CF工業控股 (CF) 2026 Q2 法說會逐字稿

Good day, ladies, and gentlemen, and welcome to CF Industries first half and second quarter of 2026. (Operator Instructions) I would now like to turn the presentation over to the host for today, Mr. Martin Jarosick, with CF Investor Relations. Sir, please proceed.

各位女士、先生，大家好，歡迎參加 CF Industries 2026 年上半年及第二季業績電話會議。(接線員指示) 現在我想把簡報交給今天的主持人、CF 投資人關係部的 Martin Jarosick 先生。先生，請開始。

Good morning, and thanks for joining the CF Industries' earnings conference call. With me today are Chris Bohn, President and CEO; Bert Frost, Executive Vice President and Chief Commercial Officer; and Andrew Scribner, Executive Vice President, and Chief Financial Officer. CF Industries reported its results for the first half and second quarter of 2026 yesterday afternoon. On this call, we'll review the results, discuss our outlook, and then host a question-and-answer session.

各位早安，感謝各位參加 CF Industries 的財報電話會議。今天與我一同出席的有：總裁暨執行長 Chris Bohn；執行副總裁暨首席商務長 Bert Frost；以及執行副總裁暨財務長 Andrew Scribner。CF Industries 已於昨天下午公布 2026 年上半年及第二季業績。在本次電話會議中，我們將回顧業績、討論展望，接著進行問答環節。

Statements made on this call and in the presentation on our website that are not historical facts are forward-looking statements. These statements are not guarantees of future performance and involve risks, uncertainties, and assumptions that are difficult to predict, therefore, actual outcomes and results may differ materially from what is expressed or implied in any statements.

本次電話會議以及我們網站簡報中所作、非歷史事實的陳述，均屬前瞻性陳述。這些陳述不保證未來表現，且涉及難以預測的風險、不確定性與假設，因此實際結果與成果可能與任何陳述中明示或暗示者有重大差異。

More detailed information about factors that may affect our performance may be found in our filings with the SEC, which are available on our website. Also, you'll find reconciliations between GAAP and non-GAAP measures in the press release and presentation posted on our website. Now let me introduce Chris Bohn.

有關可能影響我們表現之因素的更詳細資訊，請參閱我們向 SEC 提交的申報文件，並可於我們網站取得。此外，您也可在我們網站上發布的新聞稿與簡報中，找到 GAAP 與非 GAAP 指標之間的調節表。現在讓我介紹 Chris Bohn。

Thanks, Martin, and good morning, everyone. Yesterday afternoon, we posted results for the first half of 2026, in which we generated adjusted EBITDA of $2.2 billion. These results reflect the CF Industries team's strong operational performance and a tight global nitrogen supply-demand balance, which was further strained by the conflict with Iran. Most importantly, our teams continue to embrace our do-it-right culture to deliver outstanding safety performance.

謝謝你，Martin，各位早安。昨天下午，我們公布了 2026 年上半年業績，調整後 EBITDA 為 22 億美元。這些結果反映了 CF Industries 團隊強勁的營運表現，以及全球氮肥供需緊平衡；而與伊朗的衝突使此情勢進一步吃緊。最重要的是，我們的團隊持續秉持「把事情做對」的文化，交出卓越的安全績效。

We closed the quarter with trailing 12-month incident rate of 0.16 incidents per 200,000 hours work, well below industry's averages. That focus on safety directly supported high asset utilization in the first half. We operated our available ammonia capacity at nearly 98%, enabling us to meet demand from our domestic, retail, wholesale and cooperative customers who supply North American farmers. In addition to our strong operating performance, we are making steady progress on our strategic initiatives. At Blue Point, we have received all necessary permits to begin construction. Nearly all long lead items are ordered and module fabrication is set to begin later this year.

本季結束時，過去 12 個月的事故率為每 200,000 工時 0.16 起，遠低於產業平均。對安全的重視，直接支撐了上半年高資產稼動率。我們將可用的氨產能稼動率維持在接近 98%，使我們得以滿足國內零售、批發與合作社客戶的需求，而這些客戶為北美農民提供供應。除了強勁的營運表現之外，我們在策略性計畫上也持續穩健推進。在 Blue Point，我們已取得開始施工所需的全部許可。幾乎所有長交期項目均已下單，模組製造預計將於今年稍晚開始。

Within our existing network, we expect our Yazoo City complex to resume operations in the first half of 2027 after completing work to improve the site's long-term sustainability and operational flexibility.

在我們既有的網路中，我們預期 Yazoo City 廠區在完成提升場址長期永續性與營運彈性的工程後，將於 2027 年上半年恢復營運。

We also continue to be disciplined as we evaluate high-return projects across our network to unlock further value. As you saw in our presentation, we have raised our mid-cycle EBITDA and free cash flow expectations. In a moment, Andrew will address more of this, but I want to address the broader market context first.

同時，我們在評估全網路各項高報酬專案以釋放更多價值時，仍維持嚴謹紀律。如各位在簡報中所見，我們已上調中周期 EBITDA 與自由現金流的預期。稍後 Andrew 會進一步說明，但我想先談談更廣泛的市場背景。

Right now, we believe the market views a disproportionate amount of our EBITDA and free cash flow growth, primarily through the lens of short-term geopolitical friction in the Middle East. That view misses a fundamental structural shift in our industry that has been occurring over the years and exposed to the recent global nitrogen supply chain dislocation.

目前我們認為，市場對我們 EBITDA 與自由現金流成長的解讀，有不成比例的部分主要是透過中東短期地緣政治摩擦的視角。這種看法忽略了本產業多年來一直在發生、且在近期全球氮肥供應鏈錯位中被凸顯的一項根本性結構轉變。

Higher global capital costs have structurally raised the incentive price required for new global nitrogen capacity, lifting CF Industries' baseline mid-cycle earnings power while reinforcing the value of our existing manufacturing and distribution network. This is before we factor in any geopolitical premium.

全球資本成本上升，從結構上提高了新增全球氮肥產能所需的誘因價格，進而抬升 CF Industries 在中周期的基準獲利能力，同時強化我們既有製造與配送網路的價值。這還未把任何地緣政治溢價納入考量。

To be clear, our low-cost, low-risk North American asset base and not geopolitical risk is the foundation of our profitability. Our ability to operate at high utilization rates during disruptions enhances our stable mid-cycle return profile above and beyond the strong free cash flow generation already embedded in our outlook. This, in turn, augments our ability to invest in high-return projects and return capital to shareholders. With that, I'll turn it over to Bert to discuss the global nitrogen market. Bert?

需要明確的是，我們獲利能力的基礎是北美低成本、低風險的資產組合，而非地緣政治風險。在供應中斷期間維持高稼動率的能力，使我們穩健的中周期報酬特性更上一層樓，超越我們展望中已內含的強勁自由現金流創造能力。這也進一步提升我們投資高報酬專案並回饋股東資本的能力。接下來我把時間交給 Bert，請他談談全球氮肥市場。Bert？

Thanks, Chris. The first half of 2026 saw a rapidly changing global nitrogen market dynamics. Global prices rose significantly as an already tight supply-demand balance was further constrained by supply disruptions from the conflict with Iran.

謝謝你，Chris。2026 年上半年，全球氮肥市場動態快速變化。在原本已緊俏的供需平衡之上，與伊朗衝突造成的供應中斷進一步限縮供給，使全球價格大幅上升。

In regions where application seasons occur in the second half of the year, many customers deferred purchases. In North America, agricultural demand remained strong through most of the first half of 2026, led by ammonia and urea. Our team created significant value by leveraging our operational flexibility to prioritize urea production over UAN.

在施用季節落在下半年的地區，許多客戶延後採購。在北美，2026 年上半年大部分時間農業需求仍然強勁，主要由氨與尿素帶動。我們的團隊運用營運彈性，優先生產尿素而非 UAN，創造了顯著價值。

It also enabled us to deliver our second highest DEF volumes in the first half, our highest margin product. In June, however, our customers' slowed purchases of the nitrogen channel drew inventories down to a very low level. Those low inventory positions ultimately drove strong participation in our UAN and ammonia fill programs in July. As a result, we built a substantial UAN order book that extends into November and expect a strong fall ammonia season.

這也使我們在上半年交出第二高的 DEF 銷量（我們毛利最高的產品）。然而在 6 月，我們客戶在氮肥通路的採購放緩，使庫存降至非常低的水位。這些低庫存部位最終帶動 7 月我們 UAN 與氨補庫計畫的強勁參與度。因此，我們建立了可延續至 11 月的可觀 UAN 訂單簿，並預期秋季氨施用季將表現強勁。

Looking at the broader market, global nitrogen fundamentals remain tight even before factoring in geopolitical conflicts. Rising capital costs, permanent closures, and the limited pace of new capacity additions have kept supply growth constrained relative to demand.

從更廣泛的市場來看，即使不把地緣政治衝突納入考量，全球氮肥基本面仍然緊俏。資本成本上升、永久性關閉，以及新增產能投放速度有限，使供給成長相對於需求持續受限。

Additionally, a meaningful portion of global nitrogen capacity remains exposed to geopolitical uncertainty. And this exposure has further tightened the global nitrogen supply-demand balance. We believe this will continue to affect supply availability, delivery confidence, and pricing due to higher logistics and insurance costs. Additionally, high LNG prices continue to pressure production economics for marginal nitrogen producers and are likely to limit operating rates.

此外，全球氮肥產能中有相當一部分仍暴露於地緣政治不確定性。而這種暴露進一步收緊全球氮肥供需平衡。我們認為，由於物流與保險成本上升，這將持續影響供應可得性、交付信心與定價。另外，高 LNG 價格持續壓縮邊際氮肥生產商的生產經濟性，並可能限制其開工率。

We do expect China to export urea volumes similar to last year. Those exports are necessary to meet global demand, but they are not enough to materially loosen market fundamentals. On the demand side, we expect purchasing activity to recover in deferred regions such as Brazil and India. We also expect North American demand to remain firm through the upcoming application seasons.

我們確實預期中國的尿素出口量將與去年相近。這些出口對滿足全球需求是必要的，但不足以在實質上鬆動市場基本面。在需求端，我們預期巴西與印度等先前延後的地區，採購活動將回升。我們也預期北美需求在即將到來的施用季節中將維持穩健。

Taken together, we expect the global nitrogen market to remain tight into 2027. Looking further ahead, we see continued structural tightening through the end of the decade as nitrogen capacity currently under construction falls short of historical demand growth.

綜合而言，我們預期全球氮肥市場將維持緊俏並延續至 2027 年。再往後看，由於目前在建的氮肥產能不足以滿足歷史需求成長，我們看到結構性緊縮將持續至本十年末。

Finally, our low carbon sales program continues to gain momentum. Approximately 10% of our ammonia sales volumes in the first half were low carbon that earned an average premium of more than $20 per tonne. With that, I'll turn it over to Andrew.

最後，我們的低碳銷售計畫持續累積動能。上半年我們約 10% 的氨銷售量為低碳產品，平均每噸取得超過 20 美元的溢價。接下來我把時間交給 Andrew。

Thanks, Bert, and good morning, everyone. For the first half of 2026, the company reported net earnings attributable to common stockholders of $1.3 billion, or $8.71 per diluted share. EBITDA and adjusted EBITDA were about $2.2 billion.

