Talen Energy Corp (TLN) 2026 Q1 法說會逐字稿

Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for standing by. Welcome to the Talen Energy first quarter earnings call. (Operator Instructions) Please be advised that today's conference is being recorded. I would now like to turn the conference over to Sergio Castro, Vice President and Treasurer. Please go ahead.

各位女士、先生，感謝您稍候。歡迎參加 Talen Energy 第一季財報電話會議。（接線員指示）請注意，今天的會議將被錄音。現在我想把會議交給副總裁兼財務主管 Sergio Castro。請開始。

Thank you, Kathy, and welcome to Talen Energy's first quarter 2026 conference call. Speaking today are Chief Executive Officer, Mac McFarland; President, Terry Nutt; and Chief Financial Officer, Cole Muller. They are joined by other Talen senior executives to address questions during the second part of today's call as necessary. We issued our earnings release this afternoon, along with the presentation, all of which can be found in the Investor Relations section of Talen's website, talenenergy.com.

謝謝你，Kathy，也歡迎各位參加 Talen Energy 2026 年第一季電話會議。今天出席發言的有執行長 Mac McFarland；總裁 Terry Nutt；以及財務長 Cole Muller。他們也將與 Talen 其他資深主管一同出席，並在今日電話會議的第二部分視需要回答問題。我們已於今天下午發布財報新聞稿以及簡報，皆可在 Talen 官網 talenenergy.com 的投資人關係（Investor Relations）專區找到。

Today, we are making some forward-looking statements based on current expectations and assumptions. Actual results could differ due to risk factors and other considerations described in our financial disclosures and other SEC filings. Today's discussion also includes references to certain non-GAAP financial measures. We have provided information reconciling our non-GAAP measures to the most directly comparable GAAP measures in our earnings release and the appendix of our presentation. With that, I will now turn the call over to Mac.

今天，我們將基於目前的預期與假設作出若干前瞻性陳述。實際結果可能因我們財務揭露文件及其他向 SEC 申報文件中所述的風險因素與其他考量而有所不同。今天的討論亦包含對若干非 GAAP 財務衡量指標的引用。我們已在財報新聞稿及簡報附錄中，提供將非 GAAP 指標與最直接可比的 GAAP 指標進行調節（reconcile）的資訊。接下來，我把電話交給 Mac。

Great. Thank you, Sergio, and good afternoon, everyone. We appreciate your interest in Talen, and we look forward to the discussion during our Q&A. But I'll start with our first quarter results. In the first quarter, we delivered strong operational and financial results, including strong plant performance during the winter cold events, and we are off to a good start to the outage season.

很好。謝謝你，Sergio，各位下午好。感謝各位對 Talen 的關注，我們也期待在問答環節與各位交流。不過我先從第一季的業績談起。第一季我們交出強勁的營運與財務表現，包括在冬季寒流事件期間電廠表現出色，而且我們也在停機檢修季節有了良好的開局。

In fact, we are in start-up at Susquehanna slightly exceeding our planned outage duration. Terry and Cole will discuss all of this in more detail later. Also in the first quarter, we signed a Cornerstone transaction, advancing our Talen Flywheel Strategy and adding meaningful free cash flow per share growth through acquisitions. Today, we are reaffirming our 2026 guidance and providing a preliminary view of our '27 and '28 outlooks.

事實上，Susquehanna 目前正處於啟動階段，停機檢修工期略微超出原先規劃。Terry 與 Cole 稍後會更詳細說明。此外，在第一季我們簽署了 Cornerstone 交易，推進我們的 Talen 飛輪策略（Talen Flywheel Strategy），並透過併購為每股自由現金流成長帶來實質貢獻。今天，我們重申 2026 年指引，並提供對 2027 年與 2028 年展望的初步看法。

Our 2026 guidance does not include the Cornerstone assets. However, we expect to close as soon as this summer, and we will update 2026 guidance once we close. We recently closed on the financing for the Cornerstone acquisition, which positions us to close as quickly as possible once we receive all regulatory approvals. Cole will explain why we acted now in more detail. But in short, the carry cost of funding now should be more than offset by closing as soon as possible. We have also reduced market volatility risk and replaced some higher cost debt.

我們的 2026 年指引尚未納入 Cornerstone 資產。不過，我們預期最快可於今年夏季完成交割，並將在交割完成後更新 2026 年指引。我們近期已完成 Cornerstone 併購案的融資，使我們在取得所有監管核准後能以最快速度完成交割。Cole 會更詳細說明我們為何選擇現在採取行動。簡而言之，現在先行資金到位的持有成本（carry cost）應可被盡快完成交割所帶來的效益所抵銷，甚至更有利。我們也降低了市場波動風險，並置換了部分成本較高的債務。

Our preliminary '27 and '28 outlooks do include the Cornerstone assets as well as other updates, including higher current forward mark-to-market values from 3/31 of this year, improved financing costs and several other changes. These outlooks show significant year-over-year growth in free cash flow per share and meaningful upside versus the outlook we shared recently this past January.

我們對 2027 年與 2028 年的初步展望已納入 Cornerstone 資產，以及其他更新內容，包括以今年 3/31 為基準的較高即期遠期市價評估（forward mark-to-market）價值、改善的融資成本，以及其他數項變動。這些展望顯示每股自由現金流將呈現顯著的年增成長，且相較於我們今年 1 月最近分享的展望，具有明顯上行空間。

This demonstrates the strength of our business and our continued ability to return cash to shareholders through meaningful share repurchases. These outlooks also imply we are trading at double-digit free cash flow yields, which we do not believe reflect our increasingly contracted portfolio. And that does not include the other levers that we have for further upside, and Cole will walk you through those later.

這展現了我們業務的韌性，以及我們持續透過具規模的庫藏股回購向股東返還現金的能力。這些展望也意味著我們目前的交易水準對應到兩位數的自由現金流殖利率（free cash flow yields），而我們認為這並未反映我們日益提高合約覆蓋度的資產組合。此外，這還未納入我們可用來進一步提升上行空間的其他槓桿，Cole 稍後會帶各位逐一說明。

Looking ahead, nothing has changed in our Talen Flywheel Strategy. Our direction of travel remains the same. We continue to believe in data center contracting for megawatts, and we are building a pipeline of both powered land and new build options. Terry will walk you through these development activities and how we see the market evolving towards what we call a hybrid model, which uses existing generation for speed to market and is supplemented by new build in later years. Some of you may remember me saying that 2025 was a year of options and '26 will be a year of market rationalization and that we would not discuss development activities.

展望未來，我們的 Talen 飛輪策略並未改變；我們前進的方向依然一致。我們仍然看好以資料中心簽約鎖定兆瓦（megawatts）的模式，並正在建立包含已具供電條件土地（powered land）與新建（new build）選項在內的專案管線。Terry 將帶各位了解這些開發活動，以及我們如何看待市場朝向我們所稱的「混合模式」（hybrid model）演進：先利用既有發電資產以加速上市時程（speed to market），並在後續年度再以新建案補充。各位可能記得我曾說過，2025 年是選項之年，而 2026 年將是市場理性化（market rationalization）之年，因此我們不會討論開發活動。

While we're not going into specific project details, we will provide a high-level view of our development portfolio today, and we still do expect rationalization across projects in 2026. All that said, we are building a pipeline of real opportunities that can win. With that, I'll turn the call over to Terry.

雖然我們不會深入特定專案細節，但今天會提供我們開發組合的高層次概覽，而且我們仍預期 2026 年各專案將出現理性化。總之，我們正在建立一條由真實機會所構成、且有能力勝出的管線。接下來我把電話交給 Terry。

Thank you, Mac, and good afternoon, everyone. Let's look at our first quarter financial and operating results. For the first three months of 2026, we are reporting $473 million of adjusted EBITDA and $350 million of adjusted free cash flow. A comparison of these amounts to the same quarter last year provides clear evidence of the accretion Talen has achieved through acquisitions and fundamental growth in the business. Our fleet achieved strong levels of safety and reliability during the quarter, which is even more noteworthy given the frigid temperatures and icy conditions that were present in late January and early February.

謝謝你，Mac，各位下午好。讓我們看看第一季的財務與營運成果。2026 年前三個月，我們的調整後 EBITDA 為 4.73 億美元，調整後自由現金流為 3.50 億美元。將這些數字與去年同期相比，可清楚看出 Talen 透過併購以及業務基本面成長所帶來的增值效果（accretion）。本季我們的機組在安全與可靠度方面表現強勁，尤其值得一提的是，1 月下旬與 2 月上旬出現嚴寒氣溫與結冰狀況。

We are currently in the middle of our spring outage season across the fleet. Our refueling outage at Susquehanna Unit 1 has progressed well, including executing work similar to what we had on Unit 2 last spring.

目前我們全機隊正處於春季停機檢修季中。Susquehanna 1 號機組的換料停機（refueling outage）進展順利，其中包含執行與去年春季在 2 號機組相似的工作。

The current outage has been more efficient due to the learnings that we had from last year, which has resulted in the unit being synced back to the grid yesterday. I would like to thank the men and women of Talen who continue to demonstrate strong operational and safety performance. Without their efforts, none of this is possible. I'd also like to welcome the employees from Freedom and Guernsey, who were onboarded to Talen in April and congratulate them on their strong safety records since start-up. Safety remains our top priority across the fleet, and our team worked safely during a busy quarter.

本次停機檢修因吸收了去年的經驗而更有效率，使該機組於昨日重新併網（synced back to the grid）。我要感謝 Talen 的所有同仁，持續展現卓越的營運與安全表現；沒有他們的努力，這一切都不可能實現。我也要歡迎 Freedom 與 Guernsey 的員工，他們已於 4 月加入 Talen，並祝賀他們自啟動以來維持優異的安全紀錄。安全仍是我們全機隊的首要任務，而我們的團隊在忙碌的一季中仍能安全作業。

Our recordable incident rate was 0.37, which continues to be below industry average. Our fleet ran well, and we generated approximately 16 terawatt hours of electricity, achieving a 55% fleet-wide capacity factor as our intermediate and peaking assets continue the trend of higher run times to support the grid.

我們的可記錄事故率（recordable incident rate）為 0.37，持續低於產業平均。我們的機隊運轉良好，發電量約 16 太瓦時（terawatt hours），全機隊容量因子（capacity factor）達 55%；同時，我們的中載與尖峰資產（intermediate and peaking assets）持續呈現更長運轉時數的趨勢，以支援電網。

Moving to slide 4. We continue to see tightening markets driven by increased demand. In Q1, we saw approximately 3% of incremental deliveries on a weather-adjusted basis in PJM when compared to the same period in 2025. This is a clear sign of demand growth and supports our view that energy demand will increase the dispatch of our flexible fleet. To further illustrate the demand growth trend, on the lower left of this slide, you can see our first quarter generation from 2023 through 2026, which increases every year.

