Alliance Resource Partners LP (ARLP) 2022 Q2 法說會逐字稿

Welcome to Alliance Resource Partners Second Quarter 2022 Earnings Conference Call. (Operator Instructions) Please note, this conference is being recorded. I will now turn the program over to Brian Cantrell, Senior Vice President and CFO. Thank you. You may begin.

歡迎參加 Alliance Resource Partners 2022 年第二季財報電話會議。（接線員指示）請注意，本次會議將被錄音。我現在把會議交給資深副總裁兼財務長 Brian Cantrell。謝謝。您可以開始了。

Thank you, Sherry, and welcome, everyone. Earlier this morning, Alliance Resource Partners released its second quarter 2022 financial and operating results, and we'll now discuss these results as well as our perspective on market conditions and outlook. Following our prepared remarks, we'll open the call to your questions. Before we begin, a reminder that some of our remarks today may include forward-looking statements subject to a variety of risks, uncertainties and assumptions that are contained in our filings from time to time with the Securities and Exchange Commission and are also reflected in this morning's press release. While these forward-looking statements are based on information currently available to us, if one or more of these risks or uncertainties materialize or if our underlying assumptions prove incorrect, our actual results may vary materially from those we projected or expected.

謝謝你，Sherry，也歡迎各位。今天稍早，Alliance Resource Partners 已公布其 2022 年第二季財務與營運結果；接下來我們將討論這些結果，以及我們對市場狀況與展望的看法。在我們的準備發言之後，將開放各位提問。在開始之前提醒一下，我們今天的部分發言可能包含前瞻性陳述，並受多項風險、不確定性與假設影響；相關內容不時載於我們向美國證券交易委員會（SEC）提交的申報文件中，亦反映於今天早上的新聞稿。雖然這些前瞻性陳述係基於我們目前可得資訊，但若一項或多項風險或不確定性成真，或我們的基本假設證明不正確，我們的實際結果可能與我們所預測或預期者有重大差異。

In providing these remarks, the partnership has no obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, unless required by law to do so. Finally, we'll also be discussing certain non-GAAP financial measures. Definitions and reconciliations of the differences between these non-GAAP financial measures and the most directly comparable GAAP financial measures are contained at the end of ARLP's press release, which has been posted on our website and furnished to the SEC on Form 8-K.

在提供上述發言時，本合夥企業並無義務公開更新或修訂任何前瞻性陳述（無論係因新資訊、未來事件或其他原因），除非法律要求。最後，我們也將討論若干非 GAAP 財務衡量指標。這些非 GAAP 財務衡量指標與最直接可比之 GAAP 財務衡量指標之差異定義與調節表，載於 ARLP 新聞稿末尾；該新聞稿已張貼於我們網站，並以 Form 8-K 提供給 SEC。

With the required preliminaries out of the way, I'll begin with a review of our results for the quarter and then turn the call over to Joe Craft, our Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer, for his comments. As we reported earlier this morning, Alliance delivered strong results during the 2022 quarter, posting increases to all of our key operating and financial metrics compared to the 2021 quarter. reflecting improved performance for both our coal operations and our royalty segment. ARLP's coal sales and production volumes increased 13.9% and 18.7%, respectively, while our royalty sales volumes for oil and gas and coal rose 27.6% and 11.9%, respectively, all as compared to the 2021 quarter.

在完成必要的開場事項後，我將先回顧本季業績，接著把電話交給我們的董事長、總裁兼執行長 Joe Craft 發表意見。如我們今天早上稍早所報告，Alliance 在 2022 年本季交出強勁成果，與 2021 年同期相比，我們所有關鍵營運與財務指標皆呈現成長，反映煤炭營運與權利金事業兩者表現改善。ARLP 的煤炭銷售量與產量分別增加 13.9% 與 18.7%；同時，我們在油氣與煤炭的權利金銷售量分別上升 27.6% 與 11.9%，以上皆相較於 2021 年同期。

Price realizations also increased across the board during the 2022 quarter with coal sales price per ton increasing 43.3%, oil and gas prices jumping 64.7% per BOE and coal royalty revenue climbing 11.3% per ton, driven by increased sales volumes and higher prices, ARLP's total revenues for the 2022 quarter increased 7.1% to a record $615.5 million as compared to the 2021 quarter. Net income and EBITDA also jumped significantly during the 2022 quarter, increasing 266.7% to $161.5 million and 105.6% to $243.8 million, respectively, over the 2021 quarter. Our financial results also improved over the sequential quarter as total revenues increased 33.8%, income before income taxes jumped 111.1% and EBITDA rose 60.1%. ARLP generated $83.5 million of free cash flow in the 2022 quarter, an increase of 5.1% and 179.3% compared to the 2021 and sequential quarters, respectively.

2022 年本季各項實現價格亦全面上升：煤炭每噸銷售價格增加 43.3%，油氣每 BOE 價格跳升 64.7%，煤炭權利金收入每噸成長 11.3%。在銷售量增加與價格走高的帶動下，ARLP 2022 年本季總營收較 2021 年同期增加 7.1%，達到創紀錄的 6.155 億美元。2022 年本季淨利與 EBITDA 亦大幅攀升，分別較 2021 年同期增加 266.7% 至 1.615 億美元，以及增加 105.6% 至 2.438 億美元。相較前一季，我們的財務結果也有所改善：總營收增加 33.8%，所得稅前利益跳升 111.1%，EBITDA 上升 60.1%。ARLP 在 2022 年本季產生 8,350 萬美元自由現金流，較 2021 年同期與前一季分別增加 5.1% 與 179.3%。

During the 2022 quarter, we returned $45.8 million to unitholders through our quarterly distribution, reduced our total leverage ratio by 19.5% to 0.66x trailing adjusted EBITDA, increased working capital by 30.5%, invested $52.7 million in previously announced energy transition and infrastructure growth opportunities, and we ended the quarter with liquidity of $572.3 million.

在 2022 年本季，我們透過季度配息向單位持有人返還 4,580 萬美元；將總槓桿比率降低 19.5% 至追溯期調整後 EBITDA 的 0.66 倍；營運資金增加 30.5%；投資 5,270 萬美元於先前宣布的能源轉型與基礎建設成長機會；並於季末擁有 5.723 億美元的流動性。

Turning from our consolidated results. Let's now take a closer look at the performance of ARLP's business segments during the 2022 quarter. At our coal operations, the previously mentioned increases to coal sales volumes and pricing led coal sales revenues higher to $531.8 million, an increase of 63.1% and 36.9% compared to the 2021 and sequential quarter, respectively. Segment adjusted EBITDA expense per ton increased compared to both the 2021 and sequential quarters, reflecting higher labor-related expenses, inflationary pressures and supply chain issues on numerous expense items, increased sales-related expenses due to higher price realizations and reduced recoveries across both regions during the 2022 quarter.

從合併結果轉向分部表現。接下來更深入檢視 ARLP 於 2022 年本季各業務分部的表現。在煤炭營運方面，前述煤炭銷售量與定價的提升，帶動煤炭銷售收入增加至 5.318 億美元，較 2021 年同期與前一季分別增加 63.1% 與 36.9%。分部調整後 EBITDA 每噸費用相較 2021 年同期與前一季皆上升，反映勞動相關費用增加、通膨壓力與供應鏈問題對多項費用項目的影響、因實現價格較高而增加的銷售相關費用，以及 2022 年本季兩個區域的回收（recoveries）減少。

Costs in the 2022 quarter also increased by $1.11 per ton due to a noncash accrual related to our purchase of the Hamilton Mine, which is based upon projections for higher coal sales price realizations in the future. Higher coal sales revenues more than offset increased segment adjusted EBITDA expenses to drive segment adjusted EBITDA from our coal operations higher to $222.6 million; an increase of 95.4% and 68.6% over the 2021 and sequential quarter, respectively.

2022 年本季成本亦因與我們收購 Hamilton 礦場相關的一項非現金應計而每噸增加 1.11 美元；該應計係基於對未來煤炭銷售實現價格更高的預測。較高的煤炭銷售收入足以抵銷分部調整後 EBITDA 費用的增加，使煤炭營運的分部調整後 EBITDA 提升至 2.226 億美元；較 2021 年同期與前一季分別增加 95.4% 與 68.6%。

ARLP's royalty business also performed well during the 2022 quarter, benefiting from increased royalty sales volumes and sharply higher commodity prices, segment adjusted EBITDA from royalties rose to a record $43.7 million for the 2022 quarter; an increase of 97.4% and 12.4% compared to the 2021 and sequential quarter, respectively. Our financial and operating results for the first half of 2022 were also much improved compared to the 2021 period. Coal sales and production volumes increased 16.5% and 16.6%, respectively, while our royalty sales volumes for oil and gas and coal rose 26.9% and 17.3%, respectively, all as compared to the 2021 period.

ARLP 的權利金業務在 2022 年本季同樣表現良好，受惠於權利金銷售量增加以及大宗商品價格大幅走高；權利金分部調整後 EBITDA 於 2022 年本季上升至創紀錄的 4,370 萬美元，較 2021 年同期與前一季分別增加 97.4% 與 12.4%。2022 年上半年我們的財務與營運結果相較 2021 年同期亦大幅改善。煤炭銷售量與產量分別增加 16.5% 與 16.6%；同時，我們在油氣與煤炭的權利金銷售量分別上升 26.9% 與 17.3%，以上皆相較於 2021 年同期。

Increased sales volumes and commodity prices drove total revenues higher by 58.2% to $1.08 billion. Increased revenues more than offset higher total operating expenses and income taxes, leading net income higher by 188.1% to $198.1 million for the 2021 period. EBITDA for the 2022 period also increased 86.1% to $396.2 million compared to $212.9 million in the 2021 period. These exceptional results were achieved despite the continued negative impact to ARLP's financial and operating results of ongoing transportation disruptions, primarily due to poor performance by the railroads at the end of the 2022 quarter, approximately 722,000 tons of ARLP's planned coal shipments were delayed by these transportation issues. We currently expect the bulk of these delayed coal shipments will be delivered over the balance of this year, but we recognize the possibility that some shipments may shift into 2023.

銷售量與大宗商品價格上升帶動總營收增加 58.2% 至 10.8 億美元。營收增加幅度超過總營運費用與所得稅的上升，推動 2022 年期間淨利較 2021 年期間增加 188.1% 至 1.981 億美元。2022 年期間 EBITDA 亦增加 86.1% 至 3.962 億美元，而 2021 年期間為 2.129 億美元。儘管運輸中斷持續對 ARLP 的財務與營運結果造成負面影響（主要因 2022 年本季末鐵路公司表現不佳），上述卓越成果仍得以達成；約 722,000 噸 ARLP 原計畫的煤炭出貨因這些運輸問題而延遲。我們目前預期這些延遲的煤炭出貨大部分將在今年剩餘期間交付，但我們也認知到部分出貨可能延至 2023 年。

I'll close my comments with a look at ARLP's updated 2022 full year guidance. During the 2022 quarter, we secured price commitments for the delivery of an additional million tons this year and have modestly increased the midpoint of anticipated sales price realization per ton at our coal operations to reflect these new contracts. We have also slightly increased the midpoint of our expected segment adjusted EBITDA expense per ton due to ongoing impact from inflationary pressures and supply chain challenges. Considering both of these adjustments, we currently anticipate full year 2022 operating margins from coal will be in line with our previous expectations.

我將以 ARLP 更新後的 2022 年全年指引作結。在 2022 年本季，我們已就今年額外 100 萬噸的交付取得價格承諾，並已小幅上調煤炭營運每噸預期銷售實現價格的中位數，以反映這些新合約。我們也因通膨壓力與供應鏈挑戰的持續影響，略微上調每噸預期分部調整後 EBITDA 費用的中位數。綜合上述兩項調整，我們目前預期 2022 年全年煤炭業務的營運利潤率將與先前預期一致。

Turning to our outlook for ARLP's royalty businesses. Drilling and completion activity of E&P operators on our minerals acreage has resulted in greater than anticipated oil and gas royalty production volumes during the first half of 2022, leading us to increase full year BOE volume expectations by 11.7% at the midpoint. As a result of increased production volumes, along with continued strong pricing for oil, natural gas and natural gas liquids, we expect the performance of our oil and gas royalty segment will exceed our previous expectations. Full year results for our coal royalty segment are expected to be generally in line with ARLP's previous guidance. And accordingly, we increased guidance for our combined royalty businesses.

