Rich Kruger: Yes, absolutely. When I talked earlier on, I mentioned about kind of the reexamination of our strategies and kind of what are those key articulated objectives. Obviously, long-term bitumen supply is in that top 10 list. There’s no question about it. And I spent time here again with Shelly recently and now, Peter, looking at our — some of our in situ opportunities. And I think the — we — because I’ll tell you, I’m agnostic to a barrel of bitumen. I don’t care if it comes from dirt or the earth. It’s what’s the most profitable, the lowest cost, most reliable supply. And we’re looking at some of our own internal, like Lewis, for example is one we’ve talked about at points in time. I guess, a Firebag south is one area we’ve looked at.
And we’re looking at a variety of other kind of alternatives in the mining, just adjacent leases. So I think the — John, what I’d say is we’re looking at kind of the full swath of opportunities. And whatever we do will be driven by lowest supply cost and whether that’s incremental in situ or whether that’s incremental mining and whether that’s from assets in our portfolio today or assets that we think we can — are worth more to us than they are to their current owners. So it’s that full view screen or radar screen we’re looking at in Fort Hills obviously helps in that regard from the standpoint, not just the Fort Hills ramp up as well as whatever happens with the Total side of it. That definitely helps in keeping the upgraders full.
Then beyond that, it’s all about value, whether that’s maintaining a production profile, growing it or not. It’s about what value opportunities are there for us. And I’m excited because we’re — we’ve got a number of things that are there available — a number of levers that are available for us to consider pulling over time.
Operator: One moment for our next question. And that will come from the line of Doug Leggate with Bank of America.
Kalei Akamine: This is Kalei on for Doug. Thanks for taking the questions. My first question is also on Syncrude and maybe it’s best for Rich. So the trend as we see it in recent years has seen the Canadians consolidate the oil sands and the result has been just a lot of synergies. When I think about your interest in Fort Hills, it’s perhaps another play on this. And when I think about Syncrude, it’s just another asset that you’re highly familiar with. So I’m wondering if the ownership structure as it stands today, does it maximize the value of that asset, or do you think there could be synergies? And I guess I’m asking that in the context that you guys were just able to identify material cost savings across the business that you do wholly own.
Rich Kruger: Yes. I think it gets back to my earlier broad comments that ownership and partnerships get there for a variety of reasons over time. In a clean sheet of paper world, we would prefer to operate, have a 100% interest and then — and I think it’s — our asset base is a real vivid illustration of that. The synergies, and Dave commented earlier, Peter did too, of kind of molecule management from the mine all the way through to someone’s gas tech, that gives us opportunities. So, the flexibility that goes with that is also important. And I think Peter’s business is probably the best example of it. I commented in round numbers, we have 900 trucks in 5 different mines in 3 different kind of asset bases that have 3 different sets of ownership.