謝謝你，Bert，各位早安。2026 年上半年，公司歸屬於普通股股東的淨利為 13 億美元，或每股稀釋盈餘 8.71 美元。EBITDA 與調整後 EBITDA 約為 22 億美元。

For the second quarter of 2026, the company reported net earnings attributable to common stockholders of $727 million or $4.73 per diluted share. EBITDA and adjusted EBITDA were about $1.2 billion. We continue to efficiently convert EBITDA into free cash flow. Our trailing 12-month net cash from operations was approximately $3 billion and free cash flow was approximately $1.8 billion.

2026 年第二季，公司報告歸屬於普通股股東的淨利為 7.27 億美元，或每股稀釋後盈餘 4.73 美元。EBITDA 與調整後 EBITDA 約為 12 億美元。我們持續有效地將 EBITDA 轉換為自由現金流。我們過去 12 個月的營運活動淨現金約為 30 億美元，自由現金流約為 18 億美元。

As you can see on slide 10, our EBITDA and free cash conversion is consistently high, producing predictable and stable free cash flow. Over the last 12 months, we've returned nearly $1.3 billion of free cash flow to shareholders. This includes repurchasing 10.6 million shares for $958 million and $314 million in dividend payments.

如您在第 10 張投影片所見，我們的 EBITDA 與自由現金轉換率一向維持在高水準，產生可預測且穩定的自由現金流。在過去 12 個月，我們已向股東返還近 13 億美元的自由現金流。其中包括以 9.58 億美元回購 1,060 萬股，以及支付 3.14 億美元股利。

In July, the Board increased our quarterly dividend by 20% to $0.60 per share. As we have reduced the number of shares outstanding over time, we are able to reward the remaining shareholders with a higher dividend. For context, since the start of 2021, shares outstanding have decreased 29%. And over that time, our dividend has doubled.

7 月，董事會將我們的季度股利提高 20% 至每股 0.60 美元。隨著我們隨時間推移降低流通在外股數，我們得以以更高的股利回饋剩餘股東。作為背景，自 2021 年初以來，流通在外股數已減少 29%。而在此期間，我們的股利已翻倍。

Looking ahead, we continue to project approximately $1.3 billion of capital expenditures in 2026, of which CF Industries' portion is approximately $950 million. With the construction of Blue Point expected to begin in August, the pace of capital expenditures will accelerate. We continue to focus on mitigating our cost exposure through fixed fee contracts.

展望未來，我們仍預估 2026 年資本支出約為 13 億美元，其中 CF Industries 的份額約為 9.5 億美元。隨著 Blue Point 預計於 8 月開始施工，資本支出步伐將加快。我們仍專注於透過固定費用合約來降低成本曝險。

As we have advanced Blue Point activities and evaluate additional projects, it has become clear that the cost of building new nitrogen capacity in regions with low-cost natural gas has increased, narrowing the construction cost advantage those regions have historically enjoyed.

隨著我們推進 Blue Point 相關工作並評估其他專案，我們已清楚看到：在天然氣成本較低的地區建置新增氮肥產能的成本已上升，縮小了這些地區過去所享有的建造成本優勢。

As you can see on slide 9, these higher costs mean that the urea price required to bring new capacity online has gone up as well. Based on our analysis, this supports the baseline mid-cycle EBITDA for CF Industries of approximately $2.9 billion and free cash flow of $1.7 billion.

如您在第 9 張投影片所見，這些較高的成本也意味著，使新增產能得以上線所需的尿素價格同樣上升。根據我們的分析，這支持 CF Industries 的基準中周期 EBITDA 約為 29 億美元，以及自由現金流 17 億美元。

You can also see the decarbonization. Blue Point and other margin-enhancing projects provide upside to our baseline. By 2030, we expect these strategic initiatives that are in flight to raise our mid-cycle EBITDA to approximately $3.3 billion. And as Chris noted, this is before any geopolitical premium for higher freight and insurance cost and constrained global supply. These near-term dynamics provide fuel for growth and a greater ability to return capital to shareholders. With that, I will hand it back to Chris before we open the Q&A.

您也可以看到去碳化的部分。Blue Point 與其他提升利潤率的專案為我們的基準帶來上行空間。到 2030 年，我們預期這些正在推進的策略性措施將把我們的中周期 EBITDA 提升至約 33 億美元。而如 Chris 所提到，這還未納入因運費與保險成本上升以及全球供給受限所帶來的任何地緣政治溢價。這些短期動態為成長提供動能，並提升我們向股東返還資本的能力。接下來在我們開放問答之前，我把時間交還給 Chris。

Thanks, Andrew. I want to thank CF Industries employees for their commitment and dedication during the first half of 2026. The team continues to deliver safety and operational excellence while skillfully navigating our ever-changing global marketplace. As you can see on slide 12, CF Industries has a long track record of driving value for long-term shareholders by increasing production capacity and decreasing the number of shares outstanding. This is increased investor participation in our underlying assets by more than 40% since 2020.

謝謝，Andrew。我要感謝 CF Industries 員工在 2026 年上半年期間的承諾與投入。團隊在不斷變化的全球市場中靈活應對，同時持續交付安全與卓越營運表現。如您在第 12 張投影片所見，CF Industries 長期以來透過提升產能並降低流通在外股數，為長期股東創造價值。自 2020 年以來，這使投資人對我們基礎資產的參與度提高了 40% 以上。

We expect to build on this track record in the near and long term. We have a premium-grade asset base, proven operational capabilities, financial strength, and substantial high-return strategic opportunities. The global nitrogen fertilizer supply-demand balance remains tight and rising capital costs across the globe have structurally elevated our baseline mid-cycle earnings.

我們預期在短期與長期都將延續這項紀錄。我們擁有優質資產基礎、經驗證的營運能力、財務實力，以及大量高報酬的策略性機會。全球氮肥供需平衡仍然吃緊，而全球資本成本上升已在結構上抬升了我們基準的中周期獲利水準。

Against that backdrop, we believe CF Industries stands apart. As our mid-cycle EBITDA expectations continue to strengthen and our free cash flow generation remains highly predictable and durable, we are well positioned to continue to create value for long-term shareholders. With that, operator, we'll open the call to questions.

在此背景下，我們相信 CF Industries 脫穎而出。隨著我們對中周期 EBITDA 的預期持續增強，且自由現金流的產生仍高度可預測且具韌性，我們已處於有利位置，能持續為長期股東創造價值。接下來，接線員，我們開放提問。

(Operator Instructions) Ben Isaacson, Scotiabank.

(接線員指示) Ben Isaacson，豐業銀行（Scotiabank）。

My question is on your new mid-cycle price of $410 a short ton for CF. Can you talk about how much of that change is related to capital cost inflation versus how much is related to any structural or sticky changes that you see as a result of the conflict in the Middle East?

我的問題是關於你們新的中周期價格：CF 為每短噸 410 美元。你們能否談談這項變動中，有多少與資本成本通膨相關，另有多少與你們因中東衝突而看到的任何結構性或黏著性變化相關？

Yeah. Thanks, Ben. Maybe for starters, I'd just take a step back and just say, as I look back at our performance since the beginning of 2020, we've averaged over and above that $1.7 billion free cash flow that we have as the mid-cycle by quite some amount.

是的。謝謝你，Ben。也許先退一步說，回顧自 2020 年初以來的表現，我們的自由現金流平均值高出我們所稱中周期的 17 億美元自由現金流相當多。

So it's not as if the empirical data and how we've performed and really how we've set up the company by increasing our production capacity and also lowering our fixed charges to get our free cash flow conversion where it is hasn't been successful, and sometimes we don't always feel like that's being recognized, but we have been performing at that.

因此，並不是說經驗數據、我們的實際表現，以及我們透過提升產能並降低固定費用來達到目前自由現金流轉換率的公司布局沒有成功；只是有時我們不一定覺得這點被充分認可，但我們確實一直達到那樣的表現。

What I would say is construction costs, the gap between the US and the rest of the world, has closed. You're seeing labor, procurement timing, different things with being able to use module yards where that difference between a US project and a global project has changed drastically, I think.

我想說的是，建造成本方面，美國與世界其他地區之間的差距已經縮小。你會看到勞動力、採購時點，以及能否使用模組化預製場（module yards）等不同因素，使得美國專案與全球專案之間的差異我認為已大幅改變。

And then, to your point, there are certain costs associated with these geopolitical events that are going to remain structural. So if you look at freight, for instance, freight, we have basically from the Middle East to the Gulf now is about $70, where a year ago, it was $35.

另外，正如你所提，有些與這些地緣政治事件相關的成本將會以結構性方式持續存在。例如運費，如果你看運費，從中東到墨西哥灣目前大約是 70 美元，而一年前是 35 美元。

Do we expect that to snap back to $35 and not have any type of structural piece to that? Probably not. But is that $5 to $10 there as there a few dollars in insurance costs, different vessel configurations, and a risk premium based on where those assets and really the supply offtake happening.

我們是否預期它會迅速回到 35 美元，且不帶任何結構性成分？可能不會。但其中是否有 5 到 10 美元屬於結構性因素，再加上幾美元的保險成本、不同的船舶配置，以及基於資產所在位置與實際供應承購（offtake）發生地而形成的風險溢價？

So I think as we look at it really from a NOLA price, we're saying we've moved from $355 NOLA urea a short ton to $385. Of that $30, there's probably $10 that may be associated with structural changes that don't go away as a result of these geopolitical events. And then the remaining amount probably exists due to higher capital costs and really a closing of that gap between US construction and outside of the US.

因此我認為，若我們從 NOLA 價格來看，我們是說已從每短噸 355 美元的 NOLA 尿素價格上移到 385 美元。在這 30 美元之中，可能有約 10 美元與因這些地緣政治事件而不會消失的結構性變化相關。其餘部分可能是因資本成本更高，以及美國建造成本與美國以外地區之間的差距縮小所致。

Yeah. And maybe let me add a little color, Ben, this is Andrew as well. As you look at that price going from $355 to $385, the underlying assumptions that we have is this is for, call it, 1.3 to 1.4 million tonne capacity sites with a CapEx estimate of about $2.6 billion to $2.8 billion. If we assume $350 natural gas and 10% to 12% financial return, that's how you get to the $385 price, you then use our economics and it gets to our EBITDA of $2.9 billion.

是的。Ben，我也補充一些說明，我是 Andrew。當你看價格從 355 上升到 385 時，我們的基本假設是：以約 130 萬到 140 萬噸產能的場址為例，資本支出估算約為 26 億到 28 億美元。若假設天然氣為 3.50 美元，且財務報酬率為 10% 到 12%，就會得到 385 美元的價格；再套用我們的經濟模型，就會得到 29 億美元的 EBITDA。

One piece that I want to call out of what's in there and what's not in there is we also gave some color context around $400 million over time by 2030 that will get you to $3.3 billion. Out of that $400 million, $300 million of that is Blue Point and $100 million is additional carbon capture benefits will get out of [DeVille] and Yazoo City. The way to think about that, what's not in there, I will do this illustratively, you likely saw that we're pursuing a FEED study for DEF.

