I think the whole portfolio, when you look at it from top to bottom, really fits the current state and actually probably the state that it will be in some period of time, long, long tail and future for oil, natural gas, it’s not a destination fuel. It’s an ultimate field that’s going to be — there isn’t really a future without natural gas in most parts of the planet. And that doesn’t take away from renewables.
And we get into those communities. We’re in 40-plus states and 8 provinces. And we’ve got to make sure that they value our investment. I think if you look at our indigenous reconciliation action plan is another good example. And you look at projects we’ve done to include groups that haven’t historically been involved. That’s how you build strong alliances and those strong alliances actually make the regulator’s job easier. And when you get something off balance that seems to be counter to a regulatory outcome that’s counter to policy or the communities, then you see those changes. And that’s what you had in Ontario, right? So the regulators required to independently regulate consistent with government policy. That’s not what happened in Ontario, right?
But it’s our job to keep working with these communities. And when you have issues, make sure that the homebuilders understand the implications. Make sure that the manufacturers understand the implications that our union brothers and sisters understand the implications. So I think it’s much bigger than regulatory. And as an industry and definitely as a company, I think we’ve continued to improve with that. And we’ve got to keep getting better and better at that and selling our message.
– Robert HopeTy.: All right. Appreciate that Folks for the answer
Operator: Your next question comes from the line of Ben Pham from BMO. Your line is open.
Ben Pham: Hi. Thanks, good morning. Maybe I can go back to the mainline. I know you’ve been talking about the positive trends in terms of volumes this year. And — and I’m wondering if you can maybe add a bit of color on — do you think some of this is producers building ahead of Tmax? You think it’s more mostly demand-driven that’s driving it?
ColinGruending: Hey, Ben, it’s Colin. Yes, thanks for your question. And I’ve kind of looked through most of the analyst estimates, and I think most analysts have updated their forecast on this. And I think this notion that the mainland is going to lose a bunch of volume and TMAX comes in. It’s a bit of a stale concept. It might have been valid a few years ago, but it’s been delayed materially. And in that multiyear period of delay, supply has structurally and permanently grown. It’s ratable production and that demand is there. It’s basically insatiable. So I mean just to run through this, in 2022, supply grew by 100,000 barrels a day. Last year, in ’23, supply grew by 150,000 barrels per day in Canada. In 2024, it’s looking to grow between 250,000 and 300,000 a day and ’25 another couple of hundred thousand barrels per day.
If you add that up, it’s probably 2x what TMX is likely to practically move. So that’s kind of the math that we’re looking at and gives us a lot of confidence in the 3 million barrels per day forecast for 2024, there has been a bit of storage growth to your — maybe to your point, anticipation of that, and we see that in our nominations and oversubscribed. So apportionment has been high. It may — we may still have apportionment once TMX comes in, depending on the month or day or a crude slate. So we are going to be pretty full. I don’t know if that answers your question.
Ben Pham: Yes. That’s great. It’s interesting term events. And maybe the second question maybe for Greg. When you talk about balanced business mix with Dominion, are you putting renewables and gas when you think about that percentage and how you frame the business mix, are you — do you think about that as a separate part in your business mix?
Greg Ebel: It’s interesting because we definitely — we put the 4 businesses, if you drew a pie chart, if you will. We put them separately. But I guess what I was saying is that they’re just increasingly more integrated in terms of what our customers and I think what investors want as well even on a proportion basis. So here’s the way I would look at it. Just about 50% or once the utilities are closed, maybe a little bit less than 50% of the business will be liquids and 50% or more will be gas and renewables. So that’s probably the way to think about it from a split perspective. There’s no doubt, as you know, a lot of support for renewables is needed by the gas sector, right? So it’s back up. So they’re definitely connected.