接著看第 4 頁。我們持續看到在需求增加帶動下，市場趨於緊俏。第一季在 PJM，以天候調整後口徑計算，相較 2025 年同期，我們看到約 3% 的增量交付（incremental deliveries）。這清楚顯示需求正在成長，並支持我們的觀點：能源需求將提高我們彈性機隊的調度（dispatch）。為了進一步說明需求成長趨勢，在本頁左下角，各位可以看到我們 2023 年至 2026 年第一季的發電量逐年增加。

During this time, our intermediate and peaking assets, in particular, Montour and Martins Creek had significantly higher run times than the same quarter in the prior year, continuing the trend that we have seen in the past several years.

在此期間，特別是我們的中載與尖峰資產——Montour 與 Martins Creek——其運轉時數較前一年同期顯著提高，延續了我們過去幾年所觀察到的趨勢。

In relation to spark spreads, we have continued -- we have seen a continued appreciation in the forward curves for the remainder of 2026 through 2028, with the growth in spark spreads across PJM, inclusive of the zones where our generation is located. PPL zone spark spreads have seen appreciation since July of last year, but not as pronounced as the moves in PJM West Hub. We believe that some of this price action that is resulting in widening term basis between West Hub and PPL zone is based on recency bias due to transmission work impacting the zone and not fundamental factors. Our expectation is that this basis will tighten as the transmission network and load evolve.

就火花價差（spark spreads）而言，我們持續看到 2026 年剩餘期間至 2028 年的遠期曲線走升，且 PJM 各區域（包含我們發電資產所在區域）的火花價差均呈現成長。PPL 區域的火花價差自去年 7 月以來也有上升，但幅度不如 PJM West Hub。我們認為，部分導致 West Hub 與 PPL 區域之間期限基差（term basis）擴大的價格走勢，源於輸電工程對該區域造成影響所引發的近因偏誤（recency bias），而非基本面因素。我們預期，隨著輸電網路與負載演變，該基差將會收斂。

Turning to slide 5. As you can see from the graph on the left, summer spark spreads continue to move higher, driven by fundamentally tight market conditions in PJM. This is even more evident as we have seen increased instances of demand-driven volatility, widening cash market spark spreads, which in turn is helping to drive the term sparks higher.

接著看第 5 頁。如左側圖表所示，夏季火花價差持續走高，主要受 PJM 市場基本面緊俏所驅動。這一點更為明顯，因為我們看到需求驅動的波動性事件增加，現貨市場火花價差擴大，進而推動期限火花價差（term sparks）上升。

This is beginning to validate our earlier views that the market response would come as fundamental drivers are seen in the cash market. As I mentioned earlier, demand continues to increase with no meaningful increase in supply. This demonstrates the value of steel in the ground.

這開始驗證我們先前的看法：當基本面驅動因素在現貨市場顯現時，市場的反應就會出現。如我先前提到的，需求持續增加，而供給並未出現任何具實質意義的增長。這凸顯了「地上鋼鐵」（steel in the ground）的價值。

Turning to slide 6. We are working diligently to close the Cornerstone acquisition that we announced earlier this year, which will further diversify Talen's generation portfolio and enhance our large load contracting opportunities. As an update on the regulatory approvals, we filed our 203 application with FERC in January and anticipate approval by this summer.

接著看第 6 張投影片。我們正積極推進今年稍早宣布的 Cornerstone 收購案之完成，該交易將進一步分散 Talen 的發電資產組合，並強化我們在大型負載合約方面的機會。就監管核准進度更新而言，我們已於 1 月向 FERC 提交 203 申請，並預期將於今年夏季獲准。

The HSR waiting period expired in March, meaning that we have completed the DOJ approval process. And lastly, there was a hearing with the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission in April and the unopposed final order was submitted. We anticipate approval in Indiana by this summer.

HSR 等待期已於 3 月到期，代表我們已完成 DOJ 的核准流程。最後，印第安納州公用事業監管委員會於 4 月舉行聽證會，且已提交無異議的最終命令。我們預期印第安納州將於今年夏季核准。

Moving to slide 7. I'd like to give you some color on the land development and contracting growth options Mac mentioned earlier. In the near term, we have several 1-plus gigawatt opportunities for long-term PPAs at our existing sites as well as other sites in Pennsylvania and are advancing potential opportunities across the remainder of our footprint. In relation to specific site development opportunities for land that we are currently working on, we're progressing on several different fronts. Those opportunities include land of up to 3,000 acres in total that can support 3 to 4 gigawatts of data center capacity using current compute density.

接著看第 7 張投影片。我想就 Mac 先前提到的土地開發與簽約成長選項補充一些細節。短期內，我們在既有場址以及賓夕法尼亞州的其他場址，擁有數個超過 1GW 的長期 PPA 機會，並正推進我們其餘營運版圖中的潛在機會。就我們目前正在推進的特定場址土地開發機會而言，我們在多個面向皆有進展。這些機會合計包含最多達 3,000 英畝的土地，依目前的運算密度可支援 3 至 4GW 的資料中心容量。

The zoning of the property ranges from fully zoned acreage to zoning activity that is still in process, such as our Montour site. Additionally, we have the ability at several of these sites to install new generation of 500 megawatts to 1 gigawatt. As part of our strategy, we are advancing a mix of gas and storage generation projects totaling over 2 gigawatts at our sites to support data center contracting and reliability needs.

該等土地的分區狀態從已完成分區的面積，到仍在進行分區作業（例如我們的 Montour 場址）不等。此外，我們在其中數個場址具備安裝 500MW 至 1GW 新增發電的能力。作為我們策略的一部分，我們正推進在場址上合計超過 2GW 的燃氣與儲能發電專案組合，以支援資料中心簽約與可靠度需求。

Last week, we submitted several new projects in PJM's Cycle 1 interconnection study cluster. These projects are a mix of generation solutions, including CTs, batteries and CCGTs. These new generation sources in combination with our existing assets, provide us the ability to offer a solution to customers that is a hybrid approach of receiving power from existing generation now and new generation down the road.

上週，我們在 PJM 的 Cycle 1 併網研究群組中提交了數個新專案。這些專案包含多元的發電解決方案組合，包括 CT、電池與 CCGT。這些新增發電來源結合我們既有資產，使我們能向客戶提供一套混合式方案：目前先由既有機組供電，未來再由新建機組補上。

As we have stated before and we'll reiterate today, development of new generation will need to be done either through long-term offtake agreements or through the PJM RBP with a focus on financial discipline related to investment returns. This initial generation development is capital-light with no material capital required during the initial stages. As development advances, spending will be tied to customer contracts and underwriting, and we will likely utilize project financing structures related to these projects. With that, let me turn it over to Cole to cover our financial results.

如同我們先前所述、今天也再次強調，新建發電的開發必須透過長期承購協議，或透過 PJM RBP 進行，並以投資報酬的財務紀律為核心。此一初期發電開發屬於輕資本模式，在初始階段不需要任何重大資本支出。隨著開發推進，支出將與客戶合約及承作審核（underwriting）掛鉤，我們也很可能就這些專案採用專案融資架構。接下來我把時間交給 Cole，說明我們的財務結果。

Thanks, Terry, and good afternoon, everyone. On slide 8, looking at our financial results for the first quarter, we reported $473 million of adjusted EBITDA and $350 million of adjusted free cash flow. Adjusted EBITDA more than doubled and adjusted free cash flow quadrupled year-over-year, showing the impact of the Freedom and Guernsey acquisitions that we closed in Q4 last year. These results were also driven by higher prices and spark spreads, higher capacity and ROR revenues that started in June 2025 and the ongoing AWS PPA ramp. Our adjusted free cash flow also benefited from reduced cash tax payments largely related to the impacts from our Freedom and Guernsey acquisitions.

謝謝你，Terry，各位下午好。看第 8 張投影片，針對第一季的財務結果，我們報告調整後 EBITDA 為 4.73 億美元，調整後自由現金流為 3.50 億美元。調整後 EBITDA 較去年同期增加逾一倍，調整後自由現金流較去年同期成長四倍，反映我們於去年第四季完成的 Freedom 與 Guernsey 收購案之影響。這些結果亦受惠於較高的價格與 spark spread、於 2025 年 6 月開始的較高容量收入與 ROR 收入，以及 AWS PPA 的持續爬坡。我們的調整後自由現金流亦因現金稅款支付降低而受益，主要與 Freedom 與 Guernsey 收購案帶來的影響相關。

Moving to slide 9. We are reaffirming the previously announced 2026 guidance ranges. We had a strong first quarter, though it's not our practice to make adjustments this early in the year. Our adjusted EBITDA range is $1.75 billion to $2.05 billion, and our adjusted free cash flow range is $980 million to $1.18 billion. These ranges do not include any contribution from the pending Cornerstone acquisition, and we expect to provide an update to 2026 guidance after closing the transaction.

接著看第 9 張投影片。我們重申先前公布的 2026 年指引區間。第一季表現強勁，但我們通常不會在年初這麼早就調整指引。我們的調整後 EBITDA 區間為 17.5 億至 20.5 億美元，調整後自由現金流區間為 9.8 億至 11.8 億美元。這些區間不包含尚待完成的 Cornerstone 收購案之任何貢獻；交易完成後，我們預期將更新 2026 年指引。

We remain committed to maintaining sufficient liquidity and keeping our long-term net leverage ratio below our stated target of 3.5x. As of March 31, our forecasted 2026 net leverage ratio was 3.1x. I will note this excludes any impact from the Cornerstone acquisition and the associated debt that we raised back in April. Upon closing the Cornerstone transaction, we expect to maintain the ability to achieve below 3.5x net leverage by year-end 2026.

我們仍致力於維持充足流動性，並將長期淨槓桿比率維持在我們所述目標 3.5 倍以下。截至 3 月 31 日，我們預估 2026 年淨槓桿比率為 3.1 倍。我也要指出，這不包含 Cornerstone 收購案及我們於 4 月所籌措之相關債務的任何影響。Cornerstone 交易完成後，我們預期仍能在 2026 年底前維持淨槓桿低於 3.5 倍的能力。

On to slide 11. We recently secured attractive acquisition financing for the Cornerstone assets, which also provided us an opportunity to optimize the balance sheet. We raised $4 billion of senior unsecured notes in a private placement across five- and seven-year tranches at a blended rate just above 6.25%, derisking the Cornerstone acquisition financing at attractive pricing and allowing us to be ready to close upon regulatory approvals. We also took out our $1.2 billion senior secured notes that had an 8.58% coupon, delivering more than $40 million per year in interest expense reduction, which adds nearly $1 to our free cash flow per share.