我想特別指出其中包含了什麼、以及未包含什麼：我們也提供了一些背景說明，到 2030 年隨時間推移約有 4 億美元的增量，將使你達到 33 億美元。在這 4 億美元之中，3 億美元來自 Blue Point，1 億美元來自我們將在 [DeVille] 與 Yazoo City 取得的額外碳捕捉效益。至於如何理解「未包含」的部分，我用示意方式說明：你可能已看到我們正在為 DEF 推進一項 FEED 研究。

Because that has not been officially green lit yet, that is not in that $400 million. If we get to that point through an investment decision, it will go in there. Likewise, in that $2.9 billion, as we're starting to realize the benefits of DeVille on carbon capture, that's actually shifted left into that $2.9 billion. So it's really a function of the capital cost. And as Chris mentioned, there's probably some context around a little bit of geopolitical premium there, but it's really capital costs and sort of the realizing the benefits on carbon capture. So hopefully that helps.

由於那項尚未獲得正式核准，因此不包含在那4億美元之內。如果我們透過投資決策走到那一步，它就會納入其中。同樣地，在那29億美元中，隨著我們開始實現DeVille在碳捕集方面的效益，實際上已經把這部分提前納入那29億美元。所以這真的取決於資本成本。而且如Chris提到的，可能也有一些地緣政治溢價的背景因素，但主要還是資本成本，以及在碳捕集上實現效益的情況。希望這能有所幫助。

Joel Jackson, BMO Capital Markets.

Joel Jackson，BMO資本市場。

It seems like looking at yourself and your peers' results, ignoring some of the lower volumes in the Yazoo City, there's a bit of a buyer's holiday in nitrogen in Q2, and we all know what happened with commodity prices and nitrogen prices across the quarter, urea, the war started, and prices came down. I was wondering if you could talk about that, what does that set up for the second half of the year coming out of the last five, six months of volatility?

看起來，從你們自己以及同業的業績來看，若先不考慮Yazoo City的一些較低出貨量，第二季氮肥市場有點像是買方的「假期」，而我們也都知道本季大宗商品價格與氮肥價格的走勢：尿素、戰爭爆發，然後價格下滑。我想請你談談這點，過去五、六個月的波動之後，這對下半年會形成什麼樣的局面？

Yeah, interesting view, Joel. And I think that did happen in different places around the world. As prices escalated, especially in April and May, you definitely had a pullback in South America, Central and South America, where the necessity to purchase, it's really to put into inventory because applications are further later in the year specific to the big applications in Brazil.

是的，Joel，這個觀點很有意思。我認為這確實在全球不同地區都有發生。隨著價格上升，特別是在4月和5月，你確實看到南美、中美與南美出現回落；那裡的採購需求主要是為了補庫存，因為施用時間更偏向於一年中較後段，尤其是巴西的大宗施用季更晚。

But you also had pullbacks from Australia, from Southeast Asia. And the Northern Hemisphere was completing the application season. We did see some movement in North America, as I mentioned in my comments, with movements amongst products with additional urea. So we pivoted and produced more urea as well as DEF and that limited a little bit to what our UAN availability was.

但你也看到澳洲、東南亞的回落。而北半球則是在完成施用季。如我在評論中提到的，我們確實看到北美有一些變化，產品之間出現移轉，尿素的比重增加。因此我們也做了調整，轉而生產更多尿素以及DEF（柴油排氣液），這也使得我們的UAN（尿素銨溶液）供應量略受限制。

But I think overall, prices did impact some places where you could defer demand, and we saw that happen. And we see a little bit, I would say, as the data is coming in with a possible small cut in consumption in North America, but not as big as relative to the other nutrients.

但我認為整體而言，價格確實影響了一些可以延後需求的地區，我們也看到這種情況發生。而且隨著數據陸續進來，我會說北美的消費量可能會有小幅下修，但相較於其他養分（肥料）而言，幅度沒有那麼大。

And in the second half, we're bullish on the second half. When you look at what we've put together with our UAN fill program, the team did a great job of working with our customers, organizing that, and getting it executed well when the average price on that is probably close to $300 and where our program extends into Q4.

至於下半年，我們對下半年偏多。看看我們所建立的UAN補庫計畫（fill program），團隊在與客戶合作、組織安排並順利執行方面做得非常好；該計畫的平均價格大概接近300美元，而且我們的計畫會延伸到第四季。

And so good solid demand, good movement. We're already seeing that. And as I mentioned in my prepared remarks about the fall ammonia season with a very good uptake for that. And we're just now positioning product at our terminals to serve that demand in November. And so when we look at where we are in the ag cycle, where we are with pricing and the customer uptake on the retail wholesale side for us, which we know has been pushed down into the farmer, we see good positive traction through 2027.

因此需求穩健、出貨順暢。我們已經開始看到這點。而且如我在事先準備的發言中提到的，秋季氨肥季的吸收情況非常好。我們現在也正在把產品布置到我們的終端，以服務11月的需求。所以當我們看農業循環所處的位置、價格水準，以及我們在零售與批發端看到的客戶承接（我們知道這些已經往下傳導到農民端），我們看到到2027年都有良好且正向的動能。

Lucas Beaumont, UBS.

Lucas Beaumont，瑞銀（UBS）。

Follow up on the outlook there. I mean, I guess, just given kind of the soft demand here in the second quarter like a more compressed kind of time frame for deliveries in the second half. We've got the still impacted global supply issues and like now increasing cost care support as well from European gas.

就剛才的展望追問一下。我的意思是，考量第二季需求偏弱，導致下半年交付時間更為壓縮。我們仍面臨受影響的全球供應問題，而且歐洲天然氣也使成本支撐上升。

So I guess just how do you see the setup there for pricing as we move into the fall and the spring? Is there a point here where the market's going to rapidly tighten and expose low inventory levels as demand backs up? And I guess when do you think that would be timing-wise? And is that setting us up for like much higher in-season US premiums again coming up?

所以我想問，隨著我們進入秋季與春季，你怎麼看價格的格局？市場是否會在某個時間點迅速收緊，當需求回補時暴露出偏低的庫存水位？你認為時間點大概會在何時？這是否會讓我們再次面臨美國旺季期間大幅走高的溢價？

Yeah. Lucas, I think -- this is Bert. And I think -- this is Bert. Regarding the soft Q2 demand and the deferrals that I mentioned in the Southern Hemisphere, we do believe that's going to catch up, and you're seeing that in India with the most recent tender. We anticipate India to be an import demand of 9 to 10 million tonnes, which is over what they were last year.

是的。Lucas，我想——我是Bert。我想——我是Bert。關於第二季需求偏弱，以及我提到南半球的延後採購，我們確實相信這些需求會追上來；你在印度最近一次招標中已經看到這點。我們預期印度的進口需求會在900萬到1,000萬噸，將高於去年。

We're seeing positive movement in South America. And some -- I expect to see some grain movements, some grain pricing movements, which will incentivize additional consumption. But you're right, the compressed deliveries is just -- it's going to be a poor lineup for some of these folks.

我們看到南美有正向的動能。而且——我預期會看到一些穀物流動與穀物價格的變化，這將激勵更多的用量。但你說得對，交付時間被壓縮——對其中一些人來說，排船/排程會很不理想。

But the values have come back down to attractive levels. And as I think lower pricing will incent demand. And so -- but you're right, the EU gas structure is at a disadvantage with $18 to $20 gas at a differential to the world makes European operations constrained that we believe. And so probably a higher level of imports there.

但價格已回落到具吸引力的水準。而且我認為較低的價格會刺激需求。不過你也說得對，歐盟的天然氣成本結構處於劣勢；以18到20美元的天然氣、相對全球的價差，會使我們認為歐洲的營運受限。因此那裡的進口量可能會提高。

And so with where we are in the ag cycle with pricing for the feed cranes and the consumption of nitrogen, we're constructive for the back half of this year as well as 2027. And I do think there will be some tight pricing to come. When you look at -- we still lost 5 million tonnes from the Middle East or from those countries that were unable to get LNG. We're seeing a little bit of movement out of China for exports to replace some of that, but that's probably in the 5 million to 6 million-tonne range, so kind of a net zero. And then with those places that are constrained with LNG or cannot afford. You'll see probably some production cutbacks. So balance on balance, we see a tight market through next year.

因此，從農業循環的位置、飼料穀物的定價，以及氮肥的消費來看，我們對今年下半年以及2027年都抱持建設性看法。我也確實認為接下來會出現一些偏緊的定價。你看——我們仍然少了來自中東、或那些無法取得LNG的國家約500萬噸的供給。我們看到中國有一些出口動能來補上部分缺口，但大概在500萬到600萬噸的範圍，因此大致上是淨值為零。然後在那些受LNG限制或負擔不起的地區，你可能會看到一些減產。所以綜合來看，我們認為市場會一路偏緊到明年。

And I think, Bert talked about just what's happening in Europe, as we see those prices come down, but not the feedstock cost of that come down, you'll probably see more constraints on that as we've seen over the years where we're seeing curtailments and shutdowns occur. But on top of that, it's probably the one area we don't know is really what happens in the Gulf area.

我想，Bert談到歐洲正在發生的事：即便我們看到那邊的價格下來，但其原料成本並沒有同步下降，你可能會看到更多限制；就像過去幾年一樣，我們看到減產與停工發生。但除此之外，可能有一個我們不確定的領域，就是墨西哥灣地區究竟會發生什麼。

As Bert mentioned, that's a significant amount of volume that still needs to supply the world here. And if you're seeing curtailments in Europe and still some on and off again stuff in the Gulf area, that's really what's going to determine pricing from that. Volume wise, as you mentioned, I think we feel very strong about what we're seeing.

如Bert提到的，那仍是一個需要供應全球的相當可觀的量。如果你看到歐洲減產，而墨西哥灣地區仍有一些時開時停的狀況，那將真正決定價格走向。就量的角度而言，如你所說，我想我們對目前看到的情況非常有信心。

Great. And then I guess just on Yazoo City. So I mean the repairs have sort of been pushed back a little bit into the first half of '27, so I was just wondering kind of what the sort of swing factors there are in terms of sort of hitting the timeline, entering the share on the business interruption insurance that are there in terms of like the income and cost coverage? And just will you -- are you looking to do anything different at the site sort of with the rebuild that could sort of deliver benefits to you after it's finished?

了解。另外想問Yazoo City。修復似乎又往後推了一點到2027年上半年；我想了解一下，影響能否如期達成時程的關鍵變數有哪些？以及在營業中斷保險方面，關於收入與成本理賠/保障的分攤（share）條款是怎麼運作的？還有，你們是否打算在該廠的重建上做一些不同的安排，讓完工後能為你們帶來額外效益？

Okay. I'll take -- this is Chris. I'll take some of the first parts of that question and then turn the insurance discussion over to Andrew here. But I think the biggest part is, we've gotten more information when we put out that we thought it would be late 2026, that was preliminary information on what needed to be done with a particular site and what the procurement timelines would be.

好的。我先回答——我是 Chris。我會先回答這個問題的前半部分，然後把保險相關的討論交給 Andrew。但我認為最大的一點是，當我們對外表示我們認為會是 2026 年底時，我們後來取得了更多資訊；那只是初步資訊，關於某個特定場址需要做哪些工作，以及採購時程會是什麼。

As we've seen with a lot of projects globally here, you are seeing procurement timelines extend some and that was primarily for electrical gear. And that's why we've moved it into the first half of next year from a timing standpoint, just as we've gained more information and better insight into that. Related to the site itself, we are changing how that site is going to be configured.

