Andres Gluski: Yes. Well, we hope so, and then it will be second time around. I mean, basically, the €“ what happened here is that the government wanted more of an operator then a financial investor. They’re very happy with us, and they want somebody equally good. So, we feel there is a number of people interested in the asset because they actually canceled the number of new coal plants that were going to be built. So, there’s an appetite, especially from Asian operators for this asset. So, hopefully, it will be faster. It was somewhat of a surprise, but our intentions remain the same. So, to be out of coal by the end of 2025.
Richard Sunderland: Got it. Thank you for the time today.
Operator: Our next question comes from the line of Steve Fleishman of Wolfe Research. Your line is now open. Please go ahead.
Steve Fleishman: Yes, thank you. Andres, maybe could you give us just some overall color on how things are proceeding on panel supplies and particularly you flip up implementation issues. And is that kind of a key variable in the timing of these projects or is it more other issues?
Andres Gluski: Let’s see. Well, we feel pretty €“ we feel good about the panel issue. As you know, again, we got all the panels we could use in 2022. So, in 2023, we have all the orders in. Our suppliers have been getting through. So, again, we feel good about that. In terms of what would determine that last, sort of 600 megawatts, it’s really a combination of issues. It’s not just solar panels. It runs the gamut from wind turbines, deliveries, et cetera, pyramids easing. Also, the interconnection timing, is the client ready to take that . That was one of the biggest issues we had in 2022. We were ready, but the client wasn’t ready. So, it’s just a bag of different issues. I’d say an important issue going forward is, as you know, we’re heading the solar panel buyers consortium.
We want to have solar panels starting to be delivered late 2024, 2025 made in the U.S.A., and what we’re seeing now is really one of the regulations may be issued by treasury, what constitutes domestic content to get those additional credits. So, I’d say that’s an item that we’re watching very closely, but generally, we feel good about. And there are certainly people interested in locating that flat here to supply that contract.
Steve Fleishman: Okay. And then just €“ I know this was discussed on the last call, but just how are you making the decision between on U.S. projects, ITC versus PTC. I guess, — so PTC, I think you had talked about still having a lot of value in the tax equity and the depreciation, but just €“ do you see that starting to shift at some point in the €“ as you execute on future projects?
Steve Coughlin: Yes, I do, Steve, now that we have the optionality for production tax credits on solar, I would see that option being exercised primarily in the sunniest places in the U.S. So, in the Southwest U.S. projects where the production-based incentive is going to yield a higher value than necessarily the CapEx based on the capital investment based incentive. So, we are modeling more production tax credit into our longer-term. For this year, it’s not €“ I wouldn’t say, it’s impacted us really at all this year because for the most part, we’re locked into a tax credit structure election and a tax equity partnership that we’ve already agreed to. But going forward, we’ll start to see more production-based incentive come into the mix.
And that’s something, again, for Investor Day, as we talk about beyond 2025, kind of how do we look at the business, how do you look at the metrics of the business, how do you look at tax credits, distinct from earnings that don’t include tax credits, things like that, that we’ll be giving more guidance on to help people understand what that looks like going forward.