接著看第 11 張投影片。我們近期為 Cornerstone 資產取得具吸引力的收購融資，同時也提供我們優化資產負債表的機會。我們透過私募方式發行 40 億美元的高級無擔保票據，分為 5 年期與 7 年期兩個期限（tranches），加權平均利率略高於 6.25%，以具吸引力的定價降低 Cornerstone 收購融資風險，並使我們能在取得監管核准後隨時完成交割。我們也償還了 12 億美元、票息 8.58% 的高級有擔保票據，使利息費用每年減少逾 4,000 萬美元，並使我們每股自由現金流增加接近 1 美元。

I'll spend a moment to give more color on why we made the decision to raise the financing ahead of regulatory approvals. First, doing this now, we avoided potential risks to market availability, such as impacts from geopolitical events and upcoming midterm elections as well as lock in attractive long-term rates in the process. We also removed any complications if we needed to raise funds while potentially in possession of MNPI in future months. And second, having the financing already in place ahead of regulatory approvals speeds up time to close, meaning we can own the asset sooner and benefit more from the peak summer period.

我花一點時間補充說明，為何我們決定在監管核准前先行籌資。第一，現在就做，我們避開了市場可得性（market availability）的潛在風險，例如地緣政治事件與即將到來的期中選舉之影響，同時也在過程中鎖定具吸引力的長期利率。我們也排除了未來幾個月若在可能持有 MNPI 的情況下籌資所可能產生的任何複雜性。第二，在監管核准前就把融資到位可加快完成交割的速度，代表我們能更早持有該資產，並在夏季尖峰期間獲得更多收益。

We estimate the value of one additional month at approximately $30 million in additional cash flow, which far outweighs the net negative carry of only a few million dollars a month. Note that a portion of the proceeds allowed us to take out the more expensive senior secured notes last week and immediately realize interest savings. Considering where things stand with the regulatory approval processes, we feel that this was the right time to lock down the financing.

我們估計多提前一個月的價值約為額外 3,000 萬美元的現金流，遠高於每月僅數百萬美元的淨負 carry 成本。請注意，部分募集資金使我們得以上週償還成本較高的高級有擔保票據，並立即實現利息節省。綜合監管核准流程目前的進展，我們認為此時鎖定融資是正確的時點。

In eliminating the senior secured notes, we have materially reduced our secured debt composition from approximately 60% of total debt down to 30%, leading to improved credit ratings across multiple agencies. Concurrent with this financing, we are enhancing our liquidity through commitments to upsize our existing revolving credit facility to $1.35 billion and our stand-alone letter of credit facility to $1.5 billion. We are also extending the LCF maturity through December 2029. These credit facility changes go into effect upon closing the Cornerstone transaction.

透過取消高級有擔保票據，我們已將有擔保債務占總債務的比重由約 60% 大幅降至 30%，進而帶動多家評等機構的信用評等改善。配合此次融資，我們也透過承諾擴大既有循環信用額度至 13.5 億美元，以及將獨立信用狀融通額度（LCF）提高至 15 億美元，來強化流動性。我們亦將 LCF 到期日延長至 2029 年 12 月。這些信用額度調整將於 Cornerstone 交易完成交割時生效。

On slide 12, we show a preliminary update to our 2027 and '28 outlook that includes the Cornerstone assets, along with impacts across the business since last September's Investor Day, including spark spread expansion through March 31 and impacts from the recent financing that I walked through a moment ago. We also separately include the expected impacts of executing on our share repurchase program, assuming we utilize 70% of available free cash flow. In our base case, we hold share count flat, projecting free cash flow at approximately $34 per share in 2027 and approximately $36 per share in 2028, a 15% improvement from our January estimates which included the Cornerstone acquisition.

在第 12 張投影片中，我們提供對 2027 年與 2028 年展望的初步更新，納入 Cornerstone 資產，以及自去年 9 月投資人日以來業務面的各項影響，包括截至 3 月 31 日的 spark spread 擴張，以及我剛才說明之近期融資的影響。我們也另外納入執行庫藏股計畫的預期影響，假設我們使用可用自由現金流的 70%。在基本情境下，我們假設股數維持不變，預估 2027 年每股自由現金流約 34 美元、2028 年約 36 美元，較我們 1 月（已包含 Cornerstone 收購案）的估計提升 15%。

When factoring in our share repurchase program, we project approximately $41 per share in 2028, a 30% increase to what we showed back in January. At these projected levels, our free cash flow yield is about 11%. Note that this assumes we use 70% of free cash flow, leaving approximately $1 billion of additional cash available across 2027 and '28 as more upside for shareholders. In addition, we continue to see upside through the flywheel with accretive M&A, which we demonstrated with the Freedom and Guernsey and now Cornerstone acquisitions and also through acceleration of the Amazon ramp established in our existing PPA, new data center contracting opportunities and further spark spread expansion as markets continue to tighten.

若將庫藏股計畫納入考量，我們預估 2028 年每股約 41 美元，較我們 1 月所示提高 30%。在這些預估水準下，我們的自由現金流殖利率約為 11%。請注意，這假設我們使用自由現金流的 70%，因此在 2027 年與 2028 年合計仍約有 10 億美元的額外現金可用，作為股東的進一步上行空間。此外，我們仍持續透過飛輪效應看到上行潛力，包括具增益性的併購（我們已透過 Freedom 與 Guernsey，以及現在的 Cornerstone 收購案加以證明）、既有 PPA 中 Amazon 爬坡的加速、新的資料中心簽約機會，以及隨著市場持續趨緊而進一步擴大的 spark spread。

In fact, as you can see in our appendix, we have already seen significant improvements in spark spreads since the 3/31 pricing date of approximately $5 a megawatt hour beyond what is shown in these numbers, which translates to several more dollars per share if marked today. We also expect the recent widening of the West Hub to PPL zonal basis to revert to more recent average levels.

事實上，如同你們在附錄中所見，自 3/31 定價日以來，我們已看到 spark spread 顯著改善，每兆瓦時約再增加 5 美元，若以今日重新評價（marked today），將可轉化為每股再增加數美元。我們也預期近期 West Hub 相對 PPL 分區基差（zonal basis）的擴大，將回歸至較近期的平均水準。

Note that in our outlook here, we include the most visible mark that reflects this elevated zonal basis. Though as Terry mentioned earlier, we don't see this recent shift being fundamentally driven. A $5 a megawatt hour impact across 30-plus terawatt hours in PPL zone presents a compelling upside opportunity, particularly as load growth occurs within the zone. Each of these opportunities could provide 10-plus percent in additional free cash flow per share growth beyond what's shown here, offering a compelling set of further growth opportunities.

請注意，在我們此處的展望中，我們納入了反映這種偏高分區基差最明顯的指標。不過，正如 Terry 先前提到的，我們不認為這次近期的變化是由基本面所驅動。在 PPL 分區內，若以每兆瓦時 5 美元的影響乘上 30 多太瓦時，將呈現相當具吸引力的上行機會，特別是在該分區內負載成長發生之際。上述每一項機會，都可能在此處所示之外，額外帶來每股自由現金流成長 10% 以上，提供一組相當具吸引力的進一步成長機會。

I should note that there may also be additional upside in 2026 that is not reflected here based on closing the Cornerstone acquisition this summer and/or executing on our share repurchase program throughout the remainder of the year. I want to emphasize that we will continue to maintain capital discipline with a clear focus on accretive levers that meaningfully increase free cash flow per share available to investors through the Talen Flywheel.

我也要指出，2026 年可能還有額外的上行空間，但此處尚未反映，原因在於我們可能於今年夏天完成 Cornerstone 收購交割，且／或在今年剩餘期間執行我們的股票回購計畫。我想強調，我們將持續維持資本紀律，清楚聚焦於具增厚效益（accretive）的槓桿，透過 Talen Flywheel 實質提升可提供投資人之每股自由現金流。

Turning to slide 13. We show the overall contracted profile of our business when our existing nearly 2 gigawatt PPA reaches full ramp, inclusive of the megawatts and cash flows from the Cornerstone assets. With 35% of our gross margin contracted in the long term, contracted cash flows with a AA credit counterparty will be our largest revenue stream, derisking long-term exposure to PJM capacity and energy markets. In addition, for every incremental 1 gigawatt PPA that we secure, our long-term contracted gross margin increases by 15% meaning that our next 1 gigawatt PPA may increase our long-term contracted gross margin to 50%. We believe this is a differentiated position with growing cash flows that are becoming more durable.

接著看第 13 頁投影片。我們展示了在現有近 2 吉瓦 PPA 完全爬坡（full ramp）後的整體合約覆蓋輪廓，並納入 Cornerstone 資產所帶來的兆瓦數與現金流。由於我們長期合約鎖定的毛利占比為 35%，且合約現金流的交易對手為 AA 信用評等，這將成為我們最大的營收來源，降低對 PJM 容量與能源市場之長期曝險風險。此外，我們每新增取得 1 吉瓦 PPA，長期合約毛利占比將提高 15%，這意味著下一個 1 吉瓦 PPA 可能把我們的長期合約毛利占比提升至 50%。我們認為這是一個具差異化的定位，且現金流正在成長並變得更為穩健耐久。

I'll now turn it back to Mac.

我現在把時間交回給 Mac。

All right. Thanks for joining us. That's our prepared remarks. I'll now turn it back to the operator and open the line for questions.

好的。感謝各位參與。以上是我們的準備發言。接下來我把時間交回給接線員，並開放提問。

(Operator Instructions) Shahriar Pourreza, Wells Fargo.

（接線員指示）Shahriar Pourreza，Wells Fargo。

It's actually Constantine here for Shahriar. Congrats on a great quarter and the development updates. Maybe just starting off on the PJM backdrop with the site development for data centers, is there a tentative framework on things like new capacity versus existing capacity matching like a 1:1 ratio? Or how flexible would you anticipate that to be going forward, especially as the reserve auction is trying to back solve this capacity issue?

其實我是 Constantine，代 Shahriar 發問。恭喜本季表現亮眼以及開發進度更新。先從 PJM 的背景談起，關於資料中心的場址開發，對於例如新增容量與既有容量的配比是否有一個暫定框架，例如 1:1 的比例？或者你們預期未來會有多大的彈性，特別是在備用拍賣正嘗試回推解決這個容量問題的情況下？

Yes. Thanks, Constantine. This is Cole. Look, I mean, as we have talked about previously, and we continue to believe there's opportunity here to contract off of our existing generation. Obviously, new generation is an important component and how to incentivize a lot of -- is a topic for a lot of discussion right now.

是的，謝謝你，Constantine。我是 Cole。你看，我的意思是，正如我們先前談過的，而且我們仍然相信，這裡有機會以我們既有的發電資產來簽訂合約。當然，新建發電是重要的一環，而如何去激勵大量的——目前也是許多討論的主題。

And as Terry mentioned in the remarks, we do see bringing new generation on the back of a PPA with existing generation that this hybrid model that we've been talking about and working on will help incentivize both contracting near term as load grows over the next three to five years, but also bring new generation in the 2030 and beyond timeframe, certainly not in a one-for-one manner, but we do think a percentage, as you've seen some other deals over the last number of months, percentage of new build be part of the solution.