接著談 ARLP 權利金業務的展望。E&P 業者在我們礦權（minerals）土地上的鑽井與完井活動，使 2022 年上半年油氣權利金產量（以 BOE 計）高於原先預期，促使我們將全年 BOE 量的中位數預期上調 11.7%。由於產量增加，加上油、天然氣與天然氣液體價格持續強勁，我們預期油氣權利金分部的表現將優於先前預期。煤炭權利金分部的全年結果預期大致與 ARLP 先前指引一致。因此，我們上調了合併權利金業務的指引。

We have also modified guidance ranges for several consolidated items. Anticipated income tax expense increased $10 million at the midpoint as a result of currently anticipated full year performance of our oil and gas royalty segment. The range for planned capital expenditures in 2022 was also increased $10 million to reflect the addition of a fifth continuous mining unit at our Gibson South mine and another development unit at our Hamilton Mine by the end of this year or early next. Finally, estimated net interest expense was reduced to reflect anticipated cash flow expectations.

我們也調整了若干合併項目的指引區間。由於目前預期油氣權利金分部的全年表現，預期所得稅費用的中位數增加 1,000 萬美元。2022 年計畫資本支出區間亦上調 1,000 萬美元，以反映在今年底或明年初前，於 Gibson South 礦場新增第 5 套連續採礦機組，以及於 Hamilton 礦場新增另一套開發機組。最後，估計淨利息費用下調，以反映預期的現金流表現。

With that, I'll turn the call to Joe for comments on the markets and his outlook for ARLP. Joe?

接下來，我把電話交給 Joe，請他就市場狀況以及他對 ARLP 的展望發表評論。Joe？

Thank you, Brian, and good morning, everyone. Global energy market conditions have continued to improve since our last earnings release in early May. Through the first half of this year, commodity prices have risen sharply as worldwide economies struggle to meet increasing power demand in the face of systemic commodity and renewable supply shortages and disruptions related to Russia and Beijing of Ukraine. A confluence of factors has contributed to global shortages of coal, oil and natural gas. Climate policies by governments and regulatory bodies in the United States and Europe have driven the premature closures of reliable baseload power generation and are continuing to influence utilities decisions on displacing fossil fuel plants with unreliable renewables in an effort to meet arbitrarily imposed deadlines. Many large financial institutions continue to support these efforts by blocking access to capital for fossil fuel producers.

謝謝你，Brian，各位早安。自我們在 5 月初發布上次財報以來，全球能源市場狀況持續改善。今年上半年，隨著全球各地經濟體在系統性大宗商品與再生能源供應短缺之下、以及與俄羅斯與北京對烏克蘭相關的供應中斷影響下，努力滿足不斷增加的電力需求，商品價格大幅上漲。多項因素匯聚，造成全球煤炭、石油與天然氣短缺。美國與歐洲各國政府及監管機構的氣候政策，推動可靠的基載發電提前關閉，並持續影響公用事業在為了達成任意設定的期限而以不可靠的再生能源取代化石燃料電廠的決策。許多大型金融機構也持續透過阻斷化石燃料生產商取得資本來支持這些作法。

Faced with these headwinds, producers have, for several years, prudently limited investments in fossil fuel production, leading to the current worldwide shortages of coal, oil and natural gas and a continued reluctance to make meaningful investments to increase supply. This lack of supply response, combined with inflationary forces, labor shortages, supply chain issues, transportation delays and sanctions imposed on Russian fuel sources have all contributed to the current energy crisis facing the world today. Governments and power generators around the world have begun to respond to these challenges by reevaluating their energy portfolios and power generation mix with a focus on energy security and reliability, which has favored natural gas and coal in the near term. However, it is unclear what actions will be taken that will, in fact, lead to a supply response significant enough to bring the energy markets more closely in balance and thus a reduction in future energy prices.

面對這些逆風，生產商多年來審慎限制對化石燃料生產的投資，導致目前全球煤炭、石油與天然氣短缺，並且仍不願進行有意義的投資以增加供給。供給反應不足，再加上通膨力量、勞動力短缺、供應鏈問題、運輸延誤，以及對俄羅斯燃料來源施加的制裁，皆促成了當前全球面臨的能源危機。全球各國政府與發電業者已開始回應這些挑戰，重新評估其能源組合與發電結構，並以能源安全與可靠性為重點，短期內有利於天然氣與煤炭。然而，目前仍不清楚將採取哪些行動，才能真正帶來足以使能源市場更接近平衡的供給反應，進而降低未來能源價格。

In the United States, coal stockpiles remain critically low, approaching levels not seen since 2006, with competition from higher-priced export markets and dismal performance by the railroads, domestic utilities are unable to secure the coal volumes necessary to meet their power demand obligations. These utilities, regional grid operators and public utility commissions have all begun to realize the reality of these market conditions, prompting their recent announcements to delay more than 12 gigawatts of planned coal plant closures in an effort to ensure adequate grid capacity and reliability for the near future. We believe the decisions made by utilities this year in combination with a higher natural gas price curve for the next couple of years, support higher domestic demand for coal and elevated coal prices over the same time period.

在美國，煤炭庫存仍處於極度偏低水準，接近自 2006 年以來未見的水平；在高價出口市場的競爭以及鐵路運輸表現不佳的情況下，國內公用事業無法取得滿足其電力需求義務所需的煤炭量。這些公用事業、區域電網營運商以及公用事業委員會都已開始認清這些市場狀況的現實，促使其近期宣布延後超過 12 吉瓦原計畫的燃煤電廠關閉，以確保短期內電網容量與可靠性充足。我們認為，公用事業今年所做的決策，加上未來幾年較高的天然氣價格曲線，將支撐國內煤炭需求走高，並在同一期間維持煤價於高檔。

European utilities are facing similar challenges in advance of the upcoming ban on Russian coal supply scheduled to occur in the next couple of weeks. API 2 pricing remains elevated, recently closing at $370 per ton for fourth quarter deliveries. Attractive netback pricing for thermal and metallurgical exports should provide growth in revenues for several years for U.S. coal producers as well. With countries around the world, recognizing the importance of energy security and our customers increasingly seeking to secure long-term, reliable coal supply from well-capitalized operators, ARLP has been able to strengthen its contract book.

歐洲公用事業也面臨類似挑戰，因為再過幾週即將實施對俄羅斯煤炭供應的禁令。API 2 價格仍維持高檔，近期第四季交付價格收在每噸 370 美元。對美國煤炭生產商而言，具吸引力的動力煤與冶金煤出口淨回收價格（netback pricing）也應可在未來數年帶動營收成長。隨著全球各國認知到能源安全的重要性，且我們的客戶日益尋求由資本實力雄厚的營運商提供長期、可靠的煤炭供應，ARLP 得以強化其合約組合。

During the 2022 quarter, we entered into new coal sales agreements for the delivery of 24.9 million tons through 2025 at prices above last quarter's expectations. We continue to believe coal markets will provide attractive opportunities for ARLP through at least 2024 and drive year-over-year margin growth for our cooperation's in 2022 as well as 2023 and 2024.

在 2022 年該季度期間，我們簽訂了新的煤炭銷售協議，於 2025 年前交付 2,490 萬噸，價格高於上季的預期。我們仍相信，至少到 2024 年，煤炭市場將為 ARLP 提供具吸引力的機會，並推動我們合作企業在 2022 年以及 2023 年與 2024 年的年對年毛利成長。

In this environment, we remain focused on expanding ARLP's market share to meet the needs of our domestic and international customers. By phasing in 2 new units of production in the Illinois Basin, we plan to increase our coal sales volume by approximately one million tons in 2023. Strong commodity markets should also benefit our oil and gas and coal royalty segments. Record oil and gas price realizations and production volumes resulted in record segment adjusted EBITDA from our oil and gas royalty segment through the first half of this year. With a favorable forward price curve for oil and gas and expectations for volume growth during the back half of 2022, we expect the performance of our oil and gas royalty segment to remain strong.

在此環境下，我們仍專注於擴大 ARLP 的市占率，以滿足國內與國際客戶的需求。透過在伊利諾盆地逐步導入 2 個新的生產單元，我們計畫在 2023 年將煤炭銷售量提高約 100 萬噸。強勁的大宗商品市場也應有利於我們的油氣與煤炭權利金（royalty）業務。創紀錄的油氣實現價格與產量，使我們的油氣權利金部門在今年上半年創下部門調整後 EBITDA 新高。隨著油氣遠期價格曲線有利，且預期 2022 年下半年產量成長，我們預期油氣權利金部門的表現將維持強勁。

The favorable market conditions supporting the performance of our coal operations are expected to benefit our coal royalties business as well. We continue to believe ARLP is well positioned to deliver solid growth and attractive cash returns to our unitholders. During our last earnings call, we indicated that management was targeting unitholder distribution increases of 10% to 15% per quarter over the balance of this year, and we are pleased that our Board elected to support management's view by increasing ARLP's cash distribution to unitholders by 14.3% over the sequential quarter. Reflecting ARLP's strong year-to-date performance and management's expectations for the future, our targeted quarterly distribution increase remains intact through the end of this year and is expected to result in approximately 30% of our annual free cash flow being returned to unitholders as we previously communicated.

支撐我們煤炭營運表現的有利市場條件，也預期將使我們的煤炭權利金業務受益。我們仍相信 ARLP 具備良好條件，能為單位持有人帶來穩健成長與具吸引力的現金回饋。在上次財報電話會議中，我們表示管理團隊目標是在今年剩餘期間，每季將單位持有人配息提高 10% 至 15%；我們很高興董事會支持管理層的看法，將 ARLP 對單位持有人的現金配息較前一季提高 14.3%。反映 ARLP 年初至今的強勁表現以及管理層對未來的預期，我們的目標季度配息增幅將維持至今年底，並預期將使約 30% 的年度自由現金流回饋給單位持有人，正如我們先前所溝通。

In addition to returning cash to unitholders, ARLP continued to make progress during the 2022 quarter on its energy transition strategy we outlined last quarter. Adding to our earlier investments in EV charging infrastructure through Francis Energy and energy efficiency through Infinitum Electric's industrial electric motor technology, we announced this morning our $25 million commitment to NGP ETP IV, a private equity fund sponsored by NGP Energy Capital Management, LLC. While ARLP's commitment to this fund will be deployed over several years, our participation provides us insight to a broad range of investments in companies focused on the growth of renewable energy, the electrification of the U.S. economy and energy efficiency.

除了回饋現金給單位持有人之外，ARLP 在 2022 年該季度也持續推進我們上季所概述的能源轉型策略。在先前透過 Francis Energy 投資電動車充電基礎設施、以及透過 Infinitum Electric 的工業電動馬達技術投資能源效率之後，我們今天早上宣布承諾投入 2,500 萬美元至 NGP ETP IV，這是一檔由 NGP Energy Capital Management, LLC 發起的私募股權基金。雖然 ARLP 對該基金的承諾將在數年內逐步投入，但我們的參與可讓我們洞察一系列廣泛的投資機會，涵蓋專注於再生能源成長、美國經濟電氣化以及能源效率的公司。

Through these efforts and others under evaluation, we remain focused on the capital allocation priorities we outlined during the last quarterly earnings call. We firmly believe that fossil fuels that ARLP currently provides will remain essential for years to come to meet the immediate energy needs critical to our customers and the communities they serve. By implementing our energy transition strategy investments, we are also well positioned to meet their energy needs of the future. In conjunction with all of these efforts, we remain committed to maintaining a strong balance sheet and achieving record financial results leading to long-term growth and total returns to our unitholders.

透過這些努力以及其他正在評估中的項目，我們仍專注於上次季度財報電話會議中所提出的資本配置優先順序。我們堅信，ARLP 目前所提供的化石燃料在未來多年仍將是必要的，以滿足對我們客戶及其所服務社區至關重要的即時能源需求。透過落實我們能源轉型策略的投資，我們也具備良好條件以滿足其未來的能源需求。配合上述各項努力，我們仍致力於維持強健的資產負債表，並達成創紀錄的財務成果，進而為單位持有人帶來長期成長與總回報。

That concludes our prepared comments, and I'll now ask the operator to open the call for questions.

以上為我們預先準備的發言內容，接下來我請接線員開放提問。

(Operator Instructions) Our first question is from Nathan Martin with The Benchmark Company.

（接線員指示）我們的第一個問題來自 The Benchmark Company 的 Nathan Martin。

Maybe I'll start with -- you guys mentioned committing an additional 24.9 million tons through 2025 at prices above your recent expectations; pretty sizable chunk there. Maybe could we get a breakdown of those tons over the next several years, 2023, 2024, 2025? And any thoughts on pricing would be helpful.