如同我們在全球許多專案上看到的，你會看到採購時程有所拉長，而這主要是針對電氣設備。也因此，從時程角度來看，隨著我們掌握更多資訊並對此有更好的洞察，我們把它移到明年上半年。就場址本身而言，我們正在改變該場址的配置方式。

We will no longer be pulling ammonium nitrate down there. We’ll be doing ammonium nitrate solution along with ammonia and DEF down there. And really, what we're building out in that particular location is probably increased flexibility, both from an operational and a logistics standpoint, where we'll have a broader customer base that we can start to supply throughout the years here.

我們將不再把硝酸銨運到那裡。我們會在那裡處理硝酸銨溶液，並搭配氨以及 DEF。而我們在那個地點實際上要建置的，是更高的彈性——無論在營運或物流角度——讓我們能在未來幾年開始供應更廣泛的客戶群。

So I think we're excited about what the opportunities and what we're changing at that particular site to make it a more sustainable site long term. So I'll turn it over to Andrew now to talk through some of the insurance side of it.

所以我想我們對於這些機會、以及我們在該場址所做的改變感到很興奮，因為這能讓它長期成為更具永續性的場址。接下來我把時間交給 Andrew，請他說明一些保險面的內容。

So I'll give a little bit of color on kind of three buckets, accounting, I would say the insurance piece and a little bit of how to think about capital. From an accounting standpoint, in Q4 of last year, we recorded a $25 million impairment on machinery and equipment. And then you'll see or have seen in Q2, we took another further impairment of $23 million for equipment we will no longer be able to use. And so total, that's just shy of $50 million of impairments that we've taken.

我會就三個面向補充一些細節：會計、我會說是保險的部分，以及如何看待資本支出的一點說明。從會計角度來看，去年第四季我們對機器與設備認列了 2,500 萬美元的減損。然後你會看到或已在第二季看到，我們又對將無法再使用的設備進一步認列了 2,300 萬美元的減損。因此合計下來，我們認列的減損總額接近 5,000 萬美元。

On the insurance recovery to date, it's been about $75 million. We had $25 million of property damage that we recorded in Q1 and received in Q2, then we've had $50 million of business interruption insurance. When you look at it to date, it's been about a 2:1 ratio. Longer term, it will probably play out more like a 3:1 ratio. That business interruption insurance covers us for about 18 months as you look at that.

截至目前，保險理賠回收約為 7,500 萬美元。我們在第一季認列了 2,500 萬美元的財產損失理賠，並在第二季收到；另外我們也有 5,000 萬美元的營業中斷保險理賠。就目前來看，大約是 2:1 的比例。長期來看，可能會更接近 3:1 的比例。以營業中斷保險而言，保障期間約為 18 個月。

Now you will note, I just want to make sure this is clear. We are not included in our capital guidance and assumption for Yazoo City, and there's kind of two fundamental reasons. One, we expect the insurance recovery to offset that capital build cost; and two, the timing is dynamic. When you look at the timing of the capital between the back half of this year and into first half of next year, it will be dynamic and the insurance recovery is going to be dynamic. So when you look at that over a longer time frame, they will offset each other, but that's why we're not specifically guiding that right now.

另外你會注意到——我想確保這點很清楚。我們在資本支出指引中並未納入 Yazoo City 的部分，主要有兩個根本原因。第一，我們預期保險理賠回收將抵銷該資本建置成本；第二，時點具有動態性。當你看今年下半年到明年上半年之間的資本支出時點，它會是動態的，而保險理賠回收也會是動態的。所以從較長時間框架來看，它們會彼此抵銷，但這就是為什麼我們目前不針對此做具體指引。

Benjamin Theurer, Barclays.

Benjamin Theurer，Barclays。

This is Rahi on for Ben. Maybe on S&D, are you seeing any impact from the extra Texas capacity this year, like (inaudible) ammonia, Woodside? Or is this just largely offsetting Trinidad volumes? And many long or medium or long term, how do you expect this to affect supply and demand once the impact of [war on Iran] settled down?

我是代 Ben 提問的 Rahi。想請教供需（S&D）方面，今年德州新增產能是否帶來任何影響，例如（聽不清）氨、Woodside？還是這主要只是抵銷了千里達的供給量？另外在中期或長期，一旦 [war on Iran] 的影響趨於平息，你們預期這會如何影響供需？

When you look at the Texas plants, there has been a long lead to their full production. And I don't think they're still at full production. And so those tonnes have been absorbed. They've been moving around the world. They've had some contracts. And now with Yara purchasing the Gulf Coast plant, I assume a lot of that product will go to Europe, offsetting production cutbacks.

就德州的工廠而言，它們達到滿產有一段很長的爬坡期。而且我認為它們目前仍未達到滿產。因此這些噸數已被市場吸收。它們被運往世界各地。也有一些合約在身。而現在 Yara 收購了墨西哥灣沿岸的工廠，我推測相當一部分產品會流向歐洲，以抵銷當地的減產。

But you're correct. There have been offsets throughout the world as Trinidad is one, that have taken tonnage off of market. There has also -- on the demand side, there's also been some negative impacts with, as you've heard from the phosphate producers with their cutbacks due to limited supply of sulfur and sulfuric acid that has limited phosphate production, which therefore has limited their ability to consume more ammonia.

不過你說得沒錯。全球各地確實有一些抵銷因素，其中千里達就是一個例子，已將部分噸數從市場上移除。另外——在需求端，也出現了一些負面影響；正如你從磷酸鹽生產商那裡聽到的，由於硫與硫酸供應有限而減產，限制了磷酸鹽產量，進而限制了他們消耗更多氨的能力。

So the market has come off the highs of Q2 and is today balanced in the $600 to $700 range, depending on destinations. But we see these two plants, the Gulf Coast plant and the Woodside plant, both coming up to full production, and it will be absorbed into the market.

因此市場已從第二季的高點回落，目前依目的地不同，大致在 600 到 700 美元區間達到平衡。但我們看到這兩座工廠——墨西哥灣沿岸工廠與 Woodside 工廠——都在提升至滿產，而這些供給將會被市場吸收。

And I think longer term, we've talked about this that the global S&D is tightening, independent of what was happening in the Gulf during this particular time frame. And if you look at slate of new projects that are projected to come online between now and 2029 or 2030, there's just not enough to meet demand. And if there were some sort of resolution in the Gulf, as Bert mentioned, you're going to have other demand pieces that will grow because you can have sulfur, some more phosphate there. So we still think that there is just very much a tightening that continues to go on between now and the end of the decade in the nitrogen market here.

而我認為從更長期來看，我們一直在談的是：全球供需正在收緊，這與這段期間墨西哥灣發生的事情無關。如果你看現在到 2029 或 2030 年預計投產的新專案清單，供給量不足以滿足需求。而且如果墨西哥灣局勢出現某種解決方案，如同 Bert 提到的，你會看到其他需求面也會成長，因為硫、以及更多的磷酸鹽供應可能回來。所以我們仍然認為，氮肥市場在現在到本十年末之間，供需收緊的趨勢會持續非常明顯。

Got it. And just a quick follow-up for Yazoo. Can you just walk us through the thought process of that you're in AN, UAN, et cetera? Why not just -- you do urea given the margin structure has been superior in the last 10 years? That should be it from us.

了解。另外針對 Yazoo 的一個快速追問。你能否帶我們走一遍你們的思考脈絡：你們做 AN、UAN 等等。為什麼不乾脆——考量過去 10 年的利潤結構，尿素的表現更好——改做尿素？我們這邊就這些。

Yeah. From a urea standpoint, you're right. Urea is really the catalyst as to why we're going to see the global nitrogen market get tighter. So there are upgrade projects that we're looking at, one of which is even for DEF, that's a urea project at Courtright.

好的。就尿素而言，你說得對。尿素確實是我們認為全球氮肥市場將趨於更緊的主要催化因素。因此我們正在評估一些升級專案，其中之一甚至是 DEF 的專案——那是在 Courtright 的尿素專案。

As you look at Yazoo City, the urea plant there would have to be a full-blown new urea plant, world scale plant there. And we look at what we have opportunity wise that Bert's commercial team has put together both from an ANS, UAN, and DEF that it wouldn't really make sense to put in that type of capital at that particular site.

但如果看 Yazoo City，那裡的尿素裝置將必須是全新、完整的新建尿素廠，且是世界級規模的工廠。而我們評估 Bert 的商務團隊所整理出的機會，包含 ANS、UAN 與 DEF 方面，在那個場址投入那種規模的資本並不太合理。

I also think when you look at how we're configured and structured asset wise and our distribution of those assets and the modes and how we move the product through rail, truck, barge, vessel, or whatever pipeline, Yazoo is a unique asset in that it's our main -- or only ANS plant. But as we work through this new structure, we're going to be improving the load-outs, improving capabilities, and having different access to different modes, and that will give even more flexibility to Yazoo City.

我也認為，當你看我們的資產配置與結構、這些資產的分布，以及我們透過鐵路、卡車、駁船、船舶或任何管線等方式運輸產品的模式，Yazoo 是一項獨特資產，因為它是我們主要——或唯一——的 ANS 工廠。但隨著我們推進這個新架構，我們將改善裝載出貨（load-outs）、提升能力，並取得不同運輸模式的更多接入，這將為 Yazoo City 帶來更高的彈性。

Kristen Owen, Oppenheimer.

Kristen Owen，Oppenheimer。

So I wanted to follow up on capital allocation. This is clearly an e strategy, not an or just given the strong cash flow you've generated thus far. You raised the dividend, you're increasing the buybacks and you're coming into peak CapEx period. But the one that I actually really wanted to ask about is this FEED study on DEF. So can you just give us a little bit of background here how you're thinking about the demand and economics for, say, industrial applications versus over-the-road applications? I know we've got some EPA changes coming up. So just a little bit of color on the DEF study.

所以我想追問一下資本配置。鑑於你們迄今為止產生的強勁現金流，這顯然是「並且（and）」的策略，而不是「或（or）」。你們提高了股利、增加了庫藏股回購，而且正進入資本支出高峰期。但我真正想問的是這個關於 DEF 的 FEED 研究。你們能否稍微說明一下背景：你們如何看待例如工業應用相較於公路運輸（over-the-road）應用的需求與經濟性？我知道 EPA 也即將有一些變更。所以想請你們就 DEF 研究補充一些說明。

Yeah. So I'll let Bert start on the market and what we see that's interesting us in the market in the different areas where it is. And then I'll speak a little bit more specific to the project itself.

好的。我先請 Bert 談談市場，以及我們在不同領域看到哪些有趣、吸引我們的地方。接著我再更具體談一下這個專案本身。

DEF has been an interesting product for us and that it's just about 15 years old in terms of how long DEF has been an active part of our portfolio, and we produce it at different plants, but the growth from basically 0 to today, 2.2 million tonnes of -- and this is a urea equivalent tonnes. So in effect, two world-scale plants of urea are now being consumed in North America, where that just didn't exist 15 years ago.

DEF 對我們來說一直是個有趣的產品；就 DEF 作為我們產品組合中活躍的一部分而言，大約只有 15 年歷史。我們在不同工廠生產它，但需求成長基本上是從 0 成長到今天的 220 萬噸——而這是以尿素當量噸計。也就是說，北美現在消耗的尿素量相當於兩座世界級尿素工廠的產能，而在 15 年前這根本不存在。

And when you look at the growth of demand as new power units come into to service and the dosing rate has increased from a very low level 15 years ago to all 0 before that, but -- and as these power units get replaced and an average power unit can last 9 to 11 years. And so the replacement rate is slow, but we see that taking place.