而且如 Terry 在發言中提到的，我們確實看到以既有發電搭配 PPA 來帶動新建發電；也就是我們一直在談、也在推動的這種混合模式，將有助於在未來三到五年負載成長時，激勵近期的簽約，同時也能在 2030 年及之後的時間框架引入新建發電。當然不會是 1:1 的方式，但我們確實認為，正如過去幾個月你看到的其他一些交易，將一定比例的新建納入解方的一部分。

Hey, Constantine, it's Mac. Just to follow up on what Cole said. I think when you look at things, we have a reserve problem issue that's been identified in terms of a resource adequacy problem. And as we've said, Cole, Terry and I and the rest of the team here for a number of years now is that, that's really a 50-hour problem. And so we're looking at opportunities to solve that.

Constantine，我是 Mac。補充 Cole 的說法。我認為當你看整體狀況時，我們已經辨識出一個備用問題，也就是資源充足性（resource adequacy）問題。正如我們所說——Cole、Terry、我以及這裡的其他團隊成員多年來一直強調——那其實是一個「50 小時」的問題。因此我們正在尋找解決這個問題的機會。

And as Cole said, it doesn't necessarily need to be a 1:1 for the baseload generation because there's plenty of hours where there's tons of energy available. So what solves those 50 hours? And that's why -- and we can get into this and Terry mentioned it, like we have a mix of both batteries, which is the next quickest to market, CTs, most cost effective thereafter and CCGTs for the long run.

而如 Cole 所說，對於基載發電而言，未必需要 1:1，因為有很多時段其實有大量可用的能源。那麼，是什麼能解決那 50 小時？這也是為什麼——我們可以深入談這點，Terry 也提到——我們採用電池（最快能上市／投運）、燃氣渦輪 CT（之後最具成本效益），以及長期來看採用 CCGT 的組合。

So we're looking at it all in the construct, but I don't think it starts, as Cole said, on a 1:1 where if you had 1,000 megawatt PPA, you necessarily need 1,000 megawatts of additionality to solve the problem because you can do that with a number of things to increase the reserve margin for that load.

所以我們是在這個架構下通盤評估，但我不認為它會如 Cole 所說從 1:1 開始：也就是如果你有一份 1,000 兆瓦的 PPA，你就一定需要 1,000 兆瓦的新增性（additionality）來解決問題；因為你可以透過多種方式提高該負載的備用裕度（reserve margin）。

Okay. So just maybe to ask a little bit differently, it does not have to be a CCGT-based solution for some of the site development that you're looking for, right?

了解。那我換個方式問：你們正在看的某些場址開發，不一定要以 CCGT 為基礎的解決方案，對吧？

No. I mean just to go and jump in here, guys. But we actually think that if you look at what is likely to happen in the RBP, you're going to see upgrades, you're going to see CTs converted to CCGTs, which is effectively an upgrade of an existing machine. I think you're going to see batteries and peakers be the least cost solution.

對。我的意思是，我在這裡插一句，各位。但我們其實認為，如果你看 RBP 很可能會發生的事，你會看到升級，你會看到 CT 轉換成 CCGT，這本質上是對既有機組的升級。我認為你也會看到電池與尖峰機組（peakers）會是最低成本的解決方案。

And as you know, in our coalition, a broad-based coalition that we put forth for the RBP and have been supportive RBP, it is a pay as bid in order to drive home the fact of the affordability issue that's out there. So we think that, that's the least cost way to do that. And CCGTs happen to be at the steeper end of that curve and up on the cost curve. And we think that there's more effective ways of solving the reserve margin.

而且如你所知，在我們提出並支持 RBP 的聯盟——一個廣泛的聯盟——我們主張採用 pay as bid，以強調目前存在的可負擔性問題。因此我們認為那是最低成本的做法。CCGT 剛好位於那條曲線較陡的一端、也在成本曲線較高的位置。我們認為有更有效的方式來解決備用裕度問題。

Yes. And Constantine, to add to Mac's comment, when you take a look at our existing fleet-wide capacity factor outside of those 50 hours a year where you have real constraint and real capacity needs, you can see that there's excess generation on the grid that can support more megawatts outside of those peak periods, right?

是的。Constantine，再補充 Mac 的評論，當你看我們現有機組群在那每年 50 小時之外的整體容量因子（capacity factor）時——也就是真正有約束、真正需要容量的時段之外——你會看到電網上仍有多餘的發電量，可以在非尖峰時段支撐更多兆瓦的需求，對吧？

And so if you go back to the slide that we presented and you see this slow, steady creep up in demand, there's still excess capacity. So we think that's the reason why you don't need to have this one-for-one type construct in the grand scheme of things. We're really solving for the peak hours of the day in very tight periods of time, which, as Mac said, it's a capacity issue, not an overall energy issue.

因此，如果你回到我們展示的那張投影片，看到需求緩慢且穩定地上升，仍然存在多餘容量。我們認為這就是為什麼從大局來看，你不需要這種 1:1 的架構。我們真正要解的是一天中的尖峰小時、在非常緊繃的短時間內的問題；正如 Mac 所說，這是容量問題，而不是整體能源問題。

Excellent. And maybe just quickly following up on the regulatory issue here. With the PJM colocation rules progressing at FERC, how comfortable are your customers in terms of progressing with some of the data center development and the site development while rules are still being finalized. Is there any thresholds to look out for that maybe you're looking out for?

很好。那再快速追問一下監管議題。隨著 PJM 的共址（colocation）規則在 FERC 推進，在規則仍在定案之際，你們的客戶對於推進部分資料中心開發與場址開發的信心如何？是否有任何門檻是你們特別在留意的？

Yes. Look, I wouldn't say there's any thresholds. I mean, obviously, there's a lot of dialogue of where things are going. You mentioned the colocation docket. There's obviously the RBP.

是的。你看，我不會說有任何門檻。我的意思是，顯然大家對未來走向有很多對話。你提到共址案（colocation docket）。當然也有 RBP。

There's some other related things that are out there that PJM and others are talking through. So certainly no threshold. We still see significant interest in connecting to the grid and taking power as soon as possible, and that's going to be done off of existing generation. And we think that hyperscalers and others will certainly understand that they need to incentivize and bring new generation in five-plus years, but we don't see any threshold that they're working towards.

還有一些其他相關議題，PJM 與其他單位也正在討論。因此確實沒有什麼門檻。我們仍看到對於盡快併網、盡快用電有顯著興趣，而這將透過既有發電來完成。我們也認為超大規模業者（hyperscalers）與其他客戶會理解，他們需要在五年以上的時間尺度上去激勵並引入新建發電，但我們沒有看到他們正朝某個門檻在努力。

And Constantine, maybe to add just one more -- a little bit more color to Cole's comments. The existing development and construction that we see at data center sites all across PA and obviously using the site near our Susquehanna facility is a great example. That activity is continuing at a steady pace. They're moving forward, getting data halls filled, getting things electrified. So we don't see a slowdown in that at all.

Constantine，或許再補充一點，讓 Cole 的評論更具體一些。我們在賓州各地資料中心場址看到的既有開發與施工——當然，靠近我們 Susquehanna 設施的那個場址就是很好的例子——這些活動仍以穩定的速度持續進行。他們持續推進、讓資料機房（data halls）進駐滿載、讓各項設施完成電氣化。因此我們完全沒有看到放緩。

Obviously, the hyperscalers had their earnings call -- various earnings calls last week, and you see the continued trend from all of them with respect to what they're doing, whether it be in their hosting business or in other parts of their business. The revenue streams are there. They're moving forward fast and the capital still is hitting the ground in tangible infrastructure.

顯然，這些超大規模業者上週也陸續舉行了財報電話會議，你可以看到他們在各方面的持續趨勢，不論是在託管（hosting）業務或其他業務領域。營收來源都在，他們推進得很快，資本也仍在以可見的方式投入到實體基礎設施上。

Rinny Singh, Bank of America.

Rinny Singh，美國銀行。

I just had a question first on the power prices. I know you said that PPL is trading a little bit different than PJM West just because of the recency bias. When do you think we might see a correction in that? And is there like a specific catalyst to watch for?

我先有一個關於電力價格的問題。我知道你提到 PPL 的交易表現和 PJM West 有些不同，主要是因為近期偏誤。你認為我們什麼時候可能會看到這種情況出現修正？以及是否有什麼特定的催化劑可以關注？

Yes, Rinny, let me start on this one, and then I'll hand it over to Chris, who's with us here today. There's been a lot of transmission work in and around PPL zone and other parts of PJM that's been worked on over the last several months. And so there is a lot of sort of temporal short-term congestion that we're seeing across the board. I think our biggest view, and we mentioned this in the prepared remarks, is as load evolves and load pops up in PPL zone and these other load pockets that you're seeing to form, we think that, that obviously would trend and come back in line. Chris, do you want to add anything?

是的，Rinny，我先回答這題，然後再交給今天也在現場的 Chris。過去幾個月，在 PPL 分區周邊以及 PJM 其他地區做了很多輸電工程。因此我們在各處都看到不少偏短期、時間性的壅塞。我們最大的看法——也在事先準備的發言中提到——是隨著負載演變、以及 PPL 分區與你看到正在形成的其他負載口袋的負載開始上來，我們認為這些狀況顯然會逐步回歸並重新對齊。Chris，你要補充嗎？

Yes. Given the sort of -- the auction process itself has some illiquidity and timing issues. And so reflective in those marks is those auction clears and those disconnect from sort of the projections that we're making. And so near-term acuteness in basis as a result of this ongoing transmission work is bleeding into that term price. And so picking a time in which that reverts or comes back to something more normal will, again, happen through time as that load appears, but not as a binary instantaneous moment in time.

是的。由於——拍賣流程本身存在一些流動性不足與時間點上的問題。因此，這些估值反映的是拍賣的結算結果，並且與我們所做的預測之間出現某種程度的脫節。因為這些持續進行的輸電工程，短期基差的尖銳變化正在滲透到遠期價格之中。所以要選定一個時間點讓它回歸或回到較正常的水準，仍然會隨時間推移、隨著負載出現而發生，但不會是在某個二元、瞬間的時間點突然完成。

Yes. And Rinny, look, I mean, as I said in the prepared remarks, we use the most visible marks out there. And so we use the PPL zone mark. Though you can look in the appendix, we have a slide that shows the basis -- West Hub PPL basis over time. And for multiple years, it was trading very narrowly in a range.

是的。Rinny，你看，正如我在事先準備的發言中所說，我們使用市場上最可見的報價。因此我們使用 PPL 分區的報價。不過你可以看附錄，我們有一張投影片顯示基差——West Hub 與 PPL 的基差隨時間的變化。多年來它一直在非常狹窄的區間內交易。

And that's broken out over the last couple of months as Terry and Chris have noted that there's reasons why. But from a -- just a mark perspective, we stay true to what's visible, and that's why we're calling it an upside opportunity.