我先從這裡開始——你們提到在 2025 年前額外承諾 2,490 萬噸，且價格高於你們近期的預期；這是一個相當大的量。能否請你們分解一下未來幾年（2023、2024、2025）各年的噸數？另外，若能分享一些對價格的看法也會很有幫助。

Yes. So as Brian mentioned, we had $1 million in 2022 and $9.1 million in 2023. 2024 is $8.5 million and $6.3 million in 2025. As I mentioned, those prices did come in higher than what we anticipated last quarter. As we think about 2023, if our forecasts are correct for our UI tons, and based on the tons we booked, we would expect our average sales price to increase approximately $10 a ton from our guidance for 2022. As Brian mentioned, or I mentioned, we believe those margins are also going to expand in 2024. So that would suggest that those prices could be a little higher in 2024 as well. It's harder to project exactly what that number would be because it does have a larger percent of UI. And that's subject to how the markets will develop over the next year for 2024, 2025. So that's the guidance I can give you today.

好的。如 Brian 所提到的，我們在 2022 年是 100 萬噸，2023 年是 910 萬噸。2024 年是 850 萬噸，2025 年是 630 萬噸。如我所說，這些價格確實高於我們上季的預期。就 2023 年而言，如果我們對 UI 噸數的預測正確，並且基於我們已簽約的噸數，我們預期平均銷售價格將較我們對 2022 年的指引每噸提高約 10 美元。正如 Brian 提到的，或我提到的，我們認為 2024 年的利潤率也會擴大。因此這表示 2024 年的價格也可能略高。不過要精確預估那個數字比較困難，因為其中 UI 的占比更高，而這也取決於未來一年市場對 2024、2025 年的發展情況。以上就是我今天能提供的指引。

That's very helpful, Joe, appreciate that. Maybe another question on 2023 specifically. You're now expecting production sales to be up about a million tons, as you said, with the fifth unit Gibson South and an extra development unit in Hamilton, you said late this year, early next year. Are you guys planning any further expansion at this point if demand is there? Or is pretty much how you see sales shaping up at this point for next year?

非常有幫助，Joe，謝謝。再問一個關於 2023 年的問題。你們現在預期產銷量會增加約 100 萬噸，正如你所說，來自 Gibson South 的第五個單元，以及你說今年稍晚、明年初在 Hamilton 增加的一個額外開發單元。如果需求存在，你們目前是否規劃進一步擴產？還是說，這大致就是你們目前對明年銷售走勢的看法？

I think it's dependent on labor. We have seen an improvement in our labor supply this quarter. That's attributed to there's been some demand response and some industrial companies in our region that have cut back. And so that's created some opportunities for us to hire. We're hopeful that with our forward look that shows this commitment from our customers over the next several years that, that too will help us in continuing to recruit workers to the coal industry.

我認為這取決於勞動力。本季我們看到勞動力供給有所改善。這主要是因為出現了一些需求反應，我們地區的一些工業公司縮減了產出，因此為我們創造了一些招募機會。我們希望，從前瞻角度來看，客戶在未來幾年做出的這些承諾，也將有助於我們持續招募勞工加入煤炭產業。

The State of Kentucky in particular, and Southern Indiana, both have a lot of efforts on workforce development to try to go to the young people in high schools and in technical schools to put an explanation or trying to educate these young people, the tremendous opportunities they've got in the manufacturing sector of our economy and the growth that's projected over the next several years. I think that's bearing fruit. But whether we can increase volume beyond this will, in large part, be dependent on workforce and maybe more importantly, on government policy.

特別是肯塔基州以及印第安納州南部，雙方都在勞動力發展上投入大量努力，試圖走進高中與技術學校的年輕人，向他們說明並教育這些年輕人：在我們經濟的製造業部門中，他們擁有巨大的機會，以及未來幾年預期的成長。我認為這些努力正在開花結果。但我們是否能在此基礎上進一步提高產量，在很大程度上將取決於勞動力，或許更重要的是，取決於政府政策。

So right now, I'm not expecting anything beyond what we've announced to try to get to the bottom line. There are a few things we're looking at that could create some opportunities this year if we did increase those opportunities this year, it would probably take away from next year just different ways we can look at our mine plan that could allow us to bring on a little bit more tonnage. It's not significant, but there's opportunities with the price. When you look at the market for fourth quarter of this year, both domestically and export, it's quite a bit higher than what we would expect next year. So we are trying to evaluate whether there's opportunities to adjust our mine plan is a little bit to take advantage of that different price curve. But it's not significant. I mean it's meaningful to us, but as far as the guidance we've given, it's all within the ranges of the guidance we've given you for 2022.

所以就目前而言，我不預期會有任何超出我們已宣布內容的事項來推動最終盈餘。我們正在評估幾件事，如果今年真的增加那些機會，可能就會挪用到明年的量——也就是我們可以用不同方式檢視礦山計畫，讓我們能多帶出一點點噸數。幅度不大，但在價格條件下確實有機會。當你看今年第四季的市場（無論國內或出口），價格都明顯高於我們對明年的預期。因此我們正在評估，是否有機會稍微調整礦山計畫，以利用這條不同的價格曲線。但不會很顯著。我的意思是，對我們而言是有意義的，但就我們給出的指引來看，全部都仍在我們已提供給你們的 2022 年指引區間之內。

Got it. I appreciate the thoughts on the labor front as well because I was going to go with that next. So maybe just curious on the export side. I think you guys have done as many as maybe 10 million or 11 million tons max at some point historically in a year. Is that still a reasonable maximum number? Or where do you see that number popping out today?

了解。我也很感謝你們對勞動力面的看法，因為我下一題本來就要問這個。所以我想再請教出口端。我記得你們過去某些年份的出口量最高可能做到 1,000 萬或 1,100 萬噸左右。這仍然是合理的上限嗎？或者以今天的情況，你們認為這個數字大概會落在哪裡？

When we did that, I think we were producing a little over 40 million tons, 41 million or so. We could do that. Our preference is to sign long-term contracts domestically. So for domestic customers, we'd agreed to 3 years or greater, and we would more than likely end up selling tons in that market as opposed to the export market, but we're also talking to some export customers for long-term contracts. So we're looking for stability. I think the pricing we've been pleased, we thought we would have more export tons sold this year, but most of -- I think the ones that we just sold were domestic.

當我們做到那個水準時，我想我們的總產量大概在 4,000 多萬噸，約 4,100 萬噸左右。我們是做得到的。我們的偏好是與國內簽長期合約。所以對國內客戶，我們會同意 3 年或更長的合約，而我們更可能把噸數賣到那個市場，而不是出口市場；但我們也正在與一些出口客戶洽談長期合約。所以我們在尋求穩定性。我認為我們對定價是滿意的；我們原本以為今年會賣出更多出口噸數，但大多數——我想我們剛賣出的那些其實是國內的。

We may have a little bit in the export market, but the domestic market has met the export pricing. And as we get into next year with the tons that are unidentified, which is around 8 million tons, it will depend on how our efforts go. I mean if the domestic market wants it and they'll commit to 3 million tons and pay us something comparable to the export price, that's what we would do. If they elect to go short, then there's plenty of export demand for us to participate in that market to where we could go higher than the 5 million tons or so that we're targeting for this year.

我們在出口市場可能會有一點點，但國內市場已經達到出口的定價水準。等到進入明年，對於那些尚未指認的噸數（大約 800 萬噸），就要看我們的推進成果。我的意思是，如果國內市場想要，而且願意承諾 300 萬噸並支付與出口價格相當的水準，那我們就會這麼做。如果他們選擇只簽短期，那麼出口需求非常充足，我們也可以參與那個市場，讓出口量高於我們今年目標的大約 500 萬噸左右。

Okay. So that sounds pretty positive, Joe, if I understood you correctly that your domestic customers have been willing to kind of meet you where you export netbacks have been early as close to that area and give duration.

好的。所以如果我理解正確的話，Joe，這聽起來相當正面：你們的國內客戶願意在某種程度上把價格拉到接近你們出口淨回收（netbacks）的水準，並且提供合約期限。

They have in the short term. As far as the longer term, we're talking to them about meeting those. The contracts that we got longer term, we're not at the export levels, but they were still very attractive, given the guidance I gave you that we're going to increase our average sale about $10 a ton.

短期來看是的。至於更長期，我們正在和他們討論是否能達到那些水準。我們拿到的較長期合約，價格沒有到出口水準，但仍然非常有吸引力；考量到我先前給你們的指引——我們將把平均售價提高約每噸 10 美元。

Perfect. I appreciate those logs. And then maybe just finally, just kind of a higher-level question. Joe, how do you think about balancing your growth investments and growing your distribution over the next couple of years, especially with the forecast that hopefully margins will expand both in 2023 and 2024 of higher margins year in 2022 as well.

很好。我很感謝這些說明。最後再問一個比較高層次的問題：Joe，未來幾年你們如何在成長投資與提高配息（distribution）之間取得平衡？尤其是在預測 2023 與 2024 年利潤率有望擴張的情況下，而且 2022 年也是高利潤率的一年。

So we've been consistent in saying for 2022, we target a 30% payout. And we will evaluate what we will do in 2023, 2024 as far as a percent of cash flow, probably at our December meeting. So we will have an October meeting, but what we will decide is relative to what our future cash -- or our future percent of cash flow for distributions would be made that would more likely be with our preliminary budget presentation to the Board in December. I think that it's fair to say that it's not going to be below 30%, whether it goes higher than that, it's going to be dependent on what the outlook is not only for 2023, but 2024 and forward. I think we've also been very consistent that when we set an increase in distribution, we expect that distribution level to be sustainable.

我們一直一致地表示，2022 年我們的目標是 30% 的配發率（payout）。至於 2023、2024 年要做什麼（以現金流的百分比來看），我們大概會在 12 月的會議上評估。我們 10 月會有一次會議，但關於未來配息的現金流百分比，我們更可能會在 12 月向董事會提出初步預算簡報時一併決定。我認為可以公平地說，不會低於 30%；至於是否會高於 30%，將取決於不僅是 2023 年，還包括 2024 年及更往後的展望。我們也一直非常一致地強調：當我們設定提高配息時，我們期望該配息水準是可持續的。

So there is a possibility with these elevated prices that in the future, we would look at some type of variable distribution on top of our fixed, but that will be a decision to be made in December once we have a better sense of how the utilities are thinking about the transition and the timing and their willingness to continue to commit folks like us that are in it for the long term that are reliable, have the capacity to be there for them. So that will factor into that decision.

因此，在這些高檔價格之下，未來我們有可能在固定配息之上，再考慮某種形式的變動配息；但這將在 12 月做決定，屆時我們會更清楚公用事業公司如何看待能源轉型、其時程，以及他們是否願意持續承諾像我們這樣長期投入、可靠且具備能力能為他們供應的業者。這些因素都會納入該決策。

Our next question is from Mark Reichman with NOBLE Capital Markets.

下一個問題來自 NOBLE Capital Markets 的 Mark Reichman。

Just wanted to ask Joe if he could comment a little bit about the electric power sector, coal stocks kind of where they sit, what you view as kind of a normalized level? And then talk a little bit about how that's impacting the contracting environment. And when I talk about kind of where the power -- the coal stocks sit, not just in aggregate, but maybe kind of how they're kind of distributed regionally.

我想請 Joe 談談電力產業部門、煤炭庫存目前大概處於什麼水位、你認為所謂「正常化」的水準大概是多少？另外也請談談這對簽約環境造成了什麼影響。當我說煤炭庫存的位置時，不只是總量，還包括它在區域上的分布情況。

So as we mentioned, they're at lows that we haven't seen in 5 years or so or more than that in 2006. I would say it's pretty much across the board from a regional standpoint. And there are select utilities that may have a little bit better coverage than others, but not really because of the transportation shortfalls that we both -- Brian and I both talked about. So because of the transportation shortfalls, especially those that are dependent on rail, most utilities are trying to build those inventories. They're concerned about natural gas deliverability as well given the demand that they've seen for power generation and they basically decided to burn more gas even though it's not economic relative to coal because the coal supplies are short. And they want to make sure they have enough inventory in storage as they face the winter as possible. It's hard to know what's normal anymore. So I can't really respond to that. I think that...

