So, as we look at the fundamentals and compare that risk reward scenario, we like having the downside production while having exposure what we think is a positive setup for ’25, ’26 and beyond. So as you play that out in ’26 and beyond, I think the basic philosophy continues. How do we continue to maintain that nice base of production – protection. So, of course, the percentage hedge depends on what price we can hedge but that $25 million is a good example of what you may see going forward.
Paul Diamond: And just a quick follow-up that kind of portends into some of the stuff you just said. So on Slide 17, you talked about potential 16B pull over the next few years of incremental call on Gassy. On Gassy Basin from that number, does that shift your thought process in Slide 9? So the kind of the locational destination of where you want to see or where you will end up seeing the product, is there any shift there or is that still going to remain relatively consistent?
Dennis Degner: Yes, Paul, I think you’re — to think that it’s going to be consistent I think is a good starting point. The transportation portfolio and options that we have, have a lot of long-term optionality for us. And so there’s the ability for us to continue as I say extend the exposure to those different markets that we’ve had a luxury of being a part of and participating in for the past decade now. So there is an opportunity in our opinion in the future for capacity to go underutilized by other producers as you start to see conversations like inventory exhaustion become more material, as you start to see capital allocation maybe look differently for different producers as they think about different basin exposure. And I think all of that starts to point to a really good complement to our ability to put additional production when the call on that is appropriate and get more exposure to those same and similar respective markets.
Clearly, on the NGL side, we’ve already got a lot of exposure to both the Gulf and also to water board export capacity out of markets with the Philadelphia and we would expect that to be consistent as well.
Operator: Our next question comes from the line of Nitin Kumar with Mizuho.
Nitin Kumar : Dennis, I want to start on Slide 17. Obviously, AI the demand growth for gas from AI adoption is a big topic out there. In your outlook, you only take in about a Bcf a day of incremental demand growth. Obviously, you mentioned there are others that have higher expectations. I just want to see like, is there a difference in assumptions? Or are you seeing something on the ground that’s making — maybe making you more conservative than some of the expectations that are out there?
Dennis Degner: The power demand piece has no doubt been more and more topical every time we get around the table with investors these days. And also internally, as we have these conversations about the future of our industry. I think we wanted to take a conservative view on the outlook from a standpoint of we know that it’s going to require some conversations around further probably permit support, infrastructure development. But if you had to, I guess, pin us down on a respective range or a number, we think a Bcf a day is a very conservative outlook. And we think there’s a lot of opportunity when you look at gosh, if you just look at PJM alone, they came out with a forecast here recently that suggested that in a nutshell, 20 additional gigawatts is going to be required in that power market alone by 2030.
That’s going to represent somewhere between 2 and 3 Bcf a day at opportunity. So that’s kind of narrowing it down. We’ll stay a little bit closer to home for us. And again, we even think that’s conservative. When you start to think about the exposure to further coal retirements is another 2 Bcf a day approximately that’s going to get retired in that similar time frame in the Northeast. And clearly, you’ve got some other facilities that may be facing retirement conversations either regulatory driven or economics-driven. So all that to be said, we really think there’s a key opportunity here. Our diverse portfolio gets us to several of the markets that could have exposure to this AI and power demand equation. And you can start to even — I’ll just say, take a step back and say, even though the data center concentration is clearly in a place like Virginia, I think one of the questions that we’re starting to raise is does this now change because of the reliable and cost-effective clean part of our supply equation?
Does that start to challenge and relocate some of the data center development, as Mark touched on reshoring of industrialization and manufacturing expansion, all of that confined, let’s just say, new concentration centers closer to that reliable supply, which aligns with us. It aligns with Range in the long-dated inventory that we have and that runway and the quality of it. So, yes, I think a Bcf a day is a conservative estimate. But as you’ve probably seen from several of the research pieces today that Range can be wide and a little bit all over the place. But I think it’s clearly pointing to there’s a really good opportunity here and one that we could play a part of.
Nitin Kumar : My second question is perhaps related, but you started talking about the 200-odd thousand acres you have in the Northwest Pennsylvania. Perhaps closer to the Midwest area and some of your peers have been testing it. Can you talk a little bit about this acreage? And is this — does this asset play any part in your capital plans for the next two, three years? Or is this just option value for you at this stage?
Mark Scucchi : Yes, it’s probably more the latter than the prior. That’s — the Northwest Pennsylvania footprint represents a part of our legacy activity from years and years ago. And it is a part of our asset base that is held by — the deep prices are held by production. And so there’s not an at-risk component associated with the land. And so we feel like our focus for the next several years is going to be the bread and butter of what we’ve reported on in this quarter and the prior, and that’s the Marcellus and continuing to harvest the value of that portion of our asset base. But the reason why we still retain Northwest PA is it’s a stacked hydrocarbon charge column in that part of the basin, much like other parts of Appalachia.