而當你觀察需求成長，隨著新的動力單元投入使用，且添加（dosing）比率從 15 年前非常低的水準提高——在那之前甚至是 0——同時這些動力單元逐步汰換；一個動力單元平均可使用 9 到 11 年。因此汰換速度很慢，但我們確實看到這正在發生。

And with the additional dosing rate continuing to increase for better efficiency on less miles per gallon as well as emissions control, we see this market by the early part of next decade, 2030, 2031, hitting 3 million tonnes or over. And so a lot of growth opportunity. And again, where we're positioned asset-wise, Courtright makes a lot of sense to serve the East Coast market, which is a heavy demand market.

隨著添加比率持續提高，以在每加侖行駛里程更少的情況下提升效率，同時加強排放控制，我們預期到下個十年初期、也就是 2030、2031 年左右，這個市場將達到 300 萬噸或以上。因此成長機會很大。再者，就我們的資產布局而言，Courtright 非常適合服務東岸市場，而那是一個需求很重的市場。

The one thing I would add is this isn't really our thoughts on the growth of DEF and in isolation. Essentially, we worked with OEM engine manufacturers all the way down to the retail side to make certain that we're aligned as to the growth that we see going forward. And I think all parties are seeing the same thing there. As Bert mentioned, Courtright provides a unique opportunity for us.

我想補充的是，我們並不是孤立地看待 DEF 的成長。基本上，我們與 OEM 引擎製造商一路到零售端合作，以確保我們對未來看到的成長趨勢是一致的。我認為各方在這點上看到的情況都相同。如 Bert 所提到，Courtright 對我們而言提供了一個獨特的機會。

Today, Courtright has a net long position in ammonia that is a little bit logistically constrained both by what rail line it's on, and therefore, having a lower-margin ammonia that comes out of that particular plant. And because it's such a low-margin ammonia that comes out of that plant, it's providing a better opportunity to put in an upgrade unit there. And the rail line, it happens to be on, can feed the East Coast, the Mid-Atlantic area better than any of our other sites that are producing DEF today.

目前，Courtright 在氨方面是淨長部位（net long），但在物流上有些受限，原因包括它所處的鐵路線，因此該廠產出的氨毛利較低。也正因為那座廠產出的氨屬於低毛利，反而提供了在那裡導入升級單元的更好機會。而且它所在的鐵路線，恰好能比我們其他目前生產 DEF 的據點，更有效地供應東岸與中大西洋地區。

So as we look at this, provided what comes out of the engineering and design study from a capital cost, but we feel that this is going to be a project that is not only going to grow into a market that is an industrial ratable market, very strong for us, but it's additionally something that's going to be well above our cost of capital just given the configuration of that site today.

因此我們在評估時，將取決於工程與設計研究得出的資本成本；但我們認為，這個專案不僅能切入一個對我們非常強勁、且屬於工業端可按比例穩定供應（industrial ratable）的市場來實現成長，此外，考量該據點目前的配置，這個專案的報酬也將顯著高於我們的資本成本。

My follow-up (inaudible) on, your expectations for mix in the back half of the year, just given what you said about the fill programs, what fall application looks like? Obviously, the economics moved around quite a bit here in Q2, but just how you're thinking about mix of product in the back half of the year would be helpful.

我追問一下（聽不清），關於你們對今年下半年的產品組合（mix）的預期，考量你們提到的補庫計畫（fill programs），以及秋季施用（fall application）會是什麼樣子？顯然第二季的經濟性波動很大，但如果能說明一下你們如何看待下半年產品組合，會很有幫助。

Yeah, I would say we're looking at a normal slate in terms of the economics. As we look product by product to where the economic advantage is against our order book, which is a very positive order book, I would anticipate a normal slate for the back half. We're going to work on our inventory levels, which built up during Q2. I think that was one of the issues on the write-up was that we had a limited volume on UAN, but what we did was move more of that to urea and DEF in Q2. And any inventory we have, we expect to disgorge in the back half of the year and run at normal rates.

好的，我會說我們就經濟性而言，預期會是正常的產品配置。我們逐一檢視各產品，對照我們的訂單簿（order book）來看哪裡有經濟優勢；而我們的訂單簿非常正向，因此我預期下半年會是正常的配置。我們也會著手處理庫存水位，因為第二季庫存有所累積。我想那也是報告中提到的問題之一：我們在 UAN 的量比較有限，但我們在第二季把更多量轉到尿素與 DEF。而我們持有的任何庫存，預期會在下半年釋出，並以正常負荷運轉。

Christopher Parkinson, Wolfe.

Christopher Parkinson，Wolfe。

Totally understand the second half outlook in terms of steady demand, a lot of lost tonnage out of Copco as well as some of the Iranian tonnage to see the market tight for the foreseeable future. But at the same time, I'm curious on your interpretation of the US and coastal benchmarks typically trading at a discount. It seems like the international opportunities, especially in the third quarter, should have been a little bit better. It should be at least improving in terms of that prospective market tightness. So I'd love to get your perspective across both ammonia and downstream in terms of how you see the dynamics playing out just in terms of like the ripple effects from lack of production in the first quarter or two?

完全理解你們對下半年的展望：需求穩健，Copco 有大量減產噸數，加上部分伊朗噸數缺口，使得市場在可預見的未來都偏緊。但同時，我也想了解你們如何解讀美國與沿海基準價通常以折價交易的情況。看起來國際市場機會，尤其在第三季，應該會更好一些。至少在這種潛在供給偏緊的情況下，應該會有所改善。所以我想請你們從氨以及下游產品兩方面談談，你們如何看待這些動態的演變——例如第一、第二季產量不足所帶來的連鎖效應（ripple effects）？

Yeah. So when you look at what the tonnage that was lost, urea and ammonia out of the Gulf as well as tonnage lost due to lack of LNG to those countries or companies that rely on LNG to produce, it's substantial. And so back to how do you backfill that supply? And some of it is through, I think, the Chinese tonnes that everybody is expecting to come out as well as just solid operating rates.

好的。當你看那些流失的噸數——墨西哥灣地區的尿素與氨的減量，以及因 LNG 不足而導致那些依賴 LNG 生產的國家或公司減產——規模相當可觀。所以回到問題：要如何補上這些供給缺口？其中一部分，我認為會來自大家預期將釋出的中國噸數，以及整體穩健的開工率。

And in terms of trading values and looking into what markets we would move our tonnes to, you mentioned that we're trading at a discount in NOLA, we are. And so you've seen us build an export book on urea that's probably higher than normal.

至於交易價格與我們會把噸數移往哪些市場，你提到我們在 NOLA 以折價交易，確實如此。因此你也看到我們建立了尿素的出口訂單簿（export book），規模可能高於正常水準。

And so when I look at where these benchmarks go and where we are in terms of pricing for the world, I think you're going to see a market that improves in terms -- is tight and will tighten as this demand has been deferred, it comes back into has purchased and moved.

所以當我看這些基準價的走勢，以及我們相對於全球的定價位置時，我認為你會看到市場在改善——市場目前偏緊，且會進一步收緊；因為先前被遞延的需求，將回來進行採購並完成運輸。

Got it. And just as a quick follow-up to that, I'd love to hear your perspective that in the US alone, and I apologize if I'm missing one, you've seen basically seven cancellations in terms of low carbon or blue ammonia over the last several quarters and perhaps a project or two on technical lifelines.

了解。再快速追問一下：我想聽聽你們的看法——僅在美國，我若沒漏掉的話，過去幾季你們已經看到大概七個低碳或藍氨（blue ammonia）專案取消，另外可能還有一兩個專案在技術生命線上（technical lifelines）。

Chris, I'd love to hear your perspective on just kind of your intermediate longer-term outlook. It also seems like the demand side of it has been a little bit more quiet versus some positive events back in '25. I'd love to just hear your dynamics in terms of market development, your position, how you're thinking about the overall Blue Point complex, and any incremental opportunities you see fit based on the fact that a lot of others have given up?

Chris，我想聽聽你對中期到較長期展望的看法。需求端似乎也相對安靜一些，對比 25 年時的一些正面事件。我想請你談談市場開發的動態、你們的定位、你們如何看待整體 Blue Point 複合園區（complex），以及基於許多其他人已經放棄的情況下，你們是否看到任何合適的增量機會？

Yes. And I think to start with, Chris, the ones that have given up our participants that were not necessarily in the market to begin with, okay? So if we go back a few years ago, I've said this before, there was like 107 green and blue plants announced, of which I think there's four in construction today, of which ours is one of them. So there is a lot of hype about what clean energy was going to be. Our analysis never showed more than we were thinking, maybe seven of that 107 would be built.

是的。而且我認為先從這點開始，Chris，那些已經退出的參與者，原本不一定一開始就在市場裡，好嗎？所以如果我們回到幾年前，我以前也說過，當時大概宣布了107座綠氨與藍氨工廠，其中我認為目前只有四座在建，而我們的是其中之一。所以當時對清潔能源將會如何發展有很多炒作與熱度。我們的分析從未顯示會超過——我們當時想，也許那107座裡只有7座會真的建成。

So I think we've been more pragmatic in this. As you look at that clean-energy market, it's really similar to the DEF market that Bert mentioned? The million tonnes that will be going both to JERA and Mitsui, our partners, is the million tonnes of incremental demand that didn't exist just a few years ago. And we're continuing to see some growth opportunities in Japan and other pieces of Asia, but it's going to be at a slower pace than what I think the original hype was on that.

所以我認為我們在這方面一直更務實。當你看清潔能源市場時，它其實很像Bert提到的DEF市場？將會供應給JERA與三井（我們的合作夥伴）的那100萬噸，是幾年前根本不存在的新增需求100萬噸。而且我們持續在日本以及亞洲其他地區看到一些成長機會，但步調會比我認為當初的炒作所暗示的更慢。

What benefits us is whether we have a low carbon tonne or a conventional tonne. We produce it the same way, we store it the same way, we transport it the same way. So all those operational efficiencies that we have as an organization to lower our cost per tonne on new construction and also the distribution of it reside with us and accrue to us that others don't have. And I think that's why you're seeing us continue to be bullish on both Blue Point and maybe even a Blue Point 2 is because of those assets and really lights up that ability we have to move that product and to produce that product.

對我們有利的是，不論是低碳的一噸，或是傳統的一噸。我們用同樣的方式生產、同樣的方式儲存、同樣的方式運輸。因此，我們作為一個組織在新建產能以及其分銷上，能把每噸成本降下來的所有營運效率，都由我們掌握並由我們享有，這是其他人沒有的。我想這也是為什麼你看到我們仍然對Blue Point、甚至可能的Blue Point 2保持樂觀，因為有這些資產，真正點亮了我們搬運與生產該產品的能力。

Well, I would say low carbon or not, or gray or conventional however you want to define it, we are competitive globally. And even with the premium, we're competitive globally, and we're proving that by our contracts that are in place and what we're sending to different places today and that will only grow. And I do believe that the low carbon value, especially in Europe, is going to continue to be valued and grow, and that demand will grow as well.