如同我們提到的，庫存處於我們大約 5 年左右未見的低點，甚至可說是自 2006 年以來的低點。我會說從區域角度看，幾乎是全面性的。有些特定公用事業公司的覆蓋程度可能比其他人稍好一點，但其實也不太算，因為我們——Brian 和我——都談到的運輸短缺問題。由於運輸短缺，尤其是依賴鐵路的那些，多數公用事業公司都在嘗試建立庫存。他們也擔心天然氣的可交付性，因為他們看到發電需求上升；而且他們基本上決定多燒天然氣，即使相對於煤炭並不經濟，因為煤炭供應偏緊。他們希望在面對冬季時，儲存中能有盡可能足夠的庫存。現在很難說什麼才算正常。所以我其實無法真正回應這個。我認為……

Well, that's what I was going to say because at the end of 2020, the stocks are about 133 million tons, and then they drifted down to about 95 million tons at the end of 2021. And I think at the end of April, the around 91. And of course, you don't have to go too far back where over 100 million tons was kind of the norm. But I was thinking, how are the utilities handling -- should the normalized level -- Is it -- would you say it's around 100 million? Or how much do you think they need to build those stocks to...

對，這也是我想說的，因為在 2020 年底，庫存大約是 1.33 億噸，然後到 2021 年底下滑到大約 9,500 萬噸。我想在 4 月底大約是 9,100 萬噸。當然，你不用回溯太久，超過 1 億噸曾經算是常態。但我在想，公用事業公司現在是怎麼應對的——所謂正常化水準——你會說大概在 1 億噸左右嗎？或者你覺得他們需要把庫存補到多少才……

Here's the complication, Mark, that is hard for me to understand. And so the public service commissions are asking them very difficult questions right now. Why are you dispatching noneconomic gas, coal. And so, they may say, well, because we can't get it transported. Well, have you contracted to get it transported? So I think the public service commissions that I talk -- I've been in conferences with 3 of them, so, it's not like I'm having personal conversations with them. But as I listen to them and what they're saying, is they're trying to encourage the utilities to not think short term, think longer term. If they want to build inventory, that there's flexibility from a public service commission perspective that they would prefer to see them to get return on that working capital than them to go short and then come back and say, I can't get it, have excess capacity in their units, their coal plants that rate payers have already paid for or are paying for and then not use them and then go buy power to grid and then want to go come back and pass that through to the ratepayers.

Mark，這裡的複雜之處在於，我也很難釐清。而且公用事業委員會（public service commissions）現在正在問他們一些非常尖銳的問題：你們為什麼要調度（dispatch）不具經濟性的天然氣，而不是煤？於是他們可能會說，因為我們運不來煤。那委員會就會問：那你們有沒有簽約把運輸也一起確保下來？所以我認為，我所接觸到的公用事業委員會——我曾在 3 場會議/論壇上與他們同場，所以並不是我和他們私下對談——但當我聽他們的發言與立場時，他們是在鼓勵公用事業公司不要只看短期，而要看更長期。如果他們想建立庫存，從委員會的角度是有彈性的；他們寧可看到公用事業公司就這些營運資金取得回報，也不希望他們把庫存壓得太低，然後回頭說「我拿不到煤」，結果讓他們的機組出現閒置產能——那些燃煤電廠是用戶（rate payers）已經付費建置或正在付費的——卻不去使用，反而去電網買電，然後又想回頭把成本轉嫁給用戶。

So there's pressure on these -- to stop thinking about -- I mean, for the last several years, even with interest rates at near zero, they were trying to push to get their inventories down instead of building inventory on ratable shipments. So they would sign a contract that says in our contract, you ship ratably, and they've come to us and say, well, we got to keep our working capital down. So we're not going to ship this month or this month in the shoulder months. And historically, they usually would not do that. They would usually ship ratably and that would add to their stockpile. So when you try to think of averages most recently, they've tried to keep those very low anyway. And I would think that if they are being responsive to the utility commissions that they should want to be increasing their stockpiles.

所以這些方面是有壓力的——要停止去想——我的意思是，過去幾年，即使利率接近零，他們也一直試圖把庫存壓低，而不是在按比例出貨（ratable shipments）的情況下去建立庫存。所以他們會簽一份合約，合約裡寫明你要按比例出貨，而他們又會來跟我們說，嗯，我們得把營運資金壓低。所以我們這個月或在淡季月份就不出貨。從歷史上看，他們通常不會這麼做；他們通常會按比例出貨，這會增加他們的庫存堆存。所以當你試著去看最近的平均水準時，他們本來就一直努力把那些維持得很低。而我會認為，如果他們是在回應公用事業委員會（utility commissions）的要求，他們應該會想要增加他們的庫存堆存。

Now having said that, we all know that the export market is very strong. So they've got decisions to make. Do they buy and meet the price of the export market, or do they go and continue to not buy those tons at that price in anticipation that can't predict natural gas? Now natural gas right now is projected to be $550, I think, next year rate currently. So at $550, I mean they can pay prices that are at elevated levels that they could put in stockpile. So they've got to have that conversation with the utility commission as to, okay, let me make sure I'm hearing you correctly. If I do this, are you saying that's prudent? So it gets a little complicated and every pot Service Commission is different, and I'm really focused on regulated utilities when I speak to that, which is the majority of our customers. So it's hard to answer your question.

話雖如此，我們都知道出口市場非常強勁。所以他們必須做決策：他們是以出口市場的價格去買，還是繼續不以那個價格買那些噸數，並期待——但天然氣是無法預測的。現在天然氣預估是 550 美元，我想是明年的目前預估水準。所以在 550 美元的情況下，我的意思是，他們可以支付處於較高水準的價格，然後把它放進庫存堆存。因此他們必須跟公用事業委員會談清楚：好，我確認一下我有沒有聽懂；如果我這麼做，你是說這是審慎（prudent）的嗎？所以事情會變得有點複雜，而且每個公用事業服務委員會（Service Commission）都不一樣。我在談這個時候主要聚焦在受監管的公用事業（regulated utilities），那也是我們大多數客戶。所以很難回答你的問題。

In normal times, if markets were...

在正常情況下，如果市場是……

That's actually very helpful. And the other question I had was the Supreme Court recently kind of gave the coal producing states a win on that case. But now you see kind of the Biden Administration saying, well, the EPA may come back and tackle other pollutants like coal ash. I mean, how do you see that -- how do you see that playing out and impacting the utilities decisions? Because it does seem there is a lot of uncertainty, even though it seems like first initially, I thought the Supreme Court decision might lead to maybe a longer tail, but maybe a more thoughtful policy. It seems like in some policymakers? mind, fossil fuel is just kind of a dirty word that not recognizing that there's still plenty of opportunities to improve the carbon profile of fossil fuel sources. It's not fossil fuels, the focus should just be on decarbonization or lowering carbon emissions.

這其實很有幫助。我另外一個問題是，最高法院最近在那個案子上算是讓產煤州贏了一場。但現在你又看到拜登政府說，嗯，EPA 可能會回來處理其他污染物，例如煤灰（coal ash）。我的意思是，你怎麼看——你怎麼看這件事會如何發展，並影響公用事業的決策？因為看起來確實有很多不確定性；雖然一開始我以為最高法院的裁決可能會帶來更長的尾巴，但也許會有更審慎的政策。但看起來在某些政策制定者的心態裡，化石燃料幾乎成了一個「髒字」，沒有認知到其實仍有很多機會去改善化石燃料來源的碳排輪廓。重點不應該是化石燃料本身，而應該是去碳化（decarbonization）或降低碳排放。

Yes. I agree with you. Again, that's very complicated as well because there's these mixed signals. The White House wants to talk in terms that they care about inflation, and they are trying their best to reduce energy costs. And yet the EPA is accelerating these regulations that you mentioned, totally inconsistent policy. I do believe that the utilities at the very highest level are trying to communicate to the White House that our energy security is such that until we can increase supply, they need to be aware that they need every plant that they have every coal plant, every fossil plant. If they're going to meet the needs of the customers, they need to operate those and not close any.

是的。我同意你。再說一次，這也非常複雜，因為存在這些相互矛盾的訊號。白宮想用他們關心通膨的語氣來談，並且正盡最大努力降低能源成本；但同時 EPA 又在加速你提到的那些法規，這完全是不一致的政策。我確實相信，公用事業在最高層級正試圖向白宮傳達：我們的能源安全狀況是，在我們能增加供給之前，他們需要意識到他們需要現有的每一座電廠——每一座燃煤電廠、每一座化石燃料電廠。如果他們要滿足客戶需求，就需要讓這些電廠運轉，而不是關閉任何一座。

So they're encouraging the Whitehouse to get extensions on these regulations, push the pause button. But you see the Manchin-Schumer bill that if you listen to all the hype around it, they're trying to increase the speed of the transition instead of slow the speed of the transition. They need to slow the speed of the transition because these utilities are saying, we can't replace these plants. We can't replace the power with these plants.

所以他們在鼓勵白宮去爭取這些法規的延期，按下暫停鍵。但你看看 Manchin-Schumer 法案，如果你聽所有圍繞它的炒作，他們是在試圖加快轉型速度，而不是放慢轉型速度。他們需要放慢轉型速度，因為這些公用事業在說：我們無法替換這些電廠。我們無法用其他電廠來替代這些電力。

We just can't do it fast enough. You guys are moving this faster than is practical because we don't have the pipelines for the gas. We don't -- we can't get permits to construct new facilities. We've got supply chain issues on the renewable side. We can't -- all -- a lot of the states just can't move fast enough to give the go ahead to connect to the grid, etc., and so on. So we've got public policy that is trying to will their political agenda for the 2022 election and try to spin a story that is unbelievable. I listened to the White House person this morning, I can't believe that person really believes this stuff. And Nancy is a good speaker, but golly, what she's saying just is not practical. It's not reality. You're not going to get lower prices with this policy. You can't go single threaded to the natural gas industry and expect, okay, we're going to have lower prices without competition.

我們就是做不到那麼快。你們推進得比實務上可行的速度還快，因為我們沒有天然氣管線。我們也——我們拿不到許可去興建新設施。再生能源那邊有供應鏈問題。我們沒辦法——所有——很多州就是無法快到足以批准併網等等之類的事情。所以我們有公共政策在試圖為 2022 年選舉去推動他們的政治議程，並試圖包裝一個令人難以置信的故事。我今天早上聽了白宮的人講話，我不敢相信那個人真的相信這些東西。Nancy 是個很會講的人，但天啊，她說的就是不切實際。那不是現實。用這種政策你不可能得到更低的價格。你不能只單線押注天然氣產業，然後期待，好，我們會在沒有競爭的情況下得到更低的價格。

It's really hard to answer your question. I think the question that in my career, economics always trump policy, government policy. Unfortunately, that has not been true the last 3 years. But I've got to think that there's going to have to be a wake-up call because both MISO and PJM have been speaking out very loudly they're very concerned about the capacity to be there if the wind is not blowing or the sun is not shining. We just don't have the backup.

你的問題真的很難回答。我認為在我的職涯裡，經濟因素總是凌駕政策、政府政策。不幸的是，過去 3 年並非如此。但我必須認為，終究會有一個警醒時刻，因為 MISO 和 PJM 都已經非常大聲地發聲，他們非常擔心：如果風不吹、太陽不照，容量是否能到位。我們就是沒有備援。

Well, you're absolutely right. Cost and reliability.

嗯，你說得完全正確。成本與可靠性。

You're seeing similar issues play out in Europe as well.

你也看到歐洲正在上演類似的問題。

Yes. I mean they are giving us...

是的。我的意思是，他們正在給我們……

Watch the movie that Europe is going through today.

看看歐洲今天正在經歷的那部電影。

The political rhetoric is interfering with that. Now practically, what's going to happen. I am hopeful that the utilities will be able to educate the government and then they'll do the right thing, keep these plants online and if we have to wait until we get replacements, that's going to bode well for us if they decide to go ahead and create another energy crisis more severe than the one we got this year, then we'll probably have a new president in 2024.

政治修辭正在干擾這一切。那麼實務上會發生什麼？我希望公用事業能夠教育政府，然後他們會做正確的事，讓這些電廠維持在線；如果我們必須等到有替代方案，那對我們會是利多。但如果他們決定繼續推進，製造另一場比今年更嚴重的能源危機，那麼我們可能在 2024 年會有一位新總統。

Now just one last question for Brian. Brian, could you just address your annual capital expenditure profile over the next couple of years and kind of where that money gets spent?

現在最後一個問題給 Brian。Brian，你能不能談一下你們未來幾年的年度資本支出（capital expenditure）輪廓，以及這些資金大概花在哪裡？

You're talking about our maintenance capital, Mark?

你是指我們的維護性資本支出（maintenance capital），Mark？

Yes, the maintenance capital.

是的，維護性資本支出。

Yes. Our most recent plan that we're operating under today. We have that at about $5.66 per ton produced. Obviously, we will reevaluate that as we go through our 2023 5-year plan. But for now, I would use that number as a placeholder on what maintenance CapEx will look like.

