Jean Ann Salisbury: Yes. That makes sense. And then do you think of Lake Charles and the petchem project being somewhat dependent on each other in terms of the share that you’re willing to take? Just hypothetically, if one of them was to definitively kind of not reach up ID, would that increase your appetite to take a greater share of the other where you think of the as completely independent?
Tom Long: Yes. This is Tom Long. I’ll chime in here first. We look at them as independent. They’re not in the same dialogue we look at. In other words, our desire is to continue to look at market for all the product that we handle. And so when you start looking at petchem, you start looking at LNG, you start to have to start looking at the upstream benefits that we see. And we think they both on a stand-alone basis would make sense or we won’t take them to FID, but they are independent.
Jean Ann Salisbury: Great. That’s all for me. Thanks.
Operator: Our next question comes from Chase Mulvehill with Bank of America. Please go ahead.
Chase Mulvehill: Hey. Good afternoon everybody. So I guess, a quick question on the midstream segment. Obviously, took a big step down in the fourth quarter, probably more so related to POPs. But could you talk about how much in the fourth quarter that really reflected kind of spot commodity pricing versus what further downside you might have as you kind of roll in lower commodity prices. And I realize that you’re using the strip for your guidance, but just trying to understand and level set things gelato the fourth quarter.
Tom Long: Yes. This is Tom Long. It is those POP contracts. Jas, used to you nailed that as far as the way you described it. But the midstream area is the area that we did. When you look at 2022, we did enjoy a lot of the higher commodity prices as we as we went through the year and saw that. And that’s the €“ that’s probably one of the segments that we continue to look at when we give the guidance for 2023 that it is a lot about the pricing. Now remember, we are still using that forward curve for 2023, and that’s what we’ve got baked into it. But we still remain very bullish on the volumes and what we’re seeing, and we’re going to obviously capture all the value we can to continue to grow that segment.
Chase Mulvehill: Okay. Makes sense. And you probably have a decent look into kind of petchem demand. And if we’re starting to see kind of early signs of, I guess a bottoming of petchem demand potentially a pickup in the back half or you maybe think that’s more 2024. So would be curious on your thoughts on petchem demand and if you see that kind of bottom in the near term and maybe moving up as we get a
Mackie McCrea: Chase, we started losing you. Yes, I think I can answer if I don’t ask it again. But as , we do have a team they’re working diligently on a very unique €“ probably one of the most flexible projects that’s ever been built in the world, and we are in a difficult time. We’re in a very down cycle. There’s really no spread similar to what’s happening on a warrior, where there’s just no spread, and it’s hard to get a company’s commit. However, we are in dialogue with several equity partners, both of which will take a significant part of the yield out. And we do think it’s project at some point, we’ll get to FID. It’s tough timing right now based on kind of where the crack spreads are. But to your point, it is a cycle and maybe buy everybody is going to start seeing maybe by the latter part of 2024, we start seeing the upside of that cycle.
And so as we kind of get deeper into 2023 different this year, we are optimistic that we’ll get more momentum and hopefully get that to FID.