而在過去幾個月，正如 Terry 和 Chris 所指出的，因為一些原因這個區間被打破了。但從——單就估值（mark）的角度，我們仍忠於市場上可見的報價，這也是為什麼我們把它稱為一個上行機會。

Rinny, it's Mac. And just one further follow-on is let's not lose sight while the basis has widened, the entire market is up, and Chris is now being proven correct that the market was going to tighten or the term market is starting to agree with Chris.

Rinny，我是 Mac。再補充一點：別忽略了，雖然基差擴大了，但整體市場都在上行，而 Chris 現在也被證明是對的——市場確實會收緊，或者說遠期市場開始同意 Chris 的看法。

And so while the basis has widened, the market was up versus the 3/31 marks. And as Cole mentioned in his prepared piece there, they're up even further if you went to yesterday. And so the markets are finally rationalizing in our view, supply/demand. And this basis, we think, is a temporal issue.

所以雖然基差擴大了，但相較於 3/31 的估值，市場是上漲的。而且如 Cole 在他事先準備的部分提到的，如果你看到昨天，價格還更高。因此我們認為市場終於在合理化供需。我們認為這個基差是時間性的問題。

Okay. Yes, I think that makes sense. And then on this load growth, this capacity that you've highlighted, how are you guys thinking of -- what are you guys seeing for new prices essentially for whether it be CT or CCGT? And how are you guys thinking about managing the risk? Obviously, of the RBP to kind of fill in that capacity price, but more so the energy risk. Is that just focus on long-term data center contracts and higher prices?

好的。是的，我覺得這樣說得通。接著關於你們強調的這個負載成長、以及這些容量，你們怎麼看——基本上不論是 CT 或 CCGT，新建價格你們看到的是什麼水準？以及你們如何思考風險管理？顯然 RBP 會在某種程度上補足容量價格，但更重要的是能源風險。你們是否就是聚焦在長期資料中心合約與更高的價格？

Yes. Thanks, Rinny. Good question. Obviously, you've seen a significant amount of appreciation in sort of the turnkey cost for CCGT and then quite frankly, even a similar move for combustion turbines across the board. In our proposal for the RBP, and I think this is pretty consistent with what PJM has talked about, you really -- we really think that, that should be a capacity product, right?

是的，謝謝你，Rinny。好問題。顯然你已經看到 CCGT 的交鑰匙成本大幅上升，坦白說，燃氣渦輪（combustion turbines）在各方面也出現類似的上升。在我們對 RBP 的提案中——我想這也與 PJM 的說法相當一致——你真的——我們真的認為那應該是一個容量產品，對吧？

And that's where you should focus, assuming that you're going to build a CT on the back of a reliability backstop award, if you will. And so the capacity component of that or the capacity revenue stream is really what should underwrite or incentivize that. The energy and any ancillaries off of that is sort of second tier.

而你應該把重點放在那裡，前提是你要在所謂的可靠性後備（reliability backstop）得標的基礎上去建一座 CT。因此其中的容量組成、或容量收入流，才是真正應該用來承作（underwrite）或激勵這項投資的。能源收入以及任何輔助服務收入則屬於第二層級。

But also the ability of getting that award for multiple years. And obviously, our proposal has up to 15 years. PJM's current proposal even talks about procurement up to 15 years. So obviously, some similarities there. We think that ultimately is what helps underwrite that.

但同時也包括能夠取得多年期得標的能力。顯然，我們的提案最長可達 15 年。PJM 目前的提案也談到最長可採購 15 年。所以顯然兩者有一些相似之處。我們認為最終正是這一點有助於承作。

And I think we've talked about this before. I think the biggest challenge is not can you get additional resources on. It's really financing those resources and what is the underpinnings for somebody to underwrite and to get the financing associated with it. So we think the proposal that PJM has hits the marks on that. We think there's some modifications that we'd like to see, but we think it gets there.

而且我想我們以前也談過。我認為最大的挑戰不是能不能把額外資源併上來，而是如何為這些資源融資，以及讓某個人願意承作並取得相關融資的基礎是什麼。因此我們認為 PJM 的提案在這方面切中要點。我們希望看到一些修改，但我們認為方向是到位的。

Moses Sutton, BNP Paribas.

Moses Sutton，法國巴黎銀行。

It's really (technical difficulty) to '28. So last quarter, [$31.40], including Cornerstone now moves to $41 plus and you're not leaning on the upside drivers like M&A and PPA in there. So how much of that roughly $10 increase is specifically driven by the spark spread expansion versus balancing other factors? And I know you've said the basis aspect is not in there. And then finally, any assumption embedded in there of higher capacity factors on the fleet?

這真的（技術問題）到 '28。所以上一季是 [$31.40]，現在把 Cornerstone 納入後變成 $41 以上，而且你們並沒有把像是併購（M&A）和 PPA 這些上行驅動因素算進去。所以這大約增加的 $10 裡面，有多少是特別由火花價差（spark spread）擴大所驅動，而不是用來平衡其他因素？我知道你們說基差的部分不在裡面。最後，裡面是否有隱含對機組更高容量因子（capacity factors）的假設？

Yes. Thanks,. Look, at the end of the day, we're not going to get too specific on all the different drivers, and -- but we put it all in there. I mean, you can dissect a little bit. And we obviously showed the impact of just the share repurchase program separately. But the other levers here, which is around just the cornerstone numbers and the spark spreads and so forth, you can get to a directional answer there, but we're not going to break down line by line on that.

是的，謝謝。你看，歸根結底，我們不會對所有不同的驅動因素講得太具體——但我們都把它放進去了。我的意思是，你可以稍微拆解一下。我們也確實把單純的庫藏股回購計畫影響另外獨立呈現。但其他槓桿——也就是 Cornerstone 的數字、火花價差等等——你可以得到一個方向性的答案，但我們不會逐項逐行地拆解。

Got it. Got it. And on the backstop auction, so not specifically to you guys, but like just broadly, is there a view that you have of if they'll even clear 15 gigawatts, whether that means battery CT, some CCGTs in there, can they build that much by 2031 with queue reform? And do you think that it's going to -- some of it is going to go into that second stage of the clearing process? Or would you expect the bilateral process does most of the heavy lifting? I know it's hard to tell from here, but just curious your market views.

了解。了解。那關於後備拍賣（backstop auction），不是特別針對你們公司，而是更廣泛地說，你們是否有一個看法：它是否甚至能結算 15GW——不論是電池、CT、或一些 CCGT——在佇列改革（queue reform）之下，到 2031 年能建出這麼多嗎？你覺得它會不會——其中一部分會進入結算流程的第二階段？還是你預期雙邊流程會承擔大部分工作？我知道從這裡很難判斷，但只是好奇你們對市場的看法。

Yes, Moses, lots in there to unpack. Let me maybe hit a couple of those. I think when you take a look at the cost and you take a look at affordability at the end of the day, I think there's some obvious choices when it comes to technology. PJM uses the cost of new entrant. That cost of new entrant is based off of a benchmark of a CT, which is the most affordable at the end of the day.

是的，Moses，這裡面有很多可以拆開來談。我先回答其中幾點。我認為當你看成本、再看可負擔性時，歸根結底在技術選擇上會有一些明顯的答案。PJM 使用新進入者成本（cost of new entrant）。這個新進入者成本是以 CT 的基準來估算，而 CT 最終是最可負擔的選項。

And so we also think that you can get certain types of CTs and batteries built in a more timely manner. And that's also something that, quite frankly, the reliability backstop needs to take into consideration. You sort of alluded to it in your comment, CCGTs and getting in the queue for a CCGT is a little bit of longer wait time. And so you need to factor that in at the end of the day. But yes, I mean, we think that there's some good things in the proposal.

因此我們也認為，某些類型的 CT 與電池可以在更及時的時程內建成。坦白說，可靠性後備機制也需要把這點納入考量。你在評論中也提到了，CCGT 以及 CCGT 進入併網佇列（queue）會需要更長的等待時間。因此最終你必須把這些因素納入考量。不過是的，我們認為這個提案裡有一些不錯的地方。

I will say the one thing that we think could be helpful though is the interconnection queue needs some clearing and needs some prioritization. That's one area where we're actively engaged in the stakeholder process, and we'll continue to be engaged in the stakeholder process because ultimately, that interconnection queue matters quite a bit on getting these new resources online. So hopefully, that gives you a little bit of color, and we think it's a good progress, and we'll see it push forward here.

我會說，我們認為有一件事可能會有幫助：併網佇列需要清理並需要優先排序。這是我們正在利害關係人流程中積極參與的一個領域，而且我們也會持續參與，因為最終併網佇列對於讓這些新資源上線非常重要。希望這能給你一些補充說明；我們認為這是好的進展，接下來就看它如何推進。

Michael Sullivan, Wolfe.

Michael Sullivan，Wolfe。

Maybe this is a silly one, but just -- and I know you don't want to get into specific opportunities. But when you laid out your development capabilities there, why not just lean into the ones that are already fully zoned versus the ones that aren't -- that we're hearing about more publicly that are getting pushed back? And on the ones that are fully zoned, what is the hangup there?

也許這問題有點傻，但就是——我知道你們不想談具體機會。不過當你們列出你們的開發能力時，為什麼不乾脆更偏向那些已經完成完整分區（fully zoned）的案子，而不是那些——我們在公開資訊上聽到更多、而且正在被往後推的案子？另外，對於那些已經 fully zoned 的案子，卡關點是什麼？

Yes, Michael. So what we really want to try to do on that slide is to give a flavor of the work that the team has been doing for well over a year across the board. As you take a look at the different opportunities that we've developed, the ones that you hear about are fine. Obviously, Montour has been in the press. I mean, we continue to progress that one.

是的，Michael。所以我們在那張投影片上真正想做的，是讓大家感受到團隊在各個面向已經投入超過一年的工作成果。當你看看我們所開發的不同機會時，你聽到的那些當然沒問題。很明顯地，Montour 已經見諸媒體。我是說，我們仍在持續推進那個案子。

But we do have others that are not in the press. And quite frankly, we want to push those forward as well. As we talked about on the last call, back in February, there was a lot of focus on just one or two of these and wanted to make sure that investors understood that there was a broader sort of context.

但我們也有其他沒有出現在媒體上的案子。坦白說，我們也希望把那些往前推。如同我們在上一次電話會議、也就是二月時談到的，當時大家的焦點多集中在其中一兩個案子上，我們想確保投資人理解其實有更廣泛的背景脈絡。

I think the biggest thing that we think is helpful as well is as we think about this hybrid approach that we're moving forward with and trying to find some new generation to add into the mix, we think that, that solution is something that really sort of checks a lot of boxes for some of the hyperscalers. And that actually is going to be a big aspect of how you'll see these things progress forward.