是的。我們目前正在執行的最新計畫，是把它設定在每生產一噸約 5.66 美元。當然，我們在做 2023 年的五年計畫時會重新評估。但就目前而言，我會用這個數字作為維護性資本支出（maintenance CapEx）大概會長什麼樣子的暫定值。

Our next question is from Marco Rodriguez with Stonegate Capital Markets.

我們下一個問題來自 Stonegate Capital Markets 的 Marco Rodriguez。

Just a couple of quick follow-ups. I was wondering if maybe you could first start with the additional million tons that you're expecting in 2023. Can you kind of give us a sense as far as the timing of that is concerned when that comes online and how that spreads through the year?

我有幾個快速追問。我想先從你們預期 2023 年新增的一百萬噸開始。你能不能就時程給我們一些概念：那會在什麼時候上線，以及會如何分布在全年？

So the bulk of that will -- should start in the first quarter, probably in February, January, it depends on hiring folks. And then the other, let's say, $300,000 or so, $400,000, would start probably at the end of the first quarter and in pro rata. It's a development unit. So it's not going to be as productive as our or single unit, our CM unit.

所以其中大部分——應該會在第一季開始，可能是二月、一月，取決於招募人員的情況。然後另外，假設大約 30 萬到 40 萬噸，可能會在第一季末開始，並按比例（pro rata）展開。那是一個開發單元（development unit），所以它不會像我們的——我們的單一單元、我們的 CM 單元那樣高產。

It gets back to the timing of when we can get this completed. As Joe mentioned in his opening comments, we're working to add the development unit at Hamilton and the production unit at Gibson South. Hope to have that in place by the end of the year. But depending on labor, it could end up being completed in the first quarter.

這又回到我們何時能把這件事完成的時點。如 Joe 在開場評論中提到的，我們正在努力在 Hamilton 增加開發單元，並在 Gibson South 增加生產單元。希望在年底前就能到位。但取決於勞動力情況，也可能會在第一季才完成。

Got it. Understood. And then kind of following up on some of the pricing questions and answers that you had here, just wondering if you can maybe get a little bit more color on how those discussion and tone of the talks were related to pricing on a domestic side as well as the international side. I know that you said you had a preference to doing long-term contracts domestically, and it sounded like, if I picked this up correctly, that the international tonnage is not -- you would have expected to have done more by now. If you can maybe just kind of compare and contrast how that's going and what might be some of the gating factors surrounding not picking up more international tonnage?

了解，明白。然後再延伸你剛才一些關於定價的問答，我想再多問一點：你能不能提供更多細節，談談在國內與國際市場兩邊，這些與定價相關的討論內容與談判氛圍是怎樣的？我知道你說你偏好在國內做長期合約，而且聽起來——如果我理解正確——國際噸數並沒有像你原本預期那樣做到那麼多。你能不能比較一下目前進展如何，以及有哪些關鍵限制因素（gating factors）導致沒有拿到更多國際噸數？

So on the domestic side, we typically just respond to RFPs that the utilities will go out, and that unfortunately takes a month or so. I mean, they send them out and then you have conversations. So then you get signals. And so, then you have to decide what's the likelihood that you're going to close that deal as you're thinking about where the export market is going to go. On the export side, the rails have been a challenge. So it's hard to get commitments from some export buyers because not getting the commitment from the railroads to know that they can deliver.

所以在國內方面，我們通常只是回應公用事業單位發出的 RFP（投標邀請），而這不幸地大概需要一個月左右。我的意思是，他們把 RFP 發出去，然後你們會進行一些對話。接著你就會得到一些訊號。然後，當你在思考出口市場將往哪裡走時，你就必須判斷你把那筆交易成交的可能性有多大。在出口方面，鐵路一直是個挑戰。因此，一些出口買家很難給出承諾，因為鐵路公司不願承諾交付，買家也就無法確定他們能否如期交貨。

This is specifically on the East Coast as we try to ship times through the peers on the East Coast, there's a backup and a lot of these vessels are incurring to merge because the rails aren't delivering the coal at the times that they thought they were going to. So that's been one factor. The second factor that's impacted sales for this year, is trying to get an opportunity to ship a vessel to Europe, in particular, where they've been trying to accelerate their shipments from Russia until the -- what was an August 10 deadline as to when those sanctions were going to apply.

這特別是在東岸。當我們嘗試透過東岸的碼頭裝運時，出現了積壓，許多船舶因此產生滯期費，因為鐵路沒有在他們原本以為的時間把煤送到。所以這是一個因素。第二個影響今年銷售的因素，是嘗試把船運到歐洲，尤其是因為他們一直試圖在——原本是 8 月 10 日的期限之前，加速從俄羅斯的出貨，因為屆時制裁就會生效。

So the opportunities at the time to try to book something with the vessel availabilities just proved to be uncertain. So we had to make decisions or have to make decisions whether we want to wait for that boat or go ahead and take a bird in hand. And since the domestic utilities we're willing to book at what we would have gotten had we sold in the export market, that made it an easier decision for us.

因此，當時想要在船舶可用性的情況下去預訂一些機會，結果證明充滿不確定性。所以我們必須做決策——或必須決定——我們是要等那艘船，還是先把手上確定的機會拿下。由於國內公用事業願意以我們在出口市場本可賣到的價格來預訂，這讓我們更容易做出決定。

Yes. The European fuel buyers are in a tight spot. Joe mentioned, they're trying to accelerate deliveries from Russia prior to the full-scale sanction going in on August 10. And at the same time, in addition to the poor rail service, the ARA ports are at or near capacity. Water levels on the Rhine River for barge movement out of those ports is very, very low. There's bottlenecks occurring at their ports as well that has caused them to pause a little bit on how they deal with that in the short term.

是的。歐洲燃料買家處境很緊。Joe 提到，他們正試圖在 8 月 10 日全面制裁生效之前，加速從俄羅斯的交付。同時，除了鐵路服務不佳之外，ARA 港口（阿姆斯特丹-鹿特丹-安特衛普）已達或接近滿載。萊茵河水位非常、非常低，影響從這些港口以駁船外運。它們的港口也出現瓶頸，導致他們在短期內對如何處理這些問題稍微按下暫停鍵。

We do think that now that it's August, that's going to start showing opportunities. And that's why the API 2 price is where it is today. The physicals are actually higher than what the API 2 benchmark is. So it's a constant communication and trying to make good long-term decisions. That's what we're trying to do.

我們確實認為，既然現在已經是 8 月，機會將開始浮現。這也是為什麼 API 2 價格會在今天這個水準。實體成交價其實高於 API 2 基準價。因此這需要持續溝通，並努力做出良好的長期決策。這就是我們正在做的。

Understood. And last quick question for me. Just wondered if maybe you could provide a little more color surrounding the additional investment you made this quarter for the energy transition in that private equity fund. How did that kind of come about and what are your expectations there?

了解。我最後一個簡短問題是：想請你們就本季為能源轉型在那個私募股權基金所做的額外投資，提供更多背景說明。這是怎麼促成的？你們對此有什麼期待？

Yes. So as we were looking at different ways to determine how to educate ourselves and investing in the transition. I asked my team, why don't you go out and start looking at different private equity funds because they got people that are doing this. There's a lot of them out there that we could learn from because they've got larger staff than we do to try to look at each of the different ways to invest. I mean when the government starts throwing money out like they're doing before this new build, now even with this bill, there's more money out there, and there's a lot of people out there trying to evaluate opportunities to participate in that transition.

好的。當我們在看各種方式、思考如何讓自己在轉型投資方面更有認知時，我問我的團隊：你們何不出去看看不同的私募股權基金，因為他們有專門在做這件事的人。市面上有很多基金，我們可以向他們學習，因為他們的團隊規模比我們大，能夠嘗試評估各種不同的投資方式。我的意思是，當政府像現在這樣在新建項目之前就開始撒錢——現在即使有這個法案，外面也有更多資金——就會有很多人試圖評估參與這場轉型的機會。

So we went to -- or my team looked at numerous private equity funds to determine who we thought could be best-in-class so that we could invest into their funds and then as an LP, like any other LP get whatever information they share as to what their views of the future are and what they're looking at, what they're not looking at, why they're looking at what they're looking at, why they're not looking -- they're not looking at, just to learn. So their history and their returns are good. So we think that it's a good place marker to put some cash and we'll get good returns on the cash on cash over the next several years.

所以我們——或者說我的團隊——看了許多私募股權基金，來判斷誰可能是同業最佳（best-in-class），讓我們可以投資到他們的基金中，然後作為 LP（有限合夥人），像其他 LP 一樣取得他們分享的資訊：他們對未來的看法是什麼、他們在看什麼、不看什麼、為什麼看那些、為什麼不看那些——就是為了學習。他們的歷史與報酬表現都不錯。所以我們認為，這是一個放置部分現金的良好「佔位」，而且在未來幾年，我們應該能在現金投資回報（cash-on-cash）上取得不錯的收益。

But we'll also hopefully be able to get some information on opportunities so that we could be more focused in things that we might be willing to look at that would -- if we went back on the last call, our vertical 4, which are trying to find those businesses that could turn into 2-decades, 3-decade, businesses that could generate sustainable cash flow. This particular fund is not early venture. It's a late stage. So they're looking for investments that they call growth equity investments. So it's not truly an infrastructure fund. It is focused on the transition space, but they're looking at companies that will cash flow in the very near term compared to a lot of these transition funds are a little bit earlier stage capital, and they're not expecting cash flow for 3 to 4 to 5 years. So that's what attracted us to this particular fund. We think that they're looking at things that we would look -- the type of stuff we would look at that would be shorter -- that would have cash flow in the near term as opposed to further out with a lot of these transition companies.

但我們也希望能獲得一些關於機會的資訊，讓我們能更聚焦在我們可能願意評估的事情上——如果回到上一次電話會議，我們的第 4 個垂直領域（vertical 4）是要尋找那些能成為 20 年、30 年期的事業、能產生可持續現金流的業務。這支特定基金不是早期創投，而是後期階段。因此他們在找的是他們所稱的成長股權（growth equity）投資。所以它不是真正的基礎建設基金。它聚焦在轉型領域，但他們在看的是能在非常短期內產生現金流的公司；相較之下，很多轉型基金屬於更早期的資本，他們不預期 3 到 4 到 5 年才會有現金流。這就是吸引我們投資這支基金的原因。我們認為他們在看的東西，會是我們也會看的——也就是較短期、能在近期產生現金流的類型，而不是像許多轉型公司那樣要更久之後才有現金流。

So that's why we did what we did. Marco, philosophically, it's very similar to the approach we took when we got into the oil and gas minerals business, where we initially participated as an LP and a fund giving ourselves an opportunity to learn the business in more detail. And in that case, we determined that this could be a segment for us with long-term cash flow potential. It's a similar approach here. We're trying to learn as much as we can about the various opportunities that are out there. And hopefully, we will identify, as Joe mentioned, businesses that will be a more sustainable part of our company going forward.

所以這就是我們這麼做的原因。Marco，從理念上來說，這和我們當初進入油氣礦權（minerals）業務時採取的方式非常相似：我們一開始以 LP 身分參與一支基金，讓自己有機會更深入學習這門生意。在那個案例中，我們判斷這可能會是我們一個具長期現金流潛力的板塊。這裡也是類似的做法。我們正試圖盡可能多了解市面上各種機會。並且希望如 Joe 所提到的，我們能辨識出一些業務，讓它們在未來成為公司更可持續的一部分。

Our next question is from Chris Sakai with Singular Research.

我們的下一個問題來自 Singular Research 的 Chris Sakai。

Just had a question. Can you share what you're seeing regarding sulfur discounts, especially on shipments to Europe?

我有個問題。你們能分享一下你們看到的硫折價（sulfur discounts）情況嗎，特別是運往歐洲的出貨？

I haven't heard that word mentioned lately. The general -- recently, we've been seeing sulfur discounts depending on the mine, depending on the quality that's being produced, ranging from nothing, by way of example, for our MC Mining operation but elsewhere, we are seeing discounts in the 10% to 15% range or so.

我最近沒有聽到有人提到那個詞。一般來說——最近我們看到的硫折價會因礦場、因產出品質而異，範圍從沒有折價（舉例來說，我們的 MC Mining 營運就是如此）到其他地方約 10% 到 15% 左右的折價。

Okay. I noticed you increased your expense for tons sold guidance. I wanted to see what you're thinking about as far as -- as we head into 2023, can you share some color there?