嗯，我會說不論是否低碳，或是灰氨或傳統氨——不管你想怎麼定義——我們在全球都具競爭力。而且即便加上溢價，我們在全球仍具競爭力；我們也透過已簽訂的合約、以及我們今天正運往不同地區的產品來證明這點，而且這只會持續成長。我也確實相信低碳價值，特別是在歐洲，將會持續被重視並成長，而需求也會隨之成長。

Vincent Andrews, Morgan Stanley.

Vincent Andrews，摩根士丹利。

Chris, I wanted to ask you on the dividend, maybe separately on another part of capital allocation. Just what your thought process is? Obviously, as the share count comes down, you can pay a higher dividend without spending more money. So is that just the plan going forward? And should we be anticipating maybe getting to more annual dividend increases versus I think the last one was maybe '23.

Chris，我想問你關於股利，另外也想分開問資本配置的另一部分。你們的思考流程是什麼？顯然，隨著流通股數下降，你可以在不多花錢的情況下支付更高的股利。所以這就是未來的計畫嗎？而我們是否應該預期會有更偏向每年調升股利？我記得上一次可能是在'23。

And then separately, from an M&A perspective, in the US, obviously, there's a limited number of assets, but one just traded. Do you still have scope from a regulatory perspective where you think if other things became available you would still look at that? Or should we be thinking about volume growth from here being more along the DEF or as you just mentioned, Blue Point 2?

另外，從併購（M&A）的角度來看，在美國顯然資產數量有限，但最近有一項資產剛完成交易。從監管角度，你們是否仍有空間——也就是如果未來有其他標的可得，你們仍會考慮？或者我們應該把未來的量成長更多地看作是沿著DEF，或如你剛提到的Blue Point 2？

Yeah. So I'll just start with the dividend part and then maybe -- actually, let me start with the second question first, and then I'll go to the dividend and pass it over to Andrew as well. But on the M&A scope, so we did see the Gulf Coast ammonia plant transfer to Yars in the process of that. We do believe that we still have some room from an M&A scope.

是的。我先談股利那部分——不過其實，讓我先回答第二個問題，然後再回到股利，並也交給Andrew補充。關於併購的空間，我們確實看到墨西哥灣沿岸的氨工廠正在轉讓給Yars的過程。我們確實相信在併購範圍上仍有一些空間。

I mean, I think if anything, what CF has demonstrated just based on the prior answer I had given is that assets in our hands produce more production volume. Whether we go back to what we did when we acquired Terra back in the day with the investments we made, our best practice teams. We're just looking recently at Waggaman, where we've increased that, consistent production there, but by over 30%. So our ability to increase volume within a market, I think, is a key to allowing us to continue to do particular assets acquisition.

我的意思是，我想如果說CF已經證明了什麼——就像我前面那個回答——那就是資產在我們手上能產出更多的產量。不論回到當年我們收購Terra時所做的投資、我們的最佳實務團隊。我們最近也在看Waggaman，我們把那裡的穩定產量提高了超過30%。所以我認為，我們在市場內提升產量的能力，是讓我們能持續進行特定資產收購的關鍵。

Now as we look at those acquisitions, we want to be someplace that isn't in the third quartile or someplace out that, from an operations standpoint, could be constrained as time goes on. We like our low-cost position. We like the low cost, low risk that North America from a geopolitical standpoint brings. So that's primarily where we're going to focus going forward, both organic and inorganic there. From the dividend before I turn it over to Andrew to get into some of the specifics.

現在，當我們看這些收購時，我們希望標的是不在第三四分位、也不是那種從營運角度看，隨著時間推移可能會受限的地方。我們喜歡我們的低成本定位。我們也喜歡北美在地緣政治角度帶來的低成本、低風險。所以未來我們主要會把重點放在那裡，無論是有機成長或非有機成長。至於股利，在我把話交給Andrew談一些細節之前。

I think one of the underlying reasons is just our faith in where we see our mid-cycle and our free cash flow generation, not just this current year or next year, but over the entire cycle. We did see a stronger that we've been very focused on reducing fixed charges, of which dividends are one of them. But I think as we're seeing that free cash flow conversion and generation goes up, just makes us more confident in increasing it as time goes on there.

我認為其中一個根本原因，是我們對於我們所看到的中周期水準以及自由現金流產生能力的信心——不只是今年或明年，而是整個周期。我們確實看到更強的——我們一直非常專注於降低固定支出，其中股利就是其中之一。但我認為，隨著我們看到自由現金流的轉換與產生能力提升，這只會讓我們更有信心隨時間推進而提高股利。

Yeah. Hi, this is Andrew. The piece that I would share is our overall strategy on capital allocation has not changed. The hierarchy of driving strategic growth, share repurchases, and dividend, when you think about the dividend, I think of it as two fundamental principles. One, we want to be competitive with the marketplace. So the increase that we did, look at it from a 1.8% yield to 2.1% compared to the S&P of 1.1%. The second principle what I would share is, we're conscious of what we spend in absolute.

是的。大家好，我是Andrew。我想分享的是，我們整體的資本配置策略並沒有改變。當你思考股利時，我們的優先順序是推動策略性成長、股票回購、以及股利；而股利我會用兩個基本原則來看。第一，我們希望在市場上具競爭力。所以我們做的那次調升，你可以把它看作殖利率從1.8%提高到2.1%，相較於標普的1.1%。第二個原則我想分享的是，我們也會留意我們在絕對金額上花了多少。

And you can look and you can probably see there's a range that we tend to target. It's not a hard and fast rule, but it's a range, and that range allows us to fuel growth into the top of our pyramid on strategic growth. So those kind of principles that we apply as we look through it.

你可以看得出來，我們大概會鎖定一個區間。這不是硬性規則，但確實是一個區間，而這個區間讓我們能為金字塔頂端的策略性成長提供燃料。所以這些就是我們在檢視時所採用的原則。

But it should also be noted, as we've said in the past, we believe our shares are still incredibly undervalued. And this whole geopolitical swings that we trade off of rather than the underlying fundamentals that we see going forward, we're going to continue to be aggressive in share repurchases as our number one outlay of our capital allocation to our shareholders.

但也應該指出的是，正如我們過去所說，我們認為我們的股票仍然被嚴重低估。而我們的股價交易更多是跟著這些地緣政治的擺盪，而不是我們所看到的未來基本面；因此，我們將持續積極進行股票回購，作為我們對股東資本配置中第一順位的支出。

Andrew Wong, RBC Capital Markets.

Andrew Wong，RBC資本市場。

So just kind of following up on that last thought there, Chris. And in the presentation, too, there's a couple of slides where you highlight the valuation disconnect that you see versus some of your peers. Can you just talk about why you think that that's the case? What's driving that disconnect? And then what can you do at CF to kind of close that gap?

所以就延續你剛才那個想法，Chris。而且在簡報裡也有幾張投影片，你們強調你們看到的估值與部分同業之間的落差。你能談談你為什麼認為會是這樣嗎？是什麼在驅動這個落差？然後CF能做些什麼來縮小這個差距？

Well, what I would say that we can do to close that gap is continuing just to perform as we do at the highest level. Like I said, if you look at our free cash flow over the last six years on average is significantly higher than what we're suggesting the new mid-cycle is.

嗯，我想我們能做來縮小那個差距的，就是持續以最高水準維持我們目前的表現。就像我說的，如果你看我們過去六年的自由現金流，平均而言顯著高於我們所提出的新中期（mid-cycle）水準。

So this isn't just a one-year, two-year type of thing. So for us, it's to continue to move forward and perform as we do from an operational looking for margin enhancement, whether that be a DEF project, other utilization or debottlenecks, or whether that's organic and inorganic growth that has return profiles well above our cost of capital.

所以這不只是單一年、兩年的事情。對我們而言，就是持續向前推進，並在營運面尋求毛利提升——不論是 DEF 專案、其他產能利用或去瓶頸，或是具備報酬率遠高於我們資本成本的有機與無機成長。

One of the reasons why I personally believe we trade in this is I think people are still trading 10 years ago on CF. We've increased our production volume by almost 40%. We've reduced our share count by almost 60%. And yet people are still thinking we're this over-levered company that is doing expansion projects. We're a significantly different company today based on what our capital structure is, our free cash flow conversion, that hasn't happened by accident. That's come through very methodical.

我個人認為我們之所以被這樣交易（估值/定價），其中一個原因是我覺得大家還在用 10 年前的現金流（CF）來看我們。我們的產量已經增加了將近 40%。我們的流通股數已經減少了將近 60%。但人們仍然覺得我們是一家高槓桿、在做擴建專案的公司。以我們今天的資本結構、自由現金流轉換能力來看，我們已經是截然不同的公司，而這不是偶然發生的。這是非常有方法、很有系統地做到的。

Our SG&A and our working capital are the lowest in the industry and by the industry. I mean, basic materials, I mean, chemicals, everything. And there's almost this ignoring of that just to say, well, they're a fertilizer company, and we're going to place them against these three or four other peers, which I think is a complete mistake. And as long as our shares are undervalued, we'll continue to buy our shares back.

我們的 SG&A 和營運資金在整個產業中都是最低的，而且是跨產業來看也是如此。我是說，基礎材料、化學品，各種產業都是。但大家幾乎忽略了這點，只是說：嗯，他們是肥料公司，我們就把他們拿去跟另外三、四家同業相比——我認為這完全是錯誤的。只要我們的股價被低估，我們就會持續回購我們的股票。

I also think there's a misunderstanding of our assets and the leverage points that we have in terms of where our plants are located, the diversity of the products that we make the modes that we're able to ship, and then the terminals we're able to distribute as well as export to any country in the world.

我也認為市場對我們的資產以及我們的槓桿點有所誤解，包括我們工廠的地理位置、我們生產的產品多樣性、我們能夠運輸的方式，以及我們能夠透過碼頭進行分銷並出口到全球任何國家。

So we have all this flexibility on top of some of the lowest gas costs in the world, we are going to be a low-cost producer in a high-valued market with the best farmland in the world. And so when you put all those together, it's a unique mix that only we can satisfy and the rest of the world can't. None of our operating competitors can do that. That's why we think we should be valued differently.

因此，在擁有這些彈性之上，再加上全球最低的天然氣成本之一，我們將會是在高價值市場中的低成本生產者，而且坐擁全球最好的農地。把這些因素放在一起，這是一種只有我們能滿足、世界其他地方無法滿足的獨特組合。我們的任何營運競爭對手都做不到。這就是為什麼我們認為我們應該被以不同方式估值。

Yes. I mean as you look out -- I mean, as you can see, we're $500 million into a $2 billion program. And as we try to look at our intrinsic value and what it should be, I mean, we're looking at DCF analysis, comps, replacement value, every calculation that we do suggest that there's an opportunity there, and so we'll continue to be opportunistic as we go.

是的。我的意思是，往前看——如你所見，我們在一個 20 億美元的計畫中已經投入了 5 億美元。當我們試著評估我們的內在價值以及它應該是多少時，我們會看 DCF 分析、同業比較、重置成本等；我們做的每一種計算都顯示存在機會，因此我們會在推進過程中持續把握機會、採取機動策略。

Great. I appreciate all that. And then maybe just one on costs. When I look at COGS and OpEx like gas and G&A, it does look like it's trended up a little bit in the past couple of quarters. Can you just speak to that? Is it mostly just the Yazoo City or anything like maybe some extra turnarounds or anything like that?

