And so we’re watching what’s taking place in places like Ohio with others that our acreage is on trend for a portion of that, and we’ll kind of sit back and watch. We have the luxury of doing so instead of needing to prospect on that part of our asset base, while we continue to harvest the cash flow and the returns associated with the Marcellus.
Operator: Our next question comes from the line of Jake Roberts with TPH & Company.
Jacob Roberts : Just wanted to circle back and topic of your AI here. I think your view of Virginia, we tend to agree with. And we’re just curious if you could frame ultimately what you think that back half of the decade growth or demand outlook looks like in basin or out of basin? And do you think there’s a general perception that pipelines will be getting built out in the Northeast on a lot of these forecasts?
Mark Scucchi : So I’ll jump in here. I think to start with, this is still very early in how both the power markets and the data centers and all of this has developed the cadence, the energy sources and so forth. But again looking at some recent third-party research and just — if you think about in the U.S. gas market share being north of 40% or right at 40% and roll that forward, make that a simple assumption through 2030. And then even think closer to home for Range, where in the Northeast, think Virginia, Ohio, New York, just general northeast type markets, that data center market share is about 35% of the U.S. market. So if you back-sold for that you get anywhere from 2.5 to 5.5 BcF equivalent of natural gas demand for power.
So we just see this as an early but very compelling source of incremental demand over and above the demand that’s already been baked in PJM, but Dennis mentioned earlier is revised upward of their expectations. Other grid operators have as well. We can just zoom back out to the general concept of reindustrialization and reshoring in the U.S., be it the Intel plant in Ohio, while EV sales and production are slowing down a little bit, there is incremental demand in form of multiple EV battery plants, be it in Indiana from the Stellantis Samsung plant or in Ohio from the GM LG plant. And these are just a couple of examples of a whole host of other industrial projects, which ultimately pull you back to power to the grid and how that gets built out, be it distribution networks and generation and pulling back to gas.
So we think proximity to that is important. You need Appalachia, you need the Marcellus that low decline, clean base foundation of supply and it’s cost competitive. So while we can’t give you a high degree of confidence on what those other industries, the speed and permitting and construction cadence will be, we do have a high degree of confidence that we can play a fundamental role in making that economic and reliable and continuing that build out now through the end of the decade.
Dennis Degner : Yes. And I’ll just tack on one quick thing, Jac to maybe close this topic out. I think when you start to look at the supply-demand piece, really in-ground storage, as you probably well know, has really not changed in a material way over the past decade. And so as you start to think about in-ground storage not really changing, as you think about now, even if — let’s just say this wide range of variability is 2 to 3 Bcf or 5, as Mark points out, who knows where it fully lands, but it’s hard to imagine us going forward in this — in the lower 48 without further electrifying what we do. And that’s going to require infrastructure, pipes and wires to be able to get low-cost, reliable, clean, effective energy to basically power what we do.
And so the equation starts to break down at that point, if you’re going to meet the supply without additional pipeline infrastructure and wires to support that power getting to those underserved markets or critical markets. So infrastructure is going to play a real part of this in our opinion.
Jacob Roberts : And as you — I know you want to close the topic out, maybe just one more. As infrastructure does appear, the time lines are longer permitting becomes more difficult. Is there a more compelling case to be a multi-basin operator in the back half of this decade to perhaps take advantage of where this onshoring or data center facilities ultimately come online?
Dennis Degner : Yes. Really good question. I kind of think I would take a step back on this and say, look, when you look at where a lot of the power demand and some of the manufacturing that Mark touched on, it’s going to be regional for our asset base. And so I think whereas maybe a year ago, the question may have revolved around multi-basin exposure advantages tied specifically to LNG. In our case, we don’t really feel like that has to be a driver. We’ve got the inventory to basically deliver repeatable results on the transport we have two LNG type outlets. And now is this data center demand opportunity further materializes, grows and develops we feel like it’s going to be more regional to an Appalachian producer like Range. So we feel like this takes — it further supports developing our Marcellus and then the decades to come or Utica and then later after that the upper Devonian. So I think it puts us in a great position to not need to have other basin exposure.
Alan Engberg: Yes, I’ll join in on that. I would say that Range effectively is economically is a multi-basin company. 90% of our revenue is outside the basin. The transportation portfolio moves north of 80% of the gas out of the basin and virtually all of the liquids. So we have the best marriage of the most efficient asset with the business overlay and the infrastructure to transport that production and connectivity to end markets. The proximity is actually an advantage, I would say, being concentrated in the northeast for all the reasons we just touched on, in the form of incremental power and the sheer population density and data center and other sources of future demand that’s going to manifest itself in the next few years.
So from an operational standpoint, no, we don’t feel that driving need or compelling need to have another operational footprint. And from an economic perspective, we think the overlay of the transport accomplishes the goals, the risk mitigation and the capture of opportunities in other basins, both domestically and internationally.