好的。我注意到你們上調了每售出噸數的費用指引。我想了解一下你們對——隨著我們進入 2023 年——這方面的看法，能否分享一些細節？

Right now, it appears that we're sort of seeing things level off. And we're actually seeing some commodities that are going down. What we're projecting is that they'll continue to rise as we are thinking about 2023. So when we are giving you guidance on margin growth, we are planning, I think, 4% increase or so on top of the increases we've seen this year. So that's what we're seeing now. We'll see what happens, but that's our look right now is, we're looking at 4% on top of what we got this year, but we're starting to see some reduction in the areas that continue to be a little elevated that are starting to pass through is just back on the Power and Energy side, reflecting these higher prices.

目前看起來，我們似乎看到情況有點趨於持平。而且我們也看到一些大宗商品價格正在下滑。我們的預測是，當我們思考 2023 年時，它們仍會持續上升。因此，當我們給你們毛利成長的指引時，我們的規劃是——我想——在今年已經看到的增幅之上，再增加約 4% 左右。這就是我們目前看到的。接下來會怎樣還要再看，但我們現在的觀點是：在今年的基礎上再加 4%。不過我們也開始看到某些仍偏高的領域出現一些回落；而這些仍偏高的部分，主要是在電力與能源端，反映了較高的價格正在傳導。

And through the first half of this year, Chris, we have been focused on making sure that we have enough materials and supplies on hand so that we don't have any operational disruptions, which has caused some of the increase in the first and second quarter. As Joe said, we are beginning to see that level off a little bit. And so if you look at our updated guidance for the full year and compare that to where we are for the first half of the year, it's pretty well right in line despite the relatively high increase in this particular quarter.

而在今年上半年，Chris，我們一直專注於確保手上有足夠的材料與備品，以避免任何營運中斷，這也導致第一季與第二季部分成本上升。如 Joe 所說，我們開始看到這種情況稍微趨於平穩。因此，如果你看我們更新後的全年指引，並與上半年的實際狀況相比，儘管本季增幅相對較高，但整體其實相當一致、符合預期。

Okay. And lastly, can you elaborate more on the recent private equity investment? And also, do you plan on investing in more private equity funds in the future?

好的。最後，你能再多說明一下近期的私募股權投資嗎？另外，你們未來是否計畫再投資更多私募股權基金？

I think that right now, we don't have any additional plans to do that. So nothing. I don't have anything more to add on the investment in this particular one that I just talked about it if there's something more specific that you'd like to ask on what my answer was, I'm happy to try to answer it without repeating what I said.

我認為目前我們沒有任何額外計畫要這麼做。所以沒有。我對這一筆投資沒有更多補充；我剛才已經談過了。如果你對我剛才的回答有更具體想問的點，我很樂意在不重複我所說內容的前提下，嘗試回答。

Our next question is from [Joseph van Master with Intermargin].

我們的下一個問題來自 [Intermargin 的 Joseph van Master]。

Just a couple of quick follow-ups. So Manchin is a coal guy, what do you guys think he's really up to? Or do you have a view because I'm sure you are well briefed on all this?

我只有幾個簡短的追問。Manchin 是個煤炭派，你們覺得他真正想做什麼？或者你們有什麼看法嗎？我相信你們對這些事情一定都很了解。

It's a good question. And I'm very disappointed to be honest, but I really don't know what's in his head as to why we did what we did because it's totally inconsistent than everything he's done all year. And I just don't understand it. I mean you can title anything you want to title it, but it just doesn't seem like it's going to reduce inflation to me. I don't know what you all think.

這是個好問題。老實說我非常失望，但我真的不知道他腦子裡在想什麼、為什麼我們會做出我們所做的事，因為這和他今年一整年做的所有事情完全不一致。我就是不明白。我的意思是，你想怎麼命名都可以，但在我看來這似乎不會降低通膨。我不知道你們大家怎麼看。

And at a time when we're focused on energy security and reliability of supply to significantly subsidize one form of energy while taking other forms of energy. As Joe said, it just seems very inconsistent and it is very disappointing.

而且在我們聚焦能源安全與供應可靠性的時候，卻大幅補貼某一種能源，同時打壓其他形式的能源。正如 Joe 所說，這看起來非常不一致，也非常令人失望。

Well, hopefully, we'll get a new administration soon or at least new leadership in the Congress. What is the relationship between U.S. gas prices and coal dispatch? And I sort of asked that from the perspective that European -- Europe's problems have pulled up coal prices quite a bit. So they can offer high prices. At what point will domestic utilities just stick with gas because it's cheaper than dispatching coal at whatever, $100 a ton or whatever that is. -- a very general question because I know it varies from plant to plant.

嗯，希望我們很快會有新政府，或至少國會有新的領導層。美國天然氣價格與燃煤調度之間的關係是什麼？我之所以這樣問，是因為歐洲——歐洲的問題把煤價拉高了不少，所以他們可以出高價。到什麼程度時，國內公用事業公司會乾脆改用天然氣，因為它比以每噸 100 美元之類的價格去調度煤炭更便宜？——這是一個很概括的問題，因為我知道不同電廠情況不同。

Yes. So today, all utilities are acknowledging that as they dispatch gas over coal that it's uneconomic. So when you get $8 and $9 gas, they should be buying coal if they can get it, if it's on a rail, or be if they're willing to pay for it compared to what we can get in international market. And that's why in the short term, the sales we made this year, they were willing to pay what we could get in the international market because it was economic for them to do so. And we can definitely compete with natural gas at the future price curve to where they should be running their coal plants full out.

是的。所以在今天，所有公用事業公司都承認，當他們以天然氣取代煤炭進行調度時，這在經濟上是不划算的。因此當天然氣到 8、9 美元時，他們應該買煤——如果他們能買得到、如果煤能透過鐵路運到，或如果他們願意支付相對於我們在國際市場能取得的價格。這也是為什麼短期內，我們今年做出的銷售，他們願意支付我們在國際市場能拿到的價格，因為對他們而言這樣做是合算的。而且我們絕對能在未來的天然氣價格曲線下與天然氣競爭，達到他們應該讓燃煤電廠滿載運轉的程度。

Our recent estimate, I don't know if this holds true, I'm having a meeting Wednesday, but we think that there's probably 30 million tons that could have been bought in our region, just in our buying area that could have been bought this year to run at full capacity in those coal plants that were not bought because of the utilities deciding to buy uneconomic gas instead of buying coal at a price that would be better for the ratepayers.

我們最近的估計——我不確定是否仍然成立，我週三有個會——但我們認為，在我們的區域、就在我們的銷售範圍內，今年大概有 3,000 萬噸本來可以被買走，用來讓那些燃煤電廠滿負荷運轉；但因為公用事業公司決定去買不具經濟性的天然氣，而不是以對用戶更有利的價格買煤，所以沒有買。

So last question real quick. Your balance sheet has 2 equity items on it, one's equity method, which went up by $20 million. The other one is equity securities, which went up by $32.6 million from the fourth quarter. Are those both private equity investments? Or is there something else in the equity securities?

最後一個問題很快問一下。你們的資產負債表上有兩個權益項目，一個是權益法投資，上升了 2,000 萬美元；另一個是權益證券，較第四季上升了 3,260 萬美元。這兩個都是私募股權投資嗎？還是權益證券裡還有別的東西？

I think the $20 million relates to Francis and the other relates to the Infinitum.

我想那 2,000 萬美元是 Francis 的，另一個是 Infinitum 的。

That's exactly correct. From the 2 investments that we announced last quarter, Joe.

完全正確。Joe，就是我們上季宣布的兩項投資。

Our next question is from Mark Zand with Wexford Capital.

我們的下一個問題來自 Wexford Capital 的 Mark Zand。

Can you tell me, Q2, how much of that improvement over Q1 was sort of makeup of volume? And maybe the fact that there were fewer longwall moves, how much volume got shifted so that you were just sort of seeing the improvement from what was delayed in Q1?

你能告訴我第二季相較第一季的改善，有多少是因為出貨量的補回？以及可能因為長壁面搬遷（longwall moves）較少，有多少出貨量被挪移，讓你們只是看到第一季延遲的部分在第二季反映出來？

Yes. What was delayed at the end of Q1 was about 1.1 million tons. At that time, it was due obviously to poor performance by the rails, but also barge shipments were impacted in the first quarter due to high water levels as well as lock maintenance. On the barge front, those delays have essentially been resolved are mainly seasonal. So you saw our delayed shipments drop from the 1.1 to the 722,000 tons or so. I would say the vast majority of that was attributable to the barges being back on track after those seasonal issues in the first quarter. Rail performance has continued to be very, very disappointing and accounts for the majority of our delayed shipments at the end of the second quarter.

是的。第一季末延遲的大約是 110 萬噸。當時顯然是因為鐵路表現不佳，但第一季的駁船運輸也因高水位以及船閘維修而受到影響。在駁船方面，那些延遲基本上已經解決，主要是季節性因素。所以你看到我們的延遲出貨從 110 萬噸降到大約 72.2 萬噸。我會說其中絕大部分可歸因於第一季那些季節性問題過後，駁船運輸回到正軌。鐵路表現仍然非常、非常令人失望，並且占了我們第二季末延遲出貨的大多數。

Okay. And any longwall moves coming up or are you pretty much done for some period?

好的。那接下來還有任何長壁面搬遷嗎？還是你們在一段時間內基本上都完成了？

I don't have the longwall move schedule in front of me. I don't believe we had any longwall moves in the second quarter. I'll get back to you on that.

我手邊沒有長壁面搬遷的排程。我不認為我們在第二季有任何長壁面搬遷。我再回覆你。

Yes, that's fine. Joe, in 2015, your dividend or distribution was $0.675 in the company was probably 75% or 80% of where you are now. Is there any reason why you couldn't get back to that level?

好的，沒問題。Joe，2015 年你們的股利或分配是 0.675 美元，而公司規模大概只有你們現在的 75% 或 80%。有什麼原因讓你們不能回到那個水準嗎？

When we were at that level, we were closer to 70% payout of our cash flow. So now we're targeting 30%. So what we do relative to that going forward, as I mentioned earlier today, that will be something that will be discussed at our December meeting. So there's just a lot of issues that we've got to understand how utilities act, how the government acts and what the opportunities are for us to deploy that extra cash flow that we're going to be generating that is significant. And as I earlier discussed, there is a potential that we could pay out some variables also to where it would be at higher levels, but I do not see us going back to 70% payout, if that's your question.

當我們在那個水準時，我們的現金流配發率更接近 70%。而現在我們的目標是 30%。至於未來相對於那個水準我們會怎麼做，正如我今天稍早提到的，這會在我們 12 月的會議上討論。所以我們有很多議題需要釐清：公用事業公司會如何行動、政府會如何行動，以及我們有哪些機會去部署我們將要產生的、相當可觀的額外現金流。並且如我先前所說，我們也可能會支付一些變動（配發），使其達到更高水準，但如果你的問題是我們是否會回到 70% 的配發率，我不認為會。

No, but that's a good way to -- what's your feeling, Joe, about buybacks?

不，但這是個很好的方式來——你對庫藏股回購的感覺如何，Joe？

That's on the table. I don't know that it would be significant. But I think there's a possibility that the market doesn't appreciate what we're doing that we would look at that as an option with its cash flow.

那也在考量範圍內。我不確定規模會不會很大。但我認為有可能市場沒有充分認識我們正在做的事情，因此我們會把回購視為運用現金流的一個選項。

Going back to questions about NGP. Your comment, Joe, is that you want to know what they're looking at and what they're not looking at and you've got basically things that are going to be cash flowing soon. So can you just give us a general idea of what they're looking at and what they're not looking at?

回到關於 NGP 的問題。Joe，你的評論是你想知道他們在看什麼、以及他們不看什麼，而你們基本上有一些很快就會產生現金流的項目。所以你能否大致說明一下他們在看什麼、以及他們不看什麼？

Yes, I think we've talked about that. So they're looking at renewables, areas in the renewable space. They're looking at electrification, which gets into a lot of the auto sector and then...

是的，我想我們談過這個。他們在看再生能源，也就是再生能源領域的一些方向。他們在看電氣化，這會涉及很多汽車產業，然後……

Energy efficiencies.

能源效率。

Yes, energy efficiency. So the electrification also gets into battery storage and things of those nature. So it's pretty consistent with the things that I outlined on our last call, the things we're looking at. So you got energy storage, you've got EVs and the infrastructure for EVs. We've got energy efficiency, like what we've done with Infinitum and there's -- so there's -- those are the type of things that they're looking at and that we've been looking at. So it seemed to be a pretty good fit for us.

是的，能源效率。所以電氣化也會涉及電池儲能以及那類型的事情。這和我在上次電話會議中概述、我們正在看的方向相當一致。所以你有能源儲存、有電動車（EV）以及 EV 的基礎設施；我們有能源效率，例如我們在 Infinitum 所做的，還有——所以——這些就是他們在看的、也是我們一直在看的類型。因此看起來對我們而言是相當契合的。

Separate from them, Joe, are you looking at anything in batteries? I know you've mentioned it a couple of times in the past.