我認為我們覺得同樣很有幫助的一點是：當我們思考這個正在推進的混合式策略，並嘗試加入一些新一代機組到組合中時，我們認為這個解決方案對某些超大規模業者（hyperscalers）而言，確實能滿足很多關鍵需求。而這也將會是你看到這些案子如何往前推進的一個重要面向。

So it's not just zoning at the end of the day, whether it's industrial or sort of ag use, it's also the other implications around, okay, do you have some new gen to go with it? What's the existing gen that you can have on the back of it. But hopefully, that gives you some color.

所以到最後不只是分區（zoning）而已，不管是工業用地或農業用途，還有其他相關影響，例如：好，你是否有一些新一代機組可以搭配？你既有的機組能在其後提供什麼支撐？但希望這些能讓你更了解狀況。

And Michael, it's Mac. Maybe real quick. I think when you ask the question and you say, what's the hang up? I don't think that there's necessarily a hang up. What we're doing is what we've been talking about, which is developing a set of options, and they all have different statuses as they move through the process.

Michael，我是 Mac。我補充一下。你問到「卡在哪裡」時，我不認為一定有所謂的卡關。我們正在做的就是我們一直在談的：開發一組選項，而它們在流程推進中各自有不同的狀態。

And sometimes one site that hasn't potentially reached zoning, aka Montour might have been advancing faster because it was liked by a counterparty more at that first piece, right? Now you have other ones that are more zoned they come in.

有時候某個尚未達到分區階段的場址（也就是 Montour）可能反而推進得更快，因為在第一個環節它更受交易對手青睞，對吧？接著你會有其他分區條件更成熟的案子加入。

And then we've got others that aren't fully zoned that we're working on as well. So it's bringing along all of these different things, and it's not just working on one, and that's what we were trying to -- what we were mentioning when we said Montour is not our only -- we're not -- that's not the only thing we have in our development pipeline.

然後我們也有其他尚未完全完成分區的案子正在推進。所以就是把這些不同的事情一起往前帶，不是只做單一案子；這也是我們提到「Montour 不是我們唯一的——我們的開發管線不只有那一個」時想表達的重點。

Okay. That's very helpful. I appreciate the color there. And then just back to some of the pricing action. I think you gave some pretty good points as to what happened in Q1, but things have obviously really started to move in the last couple of weeks here.

好的。這非常有幫助，謝謝你提供這些補充說明。接著回到一些價格走勢。我覺得你對第一季發生的事情已經給了很好的觀點，但很明顯在過去幾週事情真的開始動起來了。

And so just curious, as we're in like a shoulder season, what's driving that? And then even on the basis side, like it seems like that's actually still going in the wrong direction. And so how you think about that in the last -- yes, kind of the last couple of weeks' developments?

所以我想問的是：現在算是淡旺季交界（shoulder season），是什麼在驅動？另外在基差（basis）方面，看起來其實仍在往不利方向走。所以你們怎麼看待最近——對，就是最近這幾週的發展？

Yes. So Michael, let me start this, and then I'll let Chris chime in. And this sort of refers back to the prepared remarks. One of the things that you're seeing is as you see cash market activity in the real-time market get really constrained and really tight, the term market is really responding to that. A couple of examples, obviously, more recent, late January and early February, we had a really significant pricing event for eight or nine days throughout the entire market.

是的。Michael，我先回答，然後讓 Chris 補充。這也呼應我們事先準備的發言。你看到的一件事是：當即時市場（real-time market）的現貨市場活動變得非常受限、非常吃緊時，遠期市場（term market）會對此做出強烈反應。舉幾個例子，當然比較近期的是一月底到二月初，我們在整個市場經歷了一次非常顯著、持續八到九天的定價事件。

So obviously, the market reacted to that. But even recently is the set of spring outages that we've had, right? We normally have a traditional large set of spring outages across the system. You get some generation that's off, but even a modest amount of weather that comes in, we've seen price volatility and cash pick up. And so the term market feeds off of that. Chris, do you want to add some details to that?

所以市場顯然對此做出反應。但即便是最近，我們也遇到一系列春季歲修停機（spring outages），對吧？通常系統在春季會有一波傳統的大規模停機，會有部分發電機組離線；但只要天氣稍微有點變化，我們就看到價格波動與現貨走強。因此遠期市場會受到這些影響。Chris，你要補充一些細節嗎？

Yes, I think, again, the price appreciation is something that we've been tracking and certainly sort of identifying for several quarters now and would be remiss to not sort of highlight our current hedge percentages in those outer years. Again, below our historical ranges that we've typically been at.

是的。我想同樣地，價格走升是我們已追蹤、並且在好幾個季度前就開始辨識的趨勢；如果不特別強調我們在較遠年度的目前避險比例，我們會覺得有所缺漏。再次強調，這些避險比例低於我們過往通常維持的歷史區間。

And so more or less of our conviction in those periods -- our conviction on that price appreciation is being expressed through those historically low hedge percentages. And so as Terry alluded to, all of the fundamental drivers taking place in the cash market, manifesting themselves now through the curve, so happening through time, but through different segments of cash and term.

因此，我們對那些期間價格走升的信心——我們對價格走升的信念——是透過這些歷史偏低的避險比例來表達的。正如 Terry 所提到的，所有在現貨市場發生的基本面驅動因素，現在正透過遠期曲線（curve）反映出來；也就是說，隨著時間推移，會在現貨與遠期的不同區段呈現。

Angie Storozynski, Seaport.

Angie Storozynski，Seaport。

I wanted to talk about Ohio. I know that we're waiting for the Cornerstone acquisition to close, but you've owned Guernsey for quite some time. And there's been a lot of chatter around data centers from Ohio, especially from the region where you own a plant already. We heard some comments from AEP this morning about how dissatisfied there with the pace of load interconnection in PJM. So it did sound like it was about Ohio.

我想談談俄亥俄州。我知道我們正在等待 Cornerstone 收購案完成交割，但你們持有 Guernsey 已經有一段時間了。而且市場上一直有很多關於俄亥俄州資料中心的討論，尤其是在你們已經擁有電廠的那個區域。今天早上我們也聽到 AEP 的一些評論，提到他們對 PJM 負載併網（load interconnection）進度的速度很不滿意，所以聽起來確實是在講俄亥俄州。

And also, we saw some deals like behind-the-meter deals from Williams. And so you showed us opportunities for contracting assets in Pennsylvania. Could you comment about Ohio, especially vis-a-vis Guernsey?

另外，我們也看到一些像 Williams 的表後（behind-the-meter）交易。因此你們向我們展示了在賓州可簽約資產的機會。你們能否評論一下俄亥俄州，特別是相對於 Guernsey 而言？

Yes. So Angie, maybe I'll touch on that real quick and Mac may follow up on that. So obviously, on the slide, we talk about specific activity in Pennsylvania. I will say in the prepared remarks, and also we do have one small sort of call out box. We have been active in Ohio.

可以。Angie，我先很快回應一下，Mac 也許會再補充。很明顯地，在投影片上我們談的是賓州的特定活動。我會說，在事先準備的發言中我們也提到，而且我們確實有一個小小的重點提示框：我們在俄亥俄州也一直很活躍。

Obviously, we've had Guernsey in the portfolio for a few months now. It performed really well in Q1. Obviously, a big help to our overall financial performance. But we've been engaged in Ohio. We've talked to customers in and around that site as well as just the broader state in general. So we're active there.

很明顯地，我們的投資組合中已經有 Guernsey 幾個月了。它在第一季表現非常好，顯然對我們整體財務表現有很大幫助。但我們也一直在俄亥俄州投入。我們已與該場址周邊的客戶，以及整個州更廣泛的客戶進行接觸。所以我們在那裡是活躍的。

Once again, I think we've been working on a number of different options. And as we restructured the leadership team at the end of last year, we put a lot more focus on different parts of the market and Ohio was definitely one of them. So it's a focus for us, and we think it's a really good market, and we think the customers like to be there. And there's a lot of customers that are already there today. It's a very established market in and around Columbus.

再一次，我認為我們一直在推進多種不同的選項。而在去年年底我們重整領導團隊後，我們把更多焦點放在市場的不同區塊，俄亥俄州絕對是其中之一。所以這是我們的重點；我們認為那是一個非常好的市場，也認為客戶喜歡在那裡布局。而且今天已經有很多客戶在那裡了。在哥倫布（Columbus）周邊，這是一個非常成熟的市場。

There are several hubs in the area where you've got a lot of data centers. And so we really want to continue to push that forward just like we're pushing forward in Pennsylvania.

那個區域有好幾個樞紐（hubs），聚集了大量資料中心。因此我們真的希望能持續把這件事往前推，就像我們在賓州推進一樣。

Angie, just to piggyback there. Obviously, we like Ohio. We've amassed over 4 gigawatt gas fleet across there, including the plant that's in Indiana that serves basically Ohio. And we did that for a reason. And so first, if you look at these fundamentals, the price appreciation, the price action that we just talked about is affecting those, and it doesn't have a negative West Hub basis.

Angie，我補充一下。很明顯地，我們喜歡俄亥俄州。我們在那裡累積了超過 4GW 的燃氣機組群（gas fleet），其中也包括位於印第安納州、但基本上服務俄亥俄州的電廠。我們這麼做是有原因的。第一，如果你看這些基本面，我們剛剛談到的價格走升、價格走勢也正在影響那裡，而且那裡沒有不利的 West Hub 基差。

So that's been a good position for us to take. And the second thing I'll say about developing options in Ohio is we're developing options in Ohio. So it's just like we've been doing in Pennsylvania over time. We're just not going to get into the specifics.

所以那對我們而言是一個很好的布局。第二點我想說的是，關於在俄亥俄州開發選項：我們確實正在俄亥俄州開發選項。這就像我們長期以來在賓州做的一樣。我們只是暫時不會談到具體細節。

Okay. And then one more question about slide 12 and the Talen Flywheel. So I mean, it was always my understanding that you go through M&A and the next step is monetization of assets. Now in that box where you show upside to your free cash flow per share, you show M&A as the first driver. Is it fair to assume that we would first see some monetization of assets before we see another M&A transaction?

好的。那我還有一個問題，關於第 12 張投影片與 Talen Flywheel。我的理解一直是：你先做併購（M&A），下一步就是資產變現（monetization of assets）。但在你們那個方框裡，顯示每股自由現金流上行空間的驅動因素時，你把 M&A 放在第一個驅動因素。是否可以合理推論：在我們看到下一筆 M&A 交易之前，會先看到一些資產變現？

Yes. Andy, it's Mac. Maybe I'll address that. So first of all, there's nothing to the order of what's on the right-hand side other than it was to maintain consistency with what we've shown before because this is the order that we showed it in before.

是的。Andy，我是 Mac。我來回應一下。首先，右側的排序本身沒有特別含義；只是為了與我們之前展示的內容保持一致，因為之前就是用這個順序呈現的。

So obviously -- and I think we've all said this in a perfect world, what you would do is you would add assets, contract them up, recycle capital, then add assets and do that. But unfortunately, we're left with deciding to make strategic actions, which are consistent with the Talen Flywheel that happen to be lumpy at periods of time.

