Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for standing by and welcome to the Q2 Earnings Call for Algonquin Power & Utilities Operation. At this time all participants are in a listen only mode. After the speaker's presentation, there will be a question-and-answer session. I’ll now like to hand the conference over to your speaker today Miss Amelia Tsang. Thank you. Please go ahead, Amelia.

Thank you. Good morning, everyone. Thanks for joining us this morning for our second quarter earnings conference call. Presenting the call today are Arun Banskota, our President and Chief Executive Officer and Arthur Kacprzak, our Chief Financial Officer. Also joining us this morning for the question-and-answer part of the call will be Jeff Norman, our Chief Development Officer and Johnny Johnston, our Chief Operating Officer. To accompany our earnings call today, we have a supplemental webcast presentation available on our website algonquinpowerandutilities.com. Our financial statements and management discussion and analysis are also available on the website, as well as on SEDAR and EDGAR. Before continuing the call, we would like to remind you that our discussion during the call will include certain forward-looking information, including but not limited to our expectations regarding future earnings and capital expenditures. At the end of the call, I will read a notice regarding both forward-looking information and non-GAAP financial measures. Please also refer to our most recent MD&A filed on SEDAR and EDGAR and available on our website for additional important information on these items. On our call this morning, Arun will provide an overview of our Q2 performance. Arthur will follow with the financial results and then Arun will conclude with an update on our strategic plan for the business. We will then open the lines for questions. I ask that you restrict your questions to two. And then re-queue if you have any additional questions to provide others the opportunity to participate. And with that, I'll turn it over to Arun.

Thank you, Amelia. And a very good morning to those who've been able to join us on the call and online. And a special welcome to today, this is the Friday the 13. I'm pleased to report solid year over year growth in our key financial metrics for the second quarter of the year. Q2 adjusted EBITDA was $244.9 million, a 39% increase year over a year. And our Q2 adjusted net earnings per share was $0.15 cents, an increase of 67% compared to last year's $0.09. I'm pleased to report solid year over year earnings growth from the addition of approximately 1400 megawatts of new renewable generation projects. These were in construction over the course of last year and this year. And this quarter’s progress brings the 1600 megawatts of project that began construction in 2020, close to completion. We are also starting to see benefits from the first full year of operations from our Bermuda electric utility as well as the ESSAL water utility in Chile, which both closed late last year and have both performed in line with our expectations. I'm pleased to report that the company's operating results were not materially impacted by the pandemic this quarter. Recall that in the second quarter last year, the pandemic did have a $0.01 impact on earnings per share. Generally speaking, we have not seen negative impacts from COVID on our loads at this day, as business conditions in the regions we operate in slowly return to normal. Approximately 60% of the company's workforce continues to work remotely. And we continue to employ operational measures intended to protect the health and safety of our employees and customers. Over the coming months, the company is planning to return to base operations as the impacts of the pandemic further diminish. However,…

Thank you, Arun and good morning, everyone. I'm pleased to report that Algonquin has made good progress to meeting its financial targets for 2021 with solid financial results for the second quarter. The Q2 results are underpinned by Algonquin’s diversified and resilient business model and proven track record of ambitious but responsible growth. Turning to Slide 11, our second quarter 2021 consolidated adjusted EBITDA was $244.9 million, which is up approximately 39% from the $176.3 million we reported in the previous year. The Regulated Services Group delivered $165.9 million in operating profit in the current quarter, which compares to $114.5 million in the same quarter last year. The year over year improvement is primarily attributable to the additional contribution from BELCO facility and ESSAL our Chilean water utility. As both acquisitions closed in Q4 of last year, as well as from the contribution over wind facilities that were placed in service as part of the greening the fleet initiative that Arun spoke of earlier. Results are also benefited from new rates implemented at the Granite State and CalPeco electric systems and were partially offset by higher fuel costs in the central region resulting from out of period resettlements relating to storm Uri and increased operating expenses. I should also note that the regulated services group did not experience any material impacts from COVID-19 this quarter, but the comparative results from Q2 of 2020 were negatively impacted by the pandemic by approximately $9.6 million. The renewable energy group reported Q2 divisional operating profit of $97.9 million, which compares to $82.7 million in the same quarter last year. The increase is primarily due to the addition of the Sugar Creek and Maverick Creek wind facilities and the Great Bay 2 solar facility. This is partially offset by lower production due to resource…