撇開他們不談，Joe，你們自己有在看任何電池相關的東西嗎？我知道你過去提過幾次。

There are continuing evaluations of numerous companies. And there's a couple of battery deals, well, not deals, but investments that we're looking at. I think our guys have a tour scheduled at one of these companies soon. But yes, we are keenly interested in investments in that arena.

我們持續在評估許多公司。而且有幾個電池案子——嗯，不是交易，但我們在看的投資。我想我們的人很快安排要去其中一家公司參訪。不過是的，我們對那個領域的投資非常有興趣。

Maybe there's a company we can direct you to. You might have -- might be interested in taking a look at are.

也許有一家公司我們可以介紹給你。你可能——可能會有興趣看看。

Sure, give us a call, Mark.

當然，打電話給我們吧，Mark。

I will give you a call. Joe, on Infinitum, can you give me any sense on the sort of make-up of these PCB stator motors? What the actual usage is?

我會打給你。Joe，關於 Infinitum，你能不能讓我大概了解一下這些 PCB 定子馬達的組成？實際用途是什麼？

Yes. I think most of them are in the HVAC, but also in the auto sector, but a lot of the interest is in both of those sectors.

可以。我想大多數用在 HVAC（暖通空調），但也用在汽車產業，而且這兩個領域都有很高的興趣。

Any sense? I mean, I guess we can -- I don't need to know. But I'm just curious, I mean, how -- are these things -- are they revolutionary?

有沒有什麼概念？我的意思是，我想我們可以——我不一定需要知道。但我只是好奇，這些東西——它們是革命性的嗎？

They're lighter, and they're more efficient. They're easier to maintain.

它們更輕，而且效率更高，也更容易維護。

Quieter.

更安靜。

Yes, and so there are a couple of competitors around the world. But yes, so we take solace in that most of the co-investors are customers. There's a couple of private equity firms, but they've got strong interest. They've got a very large book of business in the pipeline.

是的，而且全球也有幾個競爭對手。不過是的，我們感到安心的是，大多數共同投資人都是客戶。也有幾家私募股權公司，但他們的興趣很強。他們在管線中有非常龐大的業務訂單。

From OEMs that are also invested in the company as well.

來自同時也投資本公司的 OEM 廠商。

Yes. So we're excited about it.

是的。所以我們對此感到很興奮。

Joe, at one point I think I heard -- I think on the last call maybe, you said that there were a hundred people at Matrix, is that right?

Joe，有一度我想我聽到——我想可能是在上一次電話會議上，你說 Matrix 有一百個人，對嗎？

That's correct.

沒錯。

And are they doing anything specifically with Infinitum?

那他們有在特別針對 Infinitum 做些什麼嗎？

They are. They did have a visit this quarter, where they are looking at the technology and sharing different things we're looking at with our R&D, what they're doing beyond just this one investment, this particular motor that is there -- what is -- everybody is investing in that particular motor, but they've got strong R&D people that are talking to our R&D people to see if there's other applications of this particular motor and other things they're working on, that could be interesting for both companies. So there is some discussions that we think that could bear fruit, but there's nothing really to talk about other than the fact that, yes, there is potential for us to have ancillary business opportunities with them that are not related to this particular motor that is what we basically invested in.

有。他們本季確實來訪，當時他們在看這項技術，並與我們的研發團隊分享我們正在看的不同事項；他們所做的不僅僅是這一筆投資、以及那一款特定的馬達——大家都在投資那款特定的馬達，但他們有很強的研發人員，正在與我們的研發人員交流，看看這款特定馬達是否還有其他應用，以及他們正在做的其他事情，是否可能對兩家公司都有意思。所以確實有一些我們認為可能會開花結果的討論，但除了「是的，與他們之間可能存在一些與我們基本上投資的這款特定馬達無關的周邊業務機會」之外，沒有什麼實質內容可以多談。

And then just staying -- going back to the hundred people at Matrix are they making products that are being sold to third-parties? Is Matrix going to be, at some point, big enough to be reported separately, so we kind of know more about what they're doing? Can you just give us more of a feeling for where you see Matrix going and what they're doing?

那再接著問——回到 Matrix 的一百個人，他們有在做賣給第三方的產品嗎？Matrix 未來是否會大到可以單獨揭露成一個可報告的部門，讓我們更了解他們在做什麼？你能不能多給我們一些你對 Matrix 未來走向與他們在做什麼的感覺？

So as we talked about in the last earnings release, we think they can -- they have a technology called OmniPro, which is a camera focused facility on forklifts that we're rolling out to the industrial sector. And that's our growth -- our biggest growth potential. There's a few other products that we've got that are in the mining space that will be complementary to other things we're doing in the mining space on our proximity devices. But the primary growth engine for Matrix right now with a specific product that's being manufactured are these camera type...

如同我們在上一份財報新聞稿中提到的，我們認為他們——他們有一項名為 OmniPro 的技術，是一種聚焦於堆高機的攝影機設施（解決方案），我們正在把它推向工業領域。那是我們的成長——最大的成長潛力。還有一些其他產品是在礦業領域，會與我們在礦業領域針對近距離（proximity）裝置所做的其他事情形成互補。但就 Matrix 目前而言，主要的成長引擎、以及正在製造的特定產品，就是這些攝影機類型的……

These AI cameras.

這些 AI 攝影機。

Forklifts to have avoidance, to avoid running into people. So we talked about growing at 5x to 6x then?

用在堆高機上做避障，避免撞到人。所以我們談到要成長 5 倍到 6 倍，對吧？

Ten times, yes.

10 倍，是的。

Yes, and it would go to like $35 million. So it's not -- it is growth. So we are encouraging them to look beyond what they've been doing, which is just spend money within their own cash flow. So we do think that there will be opportunities for them to do some things that will allow that to grow. And then our dream would be to, yes, we would hope it would be a separate reportable segment in the not too distant future, maybe 2 or 3 years from now.

是的，那會到大約 3,500 萬美元。所以它不是——確實是成長。因此我們也鼓勵他們把眼光放到他們過去做法之外，也就是只在自身現金流範圍內花錢。我們確實認為他們會有一些機會去做一些事情，讓成長得以實現。然後我們的夢想是——是的，我們希望在不久的將來它能成為一個可單獨報告的部門，也許是 2 到 3 年後。

Yes. Today, it is still relatively small. I think last year, we did about $4.5 million in EBITDA, tracking to do about $8 million in EBITDA this year with the base being the proximity detection, minor communication type technologies that are used for mining. And then as we use those technologies to get into other products like OmniPro, that's really what's driving the growth this year.

是的。以今天來看，它仍然相對小。我想去年我們的 EBITDA 大約是 450 萬美元，今年在以近距離偵測、礦區通訊等用於採礦的技術為基礎之下，預計 EBITDA 大約可做到 800 萬美元。然後當我們把這些技術用到其他產品上，例如 OmniPro，這才是真正推動今年成長的因素。

And next year.

以及明年。

All right. Maybe I'll just -- one final one, which is PJM and MISO. You had mentioned earlier that they are concerned about and they've said they're concerned about shortages about capacity. Does it look like they've managed to sort of escape through the summer? And is the winter more of a concern or not?

好。也許我最後再問一個，就是 PJM 和 MISO。你先前提到他們擔心、而且也說他們擔心容量短缺。看起來他們是否已經算是撐過夏季了？那冬季會不會更令人擔心，還是不會？

No. I mean, I think they're concerned. Yes, from this point forward, they're really concerned with the number of plants that are on the drawing board to be closed. That's what they're really concerned about, back to the CCR rule that there's 41 plants right now asking for extensions so that they can stay open beyond 2023 that are subject to closing if EPA continues to expect them to meet certain standards. So that's what they're really concerned about in the near-term as opposed to month-to-month.

不。我是說，我認為他們確實擔心。是的，從現在往後，他們非常擔心的是有多少電廠已經在規劃要關閉。這才是他們真正擔心的，回到 CCR 規則，目前有 41 座電廠正在申請展延，好讓它們能在 2023 年之後繼續運轉；如果 EPA 仍然要求它們符合某些標準，這些電廠就可能面臨關閉。所以他們在短期內真正擔心的是這件事，而不是逐月的問題。

They're really looking to keep these plants open and keep the capacity open. Again, as Brian said, if you look at Europe, they're having to go back and pull plants out of mothballs. We've got plans that are running today that the government is trying to put in mothball. And why we do that? Why not allow these plants to stay online until we get better definition of what we've got to back them up if they're shut down. And that's the megaphone they're using to try to educate people that we need to be careful and not close anything that we've got online today. If we got shortages, you don't solve the problem by making the capacity more short.

他們真正想做的是讓這些電廠維持開放、讓容量維持在線。再說一次，如 Brian 所說，如果你看看歐洲，他們不得不把已封存（mothball）的電廠重新啟用。我們這邊有些電廠今天仍在運轉，但政府卻想把它們封存。我們為什麼要這麼做？為什麼不讓這些電廠保持在線，直到我們更清楚如果它們關掉，我們要用什麼來補上。這就是他們用來擴音宣導的重點：我們需要小心，不要關掉任何今天已在線的東西。如果出現短缺，你不會靠讓容量更短缺來解決問題。

Of course. Has there been any -- what's the experience been of restarting mothball plants? Are they no problem? Or are they any problems people experience doing that?

當然。那重啟封存電廠的經驗如何？是完全沒問題？還是人們在做這件事時會遇到一些問題？

Again, these are the European plants that we're talking about, and there are problems because in most cases, they weren't capitalized towards the end of their life. But they're spending the money to bring them back up because they need -- when you have as much gas as they've got taken off the market. They got the -- they've got the energy crisis, and they'll spend the money to bring them back up to operate.

再說一次，我們談的是歐洲的電廠；而且確實有問題，因為多數情況下，它們在生命週期末期並沒有投入資本支出。但他們仍然願意花錢把它們恢復運轉，因為他們需要——當你有那麼多天然氣被抽離市場時，他們面臨——他們正處於能源危機，所以他們會花錢把電廠拉回來運轉。

And our final question is from Arthur Calavritinos with ANC Capital.

我們的最後一個提問來自 ANC Capital 的 Arthur Calavritinos。

I'm not a lawyer, but on the EPA decision, right, West Virginia EPA, is there any compensation the industry could get? Because I mean they carpet bombed the entire coal industry. And I'm just wondering -- I just thought about it after the -- and by the way, congratulations. But is there any precedent or anything like that you guys got to get as an industry to damages done?

我不是律師，但關於 EPA 的裁決，對吧，West Virginia v. EPA，這個產業有可能獲得任何補償嗎？因為我的意思是，他們對整個煤炭產業進行了地毯式轟炸。我只是想知道——我是在……之後想到的——順帶一提，恭喜。但是否有任何先例或類似情況，讓你們作為一個產業可以就造成的損害求償？

That's a good question, and I don't have the answer for you. You say you're not a lawyer?

這是個好問題，我沒有答案。你說你不是律師？

No, I'm not a lawyer, no.

不，我不是律師。

No, I think the -- so we are looking at what impacts to the specific regulations, one of the biggest ones that spacing everyone is this carbon disclosure rule that is being talked about with the final regulations due sometime in January, maybe.

不，我想——所以我們正在看這項裁決對特定法規的影響；其中一個大家面臨的最大議題，是正在討論的碳揭露規則，最終法規可能會在 1 月左右出爐，也許吧。

At the SEC, right.

在 SEC，對吧。

The SEC, which is another -- I mean it would just be a tremendous burden on everybody to report data that I don't know that anybody would really read it or use it. So that's one. I think the regulations that exist today, it's going to be hard to overturn those. On the ones they're considering, we can't take action until there's a final rule. And then those will be focused on to determine whether or not EPAs operating within their boundaries. I do believe that the energy crisis itself and the desire to lower Americans higher prices for energy is the best route for us to get regulatory relief as opposed to going through the courts.

SEC，那又是另一個——我的意思是，這會對所有人造成巨大的負擔，要去申報一些我不確定是否真的有人會閱讀或使用的資料。所以那是一個。我認為今天已經存在的法規，要推翻會很難。至於他們正在考慮的那些，我們要等到最終規則出來才能採取行動。然後就會聚焦在判斷 EPA 是否在其權限邊界內運作。我確實相信，能源危機本身，以及降低美國人更高能源價格的訴求，會是我們取得監管紓困的最佳途徑，而不是走法院途徑。

Courts just take forever. And I think that our customers and their advocates for those that are in energy poverty need to step up and say, come on government, you've got to do something here and don't make it worse, which is what they're getting ready to do if they turn a blind eye; if the EPA turns a blind eye to the energy prices. And right now, I haven't seen no sign that they're not willing to do that. In fact, the EPA administrator was quoted last week in a speech that said that the West Virginia decision just leads them to want to accelerate what they're doing instead of slowing it down.