所以很明顯——而且我想我們都說過，在一個完美的世界裡，你會做的是：新增資產、把它們簽成合約、回收資本，然後再新增資產並重複這樣做。但不幸的是，我們現在必須決定採取一些策略性行動；這些行動與 Talen 飛輪一致，只是它們在某些時間點會呈現出不連續、較為集中的特性。

And yes, we are diligently working. I think Cole mentioned it, we're thinking about how do we get to that 50% contracted energy margin. We're looking at different opportunities across the way. And those are developing. But we like what we've been doing.

是的，我們正在勤勉地推進。我想 Cole 提到過，我們在思考如何達到 50% 的已簽約能源毛利。我們一路上在看不同的機會，而這些機會也在發展中。但我們喜歡我們一直以來所做的事情。

Yes, would we satisfy investors if we had a deal's announced by now? Sure. But these things take their time. We've said that, and we're working our way through, and we feel like we've got a good pipeline of opportunities to get things done.

是的，如果我們現在已經宣布一筆交易，會讓投資人滿意嗎？當然。但這些事情需要時間。我們一直這麼說，也正在一步步推進；我們覺得我們有一條不錯的機會管道，可以把事情做成。

Bill Appicelli, UBS.

Bill Appicelli，瑞銀（UBS）。

Just a question going back to a few of the comments earlier. When you guys look at the levelized cost of energy that's going to be needed for a lot of this new build, I mean, how wide is that spread even if you're looking at a CT relative to where market conditions are currently?

我想回到前面幾個評論再問一個問題。當你們看很多這些新建案所需要的平準化發電成本（LCOE）時，我的意思是，即便你看的是 CT（燃氣渦輪）相對於目前的市場狀況，那個價差到底有多大？

Bill, it's Cole. I'll start and others can chime in here. Look, I mean, the gap is wide, right, just on a merchant basis to support new build of any kind. And that's why we and I think a lot of others, and it's not rocket science, we'll do new build supported by some kind of commitment, whether that's a bilateral contract directly with a hyperscaler or through the RBP and through, therefore, PJM. But that gap has got to get bridged for us to make that large commitment and do so in an accretive manner for our shareholders here.

Bill，我是 Cole。我先回答，其他人也可以補充。你看，這個缺口很大，對吧？單就純商業（merchant）基礎而言，要支撐任何形式的新建案都不夠。這也是為什麼我們——我想很多人也是——這不是什麼高深學問——我們會在有某種承諾支持的情況下做新建案，不管是直接與 hyperscaler（超大規模雲端業者）簽雙邊合約，或是透過 RBP，進而透過 PJM。但這個缺口必須被彌補，我們才會做出那樣的大額承諾，而且要以對股東具增益（accretive）的方式來做。

But I mean the current capacity clears, as everyone knows, is not sufficient to stimulate new build. And obviously, different technologies have different LCOE. Combined cycles are the most expensive. They obviously have more energy margin. So always a trade-off, but the gap is not like a couple of bucks. It's a pretty large spread right now.

但我的意思是，如大家所知，目前的容量市場出清結果不足以刺激新建案。當然，不同技術的 LCOE 不同。複循環機組（combined cycles）最貴；它們的能源毛利也更高。所以永遠是取捨，但這個缺口不是差個幾塊錢而已；現在的價差相當大。

Right. Okay. And then I mean, do you have any concern about sort of a bifurcated market where the new incremental megawatts are getting the sufficient payment, but existing generation is not. I mean I think that seems to be a concern in the market more broadly. So just curious your thoughts.

了解。那接著我想問，你們是否擔心市場出現某種分化：新增的邊際兆瓦能拿到足夠的支付，但既有發電卻拿不到。我想這似乎是更廣泛市場的一個擔憂，所以想聽聽你們的看法。

Look, Bill, it's Mac. I would say that, yes, it's concerns that people have broadly in the market. I don't know that we share the same level of concern because as we've always stated and we supported the RBP, it was a onetime action.

Bill，我是 Mac。我會說，是的，這確實是市場上很多人普遍的擔憂。我不確定我們是否有同樣程度的擔憂，因為如我們一直所說、而且我們也支持 RBP，它是一個一次性的行動。

I do think as last week, the cap was extended, we were -- of the capacity clears ['29/'30] and so for two more years. We supported that. That gives time to create and to exercise the RBP. That's always a concern that's going to be raised, but we don't share the same level of concern.

我確實認為，就像上週一樣，上限被延長了，我們——針對容量市場出清（['29/'30]）因此又延長兩年。我們支持這件事。這給了時間去建立並執行 RBP。這類擔憂總是會被提出，但我們沒有同樣程度的擔憂。

Okay. And then I guess maybe just lastly, on the new gen options, would that include any repowerings of your existing assets in terms of up rates or other things?

好的。那最後一個問題，關於新發電（new gen）選項，是否包含對你們既有資產的任何再動力化（repowering），例如升級增容（uprates）或其他措施？

It does not.

不包含。

Julien Dumoulin-Smith, Jefferies.

Julien Dumoulin-Smith，Jefferies。

Maybe just to rehash on a couple of things -- just coming back to the ratepayer pledge here that came out after your last call here. Can we talk a little bit about -- just did that change the game at all, right, away from the RBP and to come back to the protection pledge they made in March. Just can you talk to that, if at all, has that changed your strategy? I know you don't want to talk too much about it, but is there anything there? Did that evolve in any way? I just want to like tackle that directly and explicitly here. And then I got a quick follow-up.

我想把幾件事再梳理一下——回到你們上次電話會議後出現的「用戶（ratepayer）承諾」這件事。我們能不能談談——那是否在某種程度上改變了局面？也就是說，是否從 RBP 轉向、回到他們在三月提出的保護承諾。你能不能談談這點？如果有的話，這是否改變了你們的策略？我知道你們不想談太多，但那裡面有什麼值得注意的嗎？有任何演變嗎？我只是想在這裡直接、明確地問清楚。然後我還有一個簡短的追問。

Look, you're talking about the Pennsylvania? Or are you talking about the -- what came out of the White House --

你說的是賓州那個？還是你說的是——白宮那邊出來的——

Yes. The White House piece in March, yes.

對，三月白宮那個，是的。

Yes. So look, I think that there's the pledge that you heard the hyperscalers make that obviously, they committed to paying their fair share effectively. I think there's still an open debate as to what that fair share is and how that fair share is determined and how that all gets pushed through the system, as you know, right? Because we operate in a reorganized market in PJM and there's a certain construct and set of rules associated with that and ability and jurisdictions and authority, whether it be at PJM, the states or at FERC that have to set these rules. And so there's the implementation that this is working its way through.

是的。所以你看，我認為你聽到 hyperscalers 做出的承諾，顯然是他們承諾有效地支付他們「公平份額」。我想目前仍有一個公開的辯論：什麼是公平份額、如何界定公平份額、以及這一切如何在系統中被傳導，你也知道，對吧？因為我們在 PJM 的重組市場中運作，這裡有特定的架構與一套規則，並且牽涉到權限、管轄與授權——不論是在 PJM、各州或 FERC——都必須制定這些規則。因此在落地執行上，這件事正在逐步推進。

But I think in general, where do we see the puck going, we generally think that there's still the ability because of speed to market to contract through existing assets. We are starting to see the hybrid model that's been discussed during the remarks today as being the development aspect of it to solve the so-called additionality or bringing incremental generation to ratepayer protection. So I think it's going to take time to evolve on that front. And I don't know that it's necessarily as clear as some people would say that the hyperscalers have signed up to pay for all of this because that's not exactly how the reform markets work.

但我想整體而言，如果問我們覺得趨勢會往哪裡走，我們普遍認為，因為上市速度（speed to market）的關係，仍然可以透過既有資產來簽約。我們也開始看到今天發言中提到的混合模式（hybrid model），也就是把開發面向納入其中，用來解決所謂的「額外性」（additionality），或是把增量發電帶進來以保護用戶。我認為這需要時間來演變。而且我不確定是否如某些人所說那麼清楚：hyperscalers 已經同意為所有這些買單，因為改革後的市場運作方式並不完全是那樣。

Got it. And then just to tie this back, I mean, as you guys talk about the 500 to 1 gig of new gen here potentially, I mean, would you think about that satiating like 1/2 of that equation when it comes to additionality such that you talk about these 1-plus gigawatt sites or what have you. Are you thinking about tethering the new gen back to it go forward?

了解。那把這跟前面連起來，你們提到可能有 500MW 到 1GW 的新發電（new gen），我的意思是，你們會不會認為這能滿足「額外性」那個方程式的一半？例如你們談到那些 1GW 以上的場址等等。你們是否在思考未來把新發電與那些場址綁定（tethering）在一起？

Yes. No, I think Terry actually said I'm looking at it, it was actually -- it's a 0.5 gig to 1 gig at a site and multiple sites that we see several gigs of opportunity. And then Dale, who's been working the development aspect of this, the asset development aspect of this he was the one that submitted through the queue, the 2.3 gigs or just over 2 gigs that we put in.

是的。不，我想 Terry 其實說的是——我在看——實際上是每個場址 0.5GW 到 1GW，而且是多個場址；我們看到有好幾個 GW 的機會。然後 Dale 一直在推進這部分的開發——資產開發的面向——他就是那位透過佇列（queue）提交了我們放進去的 2.3GW、或略高於 2GW 的申請的人。

And so when you say tethered, I think that's what we're -- tethered is the same as what we're saying is what we call the hybrid model, which is you put it with an existing PPA and then you're solving that 50 hours a year if it's batteries or peakers. And then when you need to solve the energy, then it becomes CCGTs, new, right?

所以當你說「綁定」（tethered）時，我想那就是我們——「綁定」其實跟我們所說的混合模式是一樣的：也就是你把它和既有的 PPA 放在一起，然後如果是電池或尖峰機組（peakers），你就解決一年 50 小時的那個問題。接著當你需要解決能源（energy）時，就會變成新的 CCGT（複循環燃氣機組），對吧？

But you can put those on the back of existing and solve a lot of the resource adequacy problem at a lower cost than bringing CCGTs because I know a lot of the stuff, as you know, Julien, that's being talked about out there is now $3,000 to $4,000 for a new CCGT. That's a lot more than $500 a megawatt day.

但你可以把這些接在既有資產後面，以比引入 CCGT 更低的成本，解決很大一部分的資源充足性（resource adequacy）問題。因為如你所知，Julien，外面現在談的很多東西是新建 CCGT 要 $3,000 到 $4,000（每千瓦）。這比每兆瓦日 $500 高出很多。

Absolutely, right. No, look, I hear you on the storage piece for sure. Right, right. And CTs and storage for now, right, for sure. But just the bring to a full conclusion that thought, right?