很好。感謝你分享這些。接著也許問一個關於成本的問題。當我看 COGS 和 OpEx（像是天然氣和 G&A）時，過去幾個季度看起來確實有些上升。你能談談這點嗎？主要是 Yazoo City 的因素，還是像額外的歲修之類的其他原因？

Yeah. Let me give some color on costs in Q2. If you strip out the impact of volume in gas, our fixed costs were up about $75 million. And I'll do this kind of simply in illustrative way, but it'll give you the context. So let's call that $70 million for the context that I'll share. About $10 million of that was distribution and logistics, and that was probably the smaller piece of the puzzle where you saw some mode mix going from barge into rail and in the rate on rail itself has gone up a bit.

是的。我補充一些第二季成本的背景。如果把天然氣的量的影響剔除，我們的固定成本大約增加了 7,500 萬美元。我會用比較簡化、示意性的方式說明，但能讓你掌握脈絡。所以就用 7,000 萬美元來作為我接下來要分享的背景數字。其中大約 1,000 萬美元是配送與物流，這可能是你看到的較小一塊，主要是運輸方式組合從駁船轉向鐵路，而且鐵路本身的費率也上升了一些。

The other $60 million is about a [50-50] split between higher purchased ammonia costs flowing through and the rest is fixed cost absorption tied to Yazoo City being down. So that kind of gives you the three pieces that are coming through there from a COGS standpoint.

另外的 6,000 萬美元大約是 [50-50] 分成兩部分：一半是外購氨成本上升所反映出來的影響，另一半則是與 Yazoo City 停機相關的固定成本吸收不足。所以從 COGS 的角度來看，這大致就是那三個構成因素。

And I would say that purchased ammonia, obviously, we have benefits of that, that flow through the revenue line and it is providing a margin, but it does provide higher COGS during that time frame.

我會說，外購氨當然也有其好處，會反映在營收端並帶來毛利，但在那段期間確實會推高 COGS。

Additionally, one of the turnarounds we started during that time was Ammonia 6. Ammonia 6, obviously, is there -- it's almost like comparable with two plants. So the costs associated with that in the years in which we do Ammonia 6 are always going to be slightly higher from a turnaround standpoint.

另外，我們在那段期間啟動的其中一次歲修是 Ammonia 6。Ammonia 6 顯然在那裡——它幾乎相當於兩座工廠的規模。因此，在我們進行 Ammonia 6 的年份，從歲修角度來看，相關成本一向都會略高一些。

Matthew DeYoe, BOA.

Matthew DeYoe，BOA。

I just wanted to reconfirm, for CapEx on Blue Point, like what -- what's your mix on fixed versus nonfixed EPC work? And --

我只是想再確認一下，Blue Point 的資本支出（CapEx），你們固定價格與非固定價格的 EPC 工作占比大概是多少？以及--

Well, what I was going to say is essentially, when we looked at the Blue Point project, the one thing we tried to do was mitigate our overall costs related to that. And we did that in a couple of different ways. One was through our partnerships where we partnered with [Lindie] and even [Occie's] 1PointFive on the CCS unit. But additionally, even with Mitsui and JERA, where they're providing some insight and administrative benefits along with, as we go to the module yards in Asia.

嗯，我想說的是，基本上，當我們評估 Blue Point 專案時，我們嘗試做的一件事就是降低與該專案相關的整體成本。我們用幾種不同方式來做到這點。其中一個是透過合作夥伴關係，例如我們與 [Lindie] 合作，並且在 CCS 裝置上與 [Occie's] 1PointFive 合作。此外，還有與三井（Mitsui）和 JERA 的合作，他們在我們前往亞洲模組化場地（module yards）時，提供一些洞見與行政上的效益。

So I think that is one area where we look to lock down on some of those costs. What we have fixed is roughly probably about 50% of the CapEx related to that. And that is in a couple of different areas. One is in the engineering and the module yards, the other is in some of the lump-sum turnkey that we try to do on the infrastructure pieces, whether it be the tank or some of the dock and bridge work and things like that.

所以我認為那是我們用來鎖定部分成本的一個領域。我們已經固定下來的，大概約占與該專案相關 CapEx 的 50%。而這主要在幾個不同面向。一個是在工程設計與模組化場地，另一個是在我們嘗試以總價交鑰匙（lump-sum turnkey）方式處理的一些基礎設施部分，不論是儲槽，或是部分碼頭、橋梁工程等。

So we feel pretty confident about how we're managing through this. As I mentioned earlier, we have our long lead items for Blue Point purchase. So some of those things that we're seeing with extension of lead times or increases in costs related to those, we started those -- some of those critical items having contracts in place even pre-FID on the project itself.

因此，我們對於如何管理推進這件事相當有信心。如我先前提到的，我們已經採購了 Blue Point 的長交期項目。所以對於我們看到的交期延長或相關成本上升，我們在該專案本身甚至在 FID 之前，就已經針對其中一些關鍵項目把合約先行到位。

Just as a quick follow-up, I mean labor and assembly and build out, I assume that's just like impossible to fix now in the Gulf?

再快速追問一下，我是說，墨西哥灣沿岸的勞務、組裝與建置，我猜現在應該幾乎不可能固定價格了吧？

I mean the portion that will be labor in the Gulf is going to be significantly lower than what we saw when we did the expansion projects back from 2012 to 2016. And that's because a lot of the work from the modular piece is going to be done overseas.

我的意思是，在墨西哥灣沿岸需要用到的勞務占比，將會顯著低於我們在 2012 到 2016 年做擴建專案時看到的水準。那是因為模組化部分的很多工作會在海外完成。

So as a result of that, you're probably going to have maybe a third of what the labor component was compared to what we saw last time. And that does a couple of things. One, that allows you to probably get more skilled labor in there because you have a smaller headcount that you're trying to do there, but also just limits the high-cost labor that would be in the Gulf Coast right now.

因此，和上次相比，你們的勞務部分可能大概只有當時的三分之一。這會帶來幾個效果。第一，因為你需要的總人數更少，你可能反而能找到更熟練的勞工；同時也能限制目前墨西哥灣沿岸的高成本勞務暴露。

All right. I appreciate it. And if I could, Bert, I was just wondering about the underlying assumptions for 9 to 10 million tonnes in India this year because, I mean, they obviously ended last year with pretty good balances given all that buy. So I'm just kind of wondering if that 9 to 10 assumes maybe shipments from last year into this year or that's really like a back half-loaded period?

好的。感謝。如果可以的話，Bert，我只是想了解一下你們對今年印度 900 萬到 1,000 萬噸的基本假設，因為我的意思是，考量到所有那些採購，他們去年年底的結餘顯然相當不錯。所以我有點想知道，這個 900 萬到 1,000 萬是否假設了去年到今年的延後出貨，還是其實更像是下半年集中發生的期間？

If you do it on their fertilizer year, which is April through March, they had the tender for 2.5 and a tender for 1.770, so total to date is 4.27 tonnes. They just announced a tender last week for an additional 1.7. And so you can do that math. That's roughly 6 million. We expect another tender by the end of this year.

如果以他們的肥料年度來看，也就是 4 月到隔年 3 月，他們有一個 250 萬的招標，以及一個 177 萬的招標，所以截至目前合計是 427 萬噸。他們上週剛宣布了一個額外 170 萬的招標。所以你可以自己算一下。那大約是 600 萬噸。

But they also tendered twice last year, In the calendar year, once in January and once in February. And so if you go into their fertilizer year, that would extend into January through March. And they did almost 2.2 million tonnes. So when you add those all up, that gets you to 9 million to 10 million tonnes expected. And you have to remember, they were -- they are an LNG importer, and they were running it sub optimally on their domestic operations. We estimate they lost 1.5 million to 2 million tonnes of domestic production. So rolling all that up, and we're still not sure what can come out of the Straight on the forward market, I would say 9 to 10 is a pretty good estimate today.

但他們去年也招標了兩次，在曆年中，一次在 1 月、一次在 2 月。所以如果你放到他們的肥料年度，那就會延伸到 1 月到 3 月。而他們做了將近 220 萬噸。所以把這些全部加總起來，就會得到預期的 900 萬到 1,000 萬噸。而且你要記得，他們過去——他們是 LNG 進口國，且他們的國內營運是以次優方式在運轉。我們估計他們少了 150 萬到 200 萬噸的國內產量。把這些都合併考量，再加上我們仍不確定前瞻市場上從海峽（Straight）能釋出多少，我會說今天 900 萬到 1,000 萬是相當不錯的估計。

Mazahir Mammadli, Rothchild and Company Redburn.

Mazahir Mammadli，Rothchild and Company Redburn。

I just wanted to ask a follow-up on the mid-cycle EBITDA targets. What is the sort of mid- to long-term market balance is assumed in that? I'm just going to give you an example. For example, India is striving to be more self-sufficient over the medium to long term in urea. You have a number of projects that are in development that should theoretically come online by the end of the decade, and that would theoretically remove demand from the global market. Is stuff like that factored in? How should we think about it?

我想就中周期 EBITDA 目標追問一下。其中假設的中長期市場供需平衡大概是什麼樣子？我舉個例子。例如，印度在中長期正努力在尿素方面提高自給自足。你有一些正在開發中的專案，理論上應該會在本十年末之前投產，而那理論上會從全球市場移除一部分需求。像這樣的事情有納入考量嗎？我們應該如何看待？

One is, I think if you look at the overall supply growth over the next four to five years, India does have a few projects, some of which -- one of which is green that I think you have to start to put probabilities on what is the time frame in which that's going to go.

第一，我認為如果你看未來四到五年的整體供給成長，印度確實有幾個專案，其中有些——其中一個是綠地案（greenfield），我想你必須開始對其在什麼時間框架內會推進到哪一步，賦予機率。

But even with all the announced projects that are happening right now, you're going to have a deficit or an extreme tightness in the S&D balance as we see it going out through 2030.

但即使把目前所有已宣布、正在進行的專案都算進去，依我們的看法，供需平衡一路到 2030 年仍會出現缺口或極度吃緊。

Now in saying that, just because India wants to become self-sufficient and other countries as well, doesn't mean that there's not a capital cost that's incurred in order to drive and build those particular plants themselves. And if you look at it from an economic standpoint, it may make more sense to continue the import or these particular projects can be delayed.

話雖如此，僅僅因為印度想要自給自足、其他國家也一樣，並不代表為了推動並自行興建那些特定工廠不需要付出資本成本。而如果從經濟角度來看，可能繼續進口更合理，或者這些特定專案可能會延後。

So how we look at the mid-cycle is we do build in what we have in flight when we're working with engineering teams. And usually, you have a very good visibility, I would say, out five years because that's about the time it takes to build a plant. And then we start to manage that as time goes on and readdressing that.

所以我們看中周期的方式是：在與工程團隊合作時，我們會把正在推進中的專案納入模型。而通常我會說，你對未來五年的能見度非常高，因為建一座工廠大概就需要那麼久。然後隨著時間推進，我們再去管理並重新檢視調整。

But today, really, as you look at the next few years, there's some plants -- there's a plant in Qatar, there's one in UAE, there's our plant, and then one in Nigeria. But outside of that, I would say, the others are a little bit at risk, whether that be Russian plants or some of these Indian plants that are talked about to come on before 2030.