法院程序就是會拖很久。我認為我們的客戶，以及那些為能源貧困族群發聲的人，需要站出來說：拜託政府，你們得做點什麼，而且不要讓情況更糟——如果他們視而不見；如果 EPA 對能源價格視而不見，他們正準備做的事情就會讓情況更糟。而目前我沒有看到任何跡象顯示他們不願意這麼做。事實上，EPA 署長上週在一場演講中被引述說，West Virginia 的裁決只會讓他們更想加速正在做的事，而不是放慢。

And the 24 plants, you mentioned that, I think, last quarter or the quarter before, the decision...

那你提到的 24 座電廠，我想你在上季或前一季提過，那個裁決……

Forty-one.

41 座。

Would those -- then you just mentioned 24, are those -- so those were -- because the decision came in the way it did, they were supposed to be closed, but they're not, right?

那你剛剛又提到 24 座，那些——所以那些是——因為裁決的結果，他們本來應該要關閉，但現在沒有關，對嗎？

Well, there's a compliance date of 2023 for them to dispose of their coal combustion waste in a manner different than the way they've been disposing of it. And if they don't make the investment to dispose of future ash going forward in the way that they prescribed then they would be cited for a violation of continuing to dispose of that waste in their existing piles. And so therefore, the utility has a decision to make, and I'm going to make that capital decision to do that. And they're going back and saying with COVID, we lost 2 years of trying to think in terms of coming up with a different alternative for our coal ash, we'd like to have an extension for 2 years so that we can do the engineering and get the permits and make that final decision whether we want to keep the plants open or go ahead and make the investment to open a new storage facility. That's what they're asking.

嗯，他們有一個 2023 年的合規期限，必須以不同於他們過去方式來處置煤燃燒廢棄物。如果他們不投資、未來不依照規定的方式處置後續產生的灰渣，那他們就會因持續以既有堆置方式處置該廢棄物而被認定違規。因此，公用事業公司必須做出決策：我要不要做這筆資本支出。他們回頭說，因為 COVID，我們失去了 2 年時間去思考煤灰的替代方案；我們希望能展延 2 年，讓我們可以做工程設計、取得許可，並做出最終決定：我們是要讓電廠繼續運轉，還是乾脆投資興建新的儲存設施。這就是他們在申請的內容。

So the EPA is supposedly reviewing these plans. But to my knowledge, they've only actually responded to one of the 41 and given them conditional approval. But I haven't heard of anybody else getting any approval or rejection. We're encouraging everyone to act on those things. I mean these utilities are in a bind. They need to make -- the EPA needs to make decisions and start talking to these utilities and they need to have candid conversations on what's practical, not what is -- sounds good for a campaign slogan between now and November. I just think they put the utilities in a heck of a bind, personally.

所以，據稱 EPA 正在審查這些計畫。但就我所知，他們實際上只回覆了 41 份中的其中一份，並給予有條件核准。但我沒有聽說其他任何人獲得核准或遭到否決。我們鼓勵大家針對這些事情採取行動。我的意思是，這些公用事業公司正陷入兩難。它們需要——EPA 需要做出決定，並開始與這些公用事業公司對話，而且需要就什麼是可行的進行坦誠的討論，而不是討論什麼——在現在到 11 月之間聽起來適合當競選口號的東西。我個人認為，他們讓公用事業公司陷入非常棘手的困境。

Yes, I agree. All right. And then the other question I was going to have is when you look at the business, right, are we going to be -- just the industry in general, are they going to do more international? Is it just going to be a business that does more international stuff because gas is so volatile, and we haven't seen the winter yet. And the reason I ask it like that is we have our guys here in this country, not wanting to do long-term contracts, however I'm phrasing it. But at what point do the international guys just watch this and they know what's going on.

是的，我同意。好。然後我還有另一個問題：當你看這個業務時，對吧，我們是否會——就整個產業而言，他們是否會做更多國際業務？是否會變成一個做更多國際業務的產業，因為天然氣波動太大，而我們還沒看到冬季。之所以這樣問，是因為我們在這個國家的那些人不想做長期合約，不管我怎麼表達。但到什麼時候，國際上的那些人就只是看著這一切，並且他們知道正在發生什麼。

And they're like, they want to step ahead of it and maybe have much higher inventories of coal not much higher, but much higher than they -- not that they should just to have absolute higher inventory because it seems to me you're going to have like a supply squeeze coming in all over the world. Because to me, the more I look at nat gas, to me it seems like it's very unreliable in terms of shipping and other logistics and even a political event where somebody may say, let's boycott sending that gas to China, for example, right, doing crazy stuff like that and just the demand for coal just worldwide and outpacing our guys basically like just higher prices, longer-term contracts and all that. Because it just seems like it's changing a lot. I feel like it's like right now at the moment we're ready to jump that way.

然後他們會想，他們想要搶先一步，也許把煤炭庫存提高很多——不是稍微高一點，而是比他們——不是說他們應該那樣做，而是為了確保有更高的絕對庫存。因為在我看來，你會看到全球都出現供應緊縮。因為對我而言，我越看天然氣，就越覺得在運輸與其他物流方面非常不可靠，甚至可能出現政治事件，有人可能會說，例如，我們要抵制把那個天然氣送到中國，對吧，做一些那樣瘋狂的事；再加上全球對煤炭的需求，以及需求超過我們這邊的供應，基本上就會導致更高的價格、更長期的合約等等。因為看起來變化很大。我覺得就此刻而言，我們已經準備好往那個方向跳了。

Yes. I think that the U.S., you can argue is no longer a swing supplier, which I think is what you're suggesting. And that's a valid position to take. And now the real question is, back to are we going to move more and more towards that? I think the answer is yes. Our challenge is going to be what's it going to be 5 years from now? And is there going to be any increase in takeaway capacity? Are there -- is there going to be any ability for anybody that wants to invest in capital to expand the capacity to export shipments.

是的。我認為可以說，美國不再是所謂的「擺動供應者」（swing supplier），我想這就是你在暗示的。這是個合理的立場。現在真正的問題是，回到我們是否會越來越朝那個方向走？我認為答案是肯定的。我們的挑戰會是 5 年後會變成什麼樣？而且外運能力（takeaway capacity）是否會有任何增加？是否——是否會有任何能力讓想投入資本的人去擴大出口運輸的能力。

And I think under this administration, I don't think anybody is going to want to invest capital to do that. If there is a change in administration, then there can be some certainty. You could see some expansion of export facilities that would allow for the U.S. to increase shipments in the export market beyond what we've historically done. There was an earlier question about us shipping 12 million tons a few years ago.

而且我認為在本屆政府之下，我不覺得有人會想投入資本去做這件事。如果政府更迭，那就可能帶來一些確定性。你可能會看到出口設施的一些擴張，使美國能在出口市場把出貨量提高到超過我們歷史上的水準。先前有人問到我們幾年前出貨 1,200 萬噸的問題。

And there's capacity for us to do that, but to really try to replace 30 million tons or 40 million tons in the export market and others in our domestic industry do the same. There's not the port capacity to be able to hit those numbers. So what I really think needs to happen is we need to protect every coal fleet we've got that's been invested in that has every environmental -- hasn't been meeting environmental standards to-date. Those plants need to stay operating.

我們確實有能力做到那樣，但若要在出口市場真正嘗試取代 3,000 萬噸或 4,000 萬噸，並且國內產業的其他公司也做同樣的事，港口產能不足以達到那些數字。所以我真正認為需要發生的是，我們必須保護我們已投資的每一座燃煤機組（coal fleet），而且這些機組在環保方面——截至目前一直都有符合環保標準。那些電廠需要持續運轉。

China is going to increase their coal production a billion tons this year and a billion tons next year. Our country wants to think they can shut down our coal plants in America, and that's going to solve the climate problem. And it's not. Everything we do to close things, other countries are building the capacity because the world depends on low-cost fuel other than America these days. I mean we used to. But we may feel good about doing something here, but we're just hurting ourselves and giving that opportunity to other countries, and the climate emissions are the same worldwide. It's a global issue, it's not a U.S. issue.

中國今年將把煤炭產量增加 10 億噸，明年再增加 10 億噸。我們國家卻想著可以關掉美國的燃煤電廠，然後這就能解決氣候問題。但並不是這樣。我們所做的每一件關閉行動，其他國家都在擴建產能，因為如今世界（除了美國）依賴低成本燃料。我是說，我們以前也是。但我們可能會因為在這裡做了某些事而自我感覺良好，但我們其實是在傷害自己，並把機會讓給其他國家；而且氣候排放在全球是一樣的。這是全球性議題，不是美國的議題。

Great. And then I was just talking to one of the oil, not gas guys. Not -- and one of my natural gas analyst, I know he's not prone hyperbole. And we're just talking about winter being normal or colder, a little bit colder than normal. I mean, would just -- he was saying like we could be running -- we could -- our inventories could be so that we'd run out of nat gas. And you're fond to saying economics beats politics. I say like physics beats politics all the time. It's just the timing is the issue.

很好。然後我剛才在跟一位石油——不是天然氣的人聊。不是——還有跟我們的一位天然氣分析師聊，我知道他不是那種愛誇大其詞的人。我們在談冬天如果是正常或比正常稍微冷一點。我是說，只要——他就說我們可能會——我們的庫存可能會低到把天然氣用完。你常說經濟勝過政治。我則常說物理勝過政治。只是時間點才是問題。

But at what point does nat gas prices -- like if we're at $14 like in January, February, at what point like do we have a serious conversation what we're doing to coal? Because it's not only is it the energy property of the consumers, but you have big industries. I know in Germany, for example, BAS, the chemical company is like -- they're freaked out what's going on with energy prices and they manufacture -- they use energy to manufacture stuff. And I don't know, I just -- any thoughts you may have like -- at this point, nat gas going much higher, if it goes much higher, that we have that conversation and things change. And that's my final one. Again, thank you very much.

但天然氣價格到什麼程度——比如如果我們在 1 月、2 月到 14 美元，那到什麼時候我們才會嚴肅地討論我們對煤炭正在做的事？因為這不只是消費者的能源成本問題，還有大型產業。我知道在德國，例如，化工公司 BAS——他們對能源價格正在發生的事非常緊張，而他們製造——他們用能源來製造產品。我不知道，我只是——你有沒有任何想法——在這個時間點，如果天然氣再大幅上漲，如果它真的再漲很多，我們是否就會開始那場對話，然後事情會改變。這是我最後一個問題。再次非常感謝。

I think that Manchin-Schumer bill tries to address that. So the gas industry does -- they do provide a lot of benefits to try to increase natural gas in that bill, but it's not going to impact 2023. So it's going to take time. So they are trying to relax permitting issues, create more pipelines, etc., more drilling permits. So yes, they're wanting to increase natural gas production to try to resolve those issues in the future. But currently, there is capacity constraints, and there could be a challenge this year depending on the weather, etc.

我認為 Manchin-Schumer 法案試圖處理這個問題。因此，天然氣產業——他們確實在該法案中提供了許多好處，試圖增加天然氣，但這不會影響 2023 年。所以需要時間。他們正試圖放寬許可（permitting）問題、建更多管線等，以及更多鑽探許可。因此，是的，他們希望提高天然氣產量，以在未來解決這些問題。但目前存在產能限制，而今年可能會因天氣等因素而面臨挑戰。

This does conclude our question-and-answer session. I would like to turn the conference back over to Brian for closing comments.

我們的問答環節到此結束。我想把電話會議交回給 Brian 作結語。

Thank you, Sherry. Thank you to everybody for your time this morning. Our next call to discuss our third quarter 2022 financial and operating results is currently expected to occur in late October, and we hope you'll join us again at that time. But for today, this concludes our call. Thanks again for your participation and continued support of ARLP.

謝謝你，Sherry。也謝謝各位今天早上撥冗參與。我們下一次討論 2022 年第三季財務與營運結果的電話會議，目前預計在 10 月下旬舉行，希望屆時各位能再次參與。不過今天，我們的電話會議就到此結束。再次感謝各位的參與，以及對 ARLP 的持續支持。

Thank you. You may disconnect your lines at this time, and thank you for your participation.

謝謝。您現在可以掛斷電話線，並感謝您的參與。