完全同意，對。你看，我確實理解儲能那一塊，沒錯。對，對。現在先用 CT 和儲能，沒錯。但我想把那個想法完整收斂一下，對吧？

You'll aim to bring this stuff up online. But basically leveraging this RBP, that's when that's the moment that we could see something materialize. If you think about like time lines, everyone is always peppering you on this question of when. But to come to fruition on it, to the extent to which you all clear something from an RBP perspective, what have you, that is that tethering event that should unlock this opportunity. Conceptually, it will be explicitly at that point in time tied to some of these contracting things you've been pursuing.

你們會力求把這些東西上線。但基本上是利用這個 RBP；當那個時點到來，我們就可能看到有實質的東西成形。如果你從時間線來看，大家總是一直追問你們「什麼時候」。但要讓它落地成真，在你們從 RBP 的角度出清一些東西、或類似情況的前提下，那就是那個「綁定事件」（tethering event），應該會解鎖這個機會。概念上，在那個時間點，它會明確地與你們一直在推進的一些簽約事項連結在一起。

Julian, back to the earlier conversation and questions. I think we've got a very specific path on that. There's one or two ways that those new megawatts will come to the grid. It will be either through a direct offtake agreement with the hyperscaler or through an RBP award. So those are the two paths that you'll get there. And obviously, it will depend on which path comes first at the end of the day.

Julian，回到先前的對話與問題。我認為我們在這方面已經有一條非常明確的路徑。那些新增的兆瓦將以一到兩種方式併入電網：要嘛是與超大規模雲端業者（hyperscaler）簽訂直接承購協議（offtake agreement），要嘛是透過 RBP 得標。所以你會透過這兩條路徑達成。而且很明顯，最終將取決於哪一條路徑先發生。

Nick Amicucci, Evercore.

Nick Amicucci，Evercore。

Happy Cinco de Mayo. A couple of quick ones for me and actually piggybacking on Julian's question there, too. So is it fair to say -- so the new generation could be a long-term DC offtake agreement or the RBP. I guess how would you guys frame that the capital deployment? Is it fair to say that the RBP is more of a fallback? Or are you seeing economics that would compete with a hyperscaler PPA?

五一節快樂（Cinco de Mayo）。我這邊有幾個簡短問題，也想接續 Julian 的問題。所以可以這麼說嗎——新的發電量可能是長期的資料中心（DC）承購協議，或是 RBP。我想問你們會如何界定資本部署？可以說 RBP 比較像是備援方案嗎？還是你們看到的經濟性足以與超大規模雲端業者的 PPA 競爭？

I think it's not a discrete choice between the two. It's Mac, by the way. I don't think there's a discrete choice between the two. I think we're going to participate in the RBP, and we'll participate in the bilateral markets as well with these through the hybrid model, as we've been saying. So I think that one is more of a centralized function that we think provides a onetime backstop hence the name to the market for the resource adequacy. And all the while, there's a bilateral market that's out there, too, that can bring the additionality through the hybrid model we're discussing.

我認為這不是兩者之間的非此即彼選擇。順帶一提，我是 Mac。我不認為這是兩者之間的離散選擇。我們會參與 RBP，也會透過我們一直在說的混合模式參與雙邊市場。因此我認為其中一個更像是我們認為可提供一次性後盾的集中式機制——也因此得名——用來為市場的資源充裕性提供支撐。同時，市場上也存在雙邊市場，亦可透過我們正在討論的混合模式帶來額外性（additionality）。

So I don't think it's as discrete as that. I think that what people are seeing in terms of cost, it will be interesting because people will have to bid. We have a construct in there where as it originally stood, it was 1.25x, I think, the approved cost with it so that you didn't have to get approval of your capacity bids in the RBP, there's -- of those that argue that, that should probably go up, and I could see some logic behind that.

所以我不認為它有那麼離散。我認為大家在成本方面看到的情況會很有意思，因為大家都必須出價。我們在其中有一個架構，原本的設計是 1.25 倍——我想是——核准成本，這樣你在 RBP 的容量出價就不需要再取得核准；也有人主張這個倍數可能應該提高，我也能理解其中的邏輯。

And -- but then people have to decide what are they willing to bid, what are they willing to put into that demand or capacity payment and then what are they willing to do on the energy side. And obviously, the CCGTs both require a bigger capacity component and a bigger energy margin expectation. But we actually think that there's some least cost solutions to bring things in under those costs.

但接著大家就必須決定：他們願意出多少價、願意在需求或容量付款（capacity payment）上投入多少，以及在能源端願意怎麼做。很明顯，CCGT（複循環燃氣機組）同時需要更大的容量組成，以及對能源利差更高的預期。但我們其實認為，有一些最低成本的解決方案可以把事情控制在那些成本之下。

Great. That makes sense. And then if we think about it to -- I mean, you guys had alluded to it earlier in the call, just kind of a double-digit free cash flow yield, but $100 million of share buybacks is nothing to shake a stick at but still have $1.9 billion remaining through 2028. Should we expect any type of acceleration to the Q1 pace, particularly as we think about Cornerstone closing and then leveraging -- leverage getting back down below the target?

很好，這很合理。接著如果我們再想一下——你們在電話會議前面提到大概是兩位數的自由現金流殖利率（free cash flow yield），而 1 億美元的庫藏股回購（share buybacks）也不是小數目，但到 2028 年仍剩下 19 億美元的額度。我們是否應該預期回購速度會比第一季的節奏更快，特別是考量 Cornerstone 完成交割，以及槓桿率（leverage）回落到目標以下？

You can say shake a stick at it because it's $100 million out of the $2 billion allocation. And so like when we have the opportunity and can exercise, we always like to get in and buy the shares back when we can.

你可以說「不是小數目」，因為那是 20 億美元配置中的 1 億美元。所以只要有機會、也能夠執行，我們一向喜歡在可行時進場回購股票。

Yes. And if you look at slide 12, we broke out the share repurchase program impacts. And to get there, it's going to be doing stuff at scale over time here. So we're committed to doing that.

是的。而且如果你看第 12 頁投影片，我們把股票回購計畫的影響拆開來說明。要達成目標，就需要在一段時間內以規模化方式持續執行。所以我們承諾會這麼做。

David Arcaro, Morgan Stanley.

David Arcaro，Morgan Stanley。

Wondering if you could just maybe give any color that you're hearing from potential counterparties here. Are they waiting for more clarity on the backstop procurement? And like are there milestones in that process that you think would maybe accelerate things, unlock some contracting activity? Is it the finalization of the rules from PJM? Or do we have to wait potentially for the actual procurement to be run before you see more activity?

想請教你們是否能分享一些你們從潛在交易對手方聽到的看法。他們是否在等待對後盾採購（backstop procurement）更明確的資訊？以及在那個流程中是否有一些里程碑，你們認為可能會加速進展、解鎖一些簽約活動？是 PJM 規則的最終定案嗎？還是我們可能得等到實際採購跑完之後，才會看到更多活動？

David, it's a good question. I think generally, it's sort of a balance of things there. There's a pretty good consensus now on the reliability backstop. Now we're really talking about the details of what it looks like. And so I think a lot of stakeholders, including customers, have gotten comfortable with that.

David，這是個好問題。我認為整體而言，這裡面是多種因素的平衡。現在對可靠性後盾（reliability backstop）已經有相當高的共識。現在我們真正討論的是它的細節會長什麼樣子。因此我認為許多利害關係人（包括客戶）對此已經感到安心。

As we -- obviously, as we've alluded to on this call, some of our discussions have moved to more of this hybrid approach where we're talking about bringing new generation and adding that to the solution mix. So we don't think that it's necessarily anything that's sort of hindering or keeping folks from transacting.

另外——如同我們在這通電話會議中提到的——我們的一些討論已轉向更偏混合式的方法，也就是談如何引入新的發電並把它加入解決方案組合。因此我們不認為有什麼因素在阻礙或讓大家無法交易。

Now would they want like 100% clarity? Yes. But I think at the end of the day, they've also got some demand that they've got to make sure that they meet for their customer base. So it's a little bit of yes and no at the end of the day on that question.

他們會想要 100% 的明確性嗎？會。但我認為歸根結底，他們也有一些需求必須確保能滿足其客戶群。因此對這個問題，最後答案有點介於是與不是之間。

I will say, David, it's also -- we think that it's helpful that we've been providing comments on the RBP and one of them was don't make it such an extended program into next year and bringing it into the -- during the open sessions, stakeholder sessions in the last couple of days, they've started to change -- PJM started to reformulate when they think the timing is and for it to be this fall.

我也想說，David，我們認為另一個有幫助的點是：我們一直在對 RBP 提出意見，其中之一是不要把它做成延伸到明年的長期計畫；而在過去幾天的公開會議、利害關係人會議中，他們已開始調整——PJM 也開始重新擬定他們認為的時程，並把它安排在今年秋天。

So we think that's a good thing. So anything like that, that brings a little more clarity, yes, that, of course, helps. But are people still putting down these capital plans that are just continue to reach escape velocity at the hyperscalers. I mean, it's not slowing down. So yes, clarity helps, but is it necessary? No.

所以我們認為這是好事。任何像這樣能帶來更多明確性的事情，當然會有幫助。但超大規模雲端業者那邊是否仍在持續下這些資本計畫、而且還在不斷加速到達「逃逸速度」？我的意思是，完全沒有放緩。所以是的，明確性有幫助，但是否必要？不。

Unfortunately, we're going to have to end it there. And I do see that there are a couple more questions in the queue. I apologize to everybody that we didn't get to. We just run out of time here, and we're running up against our time. But we do appreciate you for joining us today and your continued support of Talen.

很遺憾，我們必須在此結束。我也看到隊列中還有幾個問題，對於我們沒能回答到的各位，我深感抱歉。我們時間不夠了，也已經到達會議時間上限。但我們非常感謝各位今天的參與，以及各位對 Talen 的持續支持。

I think in summary, what I'd like to say is that we have a strong '27, '28 outlook with multiple levers that we can pull and further upside from spark expansion. I think we're also hopefully providing some -- pulling back the curtain a little bit to show you that we are set up to execute on some of these growth through our development pipeline and the opportunities that we've been working on for some time. We're excited about that, and we look forward to powering the future. Have a great day.

我想總結來說，我想說的是：我們對 2027、2028 年的展望強勁，有多個槓桿可以運用，且火花價差（spark）擴張還有進一步上行空間。我也希望我們多少能——稍微掀開一點帷幕——讓各位看到，我們已準備好透過開發管線（development pipeline）以及我們已耕耘一段時間的機會，去執行其中一些成長。我們對此感到興奮，也期待為未來供電。祝各位有美好的一天。

Thank you for your participation in today's conference. This does conclude the program. You may now disconnect.

感謝各位參與今天的會議。至此本次議程結束。您現在可以中斷連線。