但就今天而言，當你看未來幾年，有一些工廠——卡達有一座、阿聯有一座、我們的工廠，然後奈及利亞還有一座。但除此之外，我會說其他的專案風險比較高，不管是俄羅斯的工廠，或是一些被談到會在 2030 年前投產的印度工廠。

As well as there's constrained areas around the world we've identified in previous conferences or calls, but when you look at Europe and the gas spread and the age and the inefficiency of some of those plants and their long-term viability as well as what's coming out of in terms of LNG-constrained areas like Bangladesh and some of the Southeast Asian plants that are also, I think, challenged.

另外，我們在先前的會議或電話會議中也提過，全球有一些受限區域；但當你看歐洲的天然氣價差、一些工廠的老舊與低效率及其長期可行性，再加上像孟加拉等 LNG 受限地區，以及一些東南亞工廠，我認為也面臨挑戰。

So on a going-forward basis, not every plant, which we saw the Brazilian shutdowns, they're talking about revamping. I don't think that's very viable long term with the gas -- the way gas flows there. And then there's Trinidad that's also limited on gas. So you have new capacity coming in and old capacity, which we believe won't be operable over the long term as well as demand increases over time.

所以往前看，並不是每一座工廠——我們看到巴西關廠，他們在談翻修。我不認為以那裡的天然氣——天然氣流向的狀況，長期來看很可行。另外千里達也同樣受限於天然氣。因此你一方面有新產能進來，另一方面也有我們認為長期無法運轉的舊產能，再加上需求會隨時間增加。

Great. Makes sense. And then I just wanted to send it to check something regarding 45Q. So when I look at Q1, there is $19 million of 45Q income, which, if I sort of divide it by the $85 a tonne CO2 price, gives me a CO2 capture of slightly more than 200,000 tonnes. And as far as we know, Donaldsonville around 500,000 tonnes CO2 per quarter. Is that calculation missing something? Or you've (inaudible) CO2 still ramping up?

很好。有道理。另外我想確認一下關於 45Q 的事情。所以我看第一季有 1,900 萬美元的 45Q 收入，如果我用每噸 85 美元的 CO2 價格去除，得到的 CO2 捕集量略高於 20 萬噸。而據我們所知，Donaldsonville 每季大約 50 萬噸 CO2。這個計算是少了什麼嗎？還是你們（聽不清）CO2 仍在爬坡？

Well, I think there's two points there. One, the revenue through the first half of the year is about $45 million associated with the 45Q, not the number that you suggested. The second part is this year, we do expect the overall CO2 to be lower throughout the Donaldsonville facility, primarily because of the turnarounds that took place there. I mentioned earlier, Ammonia 6, which is effectively two ammonia plants with its production went through a turnaround. It's completed that turnaround now, but the turnaround began in June and went through July as well.

我想這裡有兩點。第一，上半年與 45Q 相關的收入大約是 4,500 萬美元，不是你提到的那個數字。第二，今年我們確實預期 Donaldsonville 廠區整體 CO2 會比較低，主要是因為那裡進行了歲修（turnarounds）。我先前提到，Ammonia 6 實際上是兩座氨廠，其產線進行了歲修。現在已完成歲修，但歲修是從 6 月開始並延續到 7 月。

So as a result of that, you're going to have lower CO2 that was available in order to sequester during that time frame. But I think the numbers themselves would show through in the other operating income line are correct, that $45 million.

因此在那段期間，可用於封存的 CO2 會比較少。但我認為數字本身——會反映在其他營業收入那一行——是正確的，也就是 4,500 萬美元。

And the one thing I would mention is that we are not taking it to a Class 6 as of right now. And so as that is at $60 per tonne, we do believe, just to maybe follow up on that, that the Class 6 approval will be happening later this year, and then that will move to the $85 a tonne. Economically, we're indifferent because our transfer today is at a zero cost with Exxon, and it will move up to the contractual rate once the Class 6 is in place.

另外我想提的是，我們目前還沒有把它轉到 Class 6。因此在每噸 60 美元的情況下，我們確實相信——也許補充一下——Class 6 的核准會在今年稍晚發生，之後就會轉到每噸 85 美元。在經濟上我們是無差別的，因為我們目前與 Exxon 的移轉是零成本，等到 Class 6 到位後，就會依合約費率上調。

Edlain Rodriguez, Mizuho.

Edlain Rodriguez，瑞穗（Mizuho）。

Chris, in terms of the valuation, should we then expect to be more aggressive on the buyback going the second half of the year because the pace seems to be a little slower in the first half?

Chris，就估值而言，我們是否應該預期在今年下半年更積極地進行回購，因為上半年的節奏似乎稍微慢了一些？

And more importantly, as you noted, late into the second quarter, we saw global urea prices decline. But what was most surprising to me was that in the US, prices not only a decline, but they were below last year's level. And that was despite all the supply disruption we had globally. Like how do we explain that?

更重要的是，如你所提到的，在第二季後段，我們看到全球尿素價格下跌。但最讓我驚訝的是，在美國，價格不僅下跌，而且還低於去年的水準。而這是在我們全球供應出現各種中斷的情況下發生的。這要如何解釋？

So from the share repurchase, I'll start with that, and then I'll let Bert touch on the urea pace. On the share repurchase, we have a significant amount of cash on our balance sheet. We have a program, as Andrew mentioned, is still open with plenty of room there, and we believe that we are trading underneath our intrinsic. So checking all those boxes, we expect to be into the market.

關於股票回購，我先從這部分開始，然後我會讓Bert談談尿素的節奏。就股票回購而言，我們的資產負債表上有相當可觀的現金。我們有一項計畫，如Andrew提到的，仍然開放且還有很大的額度空間，而且我們認為目前股價低於我們的內在價值。因此在這些條件都符合的情況下，我們預期會進場。

Now having said that, when I look at how we're trading off of what happens on a tweet or basically what Pakistan is saying or something coming out of Oman or whatever, we're trading in the last six weeks between $100 and $140. So we're going to be opportunistic and grab more shares as we see some of that volatility exists. But we are committed to repurchasing shares. We have the cash flow to do it over and above what we're seeing from our strategic initiatives, and we'll continue to do that.

話雖如此，當我看到我們的股價會因為一則推文、或巴基斯坦的說法、或阿曼那邊傳出的消息等等而波動時，過去六週我們的股價在100到140美元之間交易。所以我們會把握機會，在看到這些波動存在時買進更多股票。但我們承諾會回購股票。我們有足夠的現金流來進行回購，且在我們策略性計畫所需之上仍綽綽有餘，我們也會持續這麼做。

Yeah. Regarding the Q2 price correction, you basically reverted back to where we were in the lows of Q1 and went up due to the hostilities in the Gulf and then reverted back down. A lot of that, I think, was trading off of rumors of fees and openness to the Gulf, and then we were at the tail end of our season. So a lot of trader liquidation taking place.

是的。關於第二季的價格修正，基本上是回到第一季低點附近，之後因為波斯灣的敵對行動而上漲，接著又回落。我認為其中很大一部分是市場在交易關於費用與對波斯灣開放性的傳聞，此外我們也處於旺季尾聲。因此出現了大量交易商平倉（賣出）情況。

I don't think a lot of physical tonnes moved at that level, but then we've since corrected back up to the $400, $415 level where we are today. And I think that's where we'll playing out. And then as we talked about in earlier calls, earlier questions, the tightness, I think, will be more pronounced as we get to the back half of the year.

我不認為在那個價位有很多實體噸數成交，但之後我們已修正回升到目前約400到415美元的水準。我認為接下來大致會在這個區間發展。另外，如同我們在先前的電話會議、先前的提問中談到的，隨著進入下半年，供應吃緊的情況我認為會更為明顯。

David Symonds, BNP Paribas.

David Symonds，法國巴黎銀行（BNP Paribas）。

Just another one on longer-term outlook. So China is still adding capacity the rest of this decade. Is your view that they can start to export more than the 4 to 6 million tonnes you expect this year in the next few years? Or do you think they add capacity to replace older plants at this stage?

再問一個關於較長期展望的問題。中國在本十年剩餘期間仍在新增產能。你們是否認為，未來幾年他們的出口量可以超過你們預期今年的400萬到600萬噸？或者你們認為他們目前新增產能主要是用來替換較老舊的工廠？

I think yes and yes. I think they've proven their ability to build new plants, but the amazing thing to me about China is the growth in demand. Today, they're running at about -- we target them at an 82% to 83% operating rate where we run at 98% to 99%. So we have to take their factor in terms of their capacities. They do have some older plants. There have been, over time, a replacement of urban plants or inefficient plants to newer, more world-scale plants.

我認為兩者都是。我認為他們已證明有能力興建新廠，但對我來說中國最令人驚訝的是需求的成長。目前他們的運轉率大約在——我們估他們約82%到83%的開工率，而我們是98%到99%。因此在評估他們的產能時，我們必須把這個因素納入考量。他們確實有一些老舊工廠。長期以來，城市工廠或效率較差的工廠已逐步被更新、規模更符合世界級的新廠所取代。

And so -- but the growth in demand over the years were there over 60, 63, [4] million tonnes of consumption internally, the capability to export is there, but I think what the Chinese government has learned is exporting energy in the form of urea, but you're importing energy and LNG and coal it's not a value-creating game. And so what they have determined or what they, over the last several years, have communicated is the urea and the energy basis and the subsidies they've given us should be benefiting the Chinese farmer and the Chinese consumer, and that has happened.

因此——但多年來需求的成長一直存在，他們內需消費量超過6,000萬、6,300萬噸（約[4]百萬噸），具備出口能力；但我認為中國政府學到的是：以尿素的形式出口能源，同時又進口能源、液化天然氣（LNG）與煤炭，並不是一個能創造價值的遊戲。因此他們所決定的，或他們在過去幾年所傳達的是：尿素與能源的定價基礎，以及他們提供的補貼，應該要讓中國農民與中國消費者受益，而這也確實發生了。

So the domestic price in China is significantly lower than the global price. And over the last, I'd say, year or two, they've controlled it through these export quotas and allowing certain times, levels, and values to be exported which the global economy needs.

因此，中國的國內價格顯著低於全球價格。而在過去我想一年或兩年，他們透過這些出口配額來加以控制，並允許在特定時間、特定數量與特定價格水準下出口，以滿足全球經濟的需求。

So where they will be longer term, I think that where they are today in that 4 to 6 million tonnes probably for this year and the next and will be determined later in the future. But I don't think they have identified urea or ammonium sulfate or any of the fertilizer products as an area to focus the attention and again, keep that for the Chinese consumer and farmer.

所以就長期而言他們會走到哪裡，我認為他們目前大概維持在400萬到600萬噸的水準，可能適用於今年與明年，未來則會在之後再決定。但我不認為他們已把尿素、硫酸銨或任何肥料產品視為需要重點關注的領域；他們更傾向把這些留給中國的消費者與農民。

Ladies and gentlemen, that is all the time we have for questions today. I would like to turn the call back to Martin Jarosick for closing remarks.

各位女士、先生，今天的提問時間到此結束。我想把電話交回給Martin Jarosick作結語。

Thanks, everyone, for joining us this morning, and we look forward to seeing you at upcoming conferences.

感謝各位今天早上參與，我們期待在接下來的各場會議上與各位見面。

The conference has now concluded. Thank you for attending today's presentation. You may now disconnect.

本次電話會議到此結束。感謝各位參加今天的簡報。您現在可以掛線。