Thanks, Arthur. Before we close our prepared comments this morning, I want to give an update on our strategic initiatives. As we looked at simplifying our business further, on August 6, we took a step towards simplification by exercising the option to acquire Abengoa’s interest in ages. Given the change in ownership, we will be referring to ages and associated entities as Liberty Development. Liberty Development will remain focused on advancing Algonquin’s non-regulated development pipeline in North America and selected international markets. Abengoa’s interest is expected to be acquired by funds managed by the infrastructure and power strategy of Ares Management LLC, with Algonquin retaining the right to acquire 100% of Liberty Development projects. We also anticipate that Ares will remain involved in projects until commercial operations. At Investor Day, we spoke about our $9.4 billion five-year investment plan from 2021 through 2025, which has identified projects that make up the entire $9.4 billion, with most of them now in operation, under construction, or in advanced stages of development. Let me provide the latest update. The following projects have reached commercial operations since last November. Maverick Creek, Sugar Creek, Altavista on the renewable side, while on the regulatory side, our three Midwest wind projects, totaling $1.1 billion in investments were also completed. On the construction site, what our 175 megawatt Blue Hill wind project in Saskatchewan and 24 megawatts Val-Eo wind project in Cuba continue to progress well, with turbine deliveries in flight. We are also progressing well on our new site, demonstrating the ongoing execution of our development portfolio. Shady Oaks 2 have signed an agreement with JP Morgan Chase, as I discussed earlier, and the project commenced construction in May. We had also included two PGM solar projects that were incremental additions at investor day. In the first…

Thank you. And your first question comes from the line of Sean Steuart, TD Securities.

Thank you. Good morning, and thanks for all the detailed commentary. A couple of questions, with respect to the Empire rate request 10% ROE and 52% equity thickness, that looks similar to what was rejected last year. Can you give us some thoughts on the request this time? What gives you confidence that this is reasonable and how things might have changed over the last year to give you that confidence?

Sure. Good morning, and thanks for that question. So, look, first of all, it's still early. We just very recently filed for that rate case. As we've said in prior calls, we continue to be confident in our position on equity thickness, and we believe we will get the right outcome around equity thickness.

Okay. And further to that, the securitization of the costs tied to the weather event. Can you walk us through that process and how that could evolve to get the $30 million there?

Sure, as you know Sean, the legislature has recently passed legislation that approves securitization of such extraordinary costs. And we do plan to avail of that mechanism. We are looking at starting the internal process around that. Just as a reminder, of the $80 million increase, the $30 million of that is from storm Uri. And outside of that, our rate case increase is more in the 7% range, which translates approximately into 1.4% CAGR, when you look at it from the last rate increase in 2017.

Okay, and then one last question maybe for Arthur, you guys seem very focused on obviously growth here. But any updated thoughts on capital recycling as a longer-term funding source to see the broader growth ambitions for the company. Any updated thoughts on potential for asset sales to fund earlier stage developments?

So, Arthur before I tell you to answer, I will say that capital recycling is always on the agenda for us. When we announced that back in at Investor Day, we're still about six, seven months now from that point onwards. Still early days, but capital recycling is absolutely something we continue to look at as an option.

I don't really have anything to add Sean. It's on the radar, we look at it. It's nothing concrete to talk about this picture.

Okay, thanks very much, guys. I'll get back in the queue.

And your next question comes from the line of Rupert Merer with National Bank.

Morning, everyone.

Good morning, Rupert.

So, getting back to the rate cases that you filed. Can you give us a sense of the timing of the hearings here? And are you seeking any additional smoothing mechanisms and maybe a move off piece of accounting with the rate case you filed with Empire?

Sure, so we filed a rate case just late May, but let me turn it to Johnny for further details.

Yes, so hearing settled will be later on towards the back end, I think of this year. We're not expecting a decision until Q2 of next year. And we will work through with the commission and stakeholders in terms of the best way to implement any increase. So, we're certainly open to smoothing rates in a way that works for other practice.

All right. Great thanks. And Arun, you've completed the Greening, the fleet initiative in Missouri. You’re looking at new regulated investments at CalPeco. Is it more to come here, how soon before you could look at, say greening the fleet phase 2 in Missouri? Is their political support for doing many more investments like this across your asset base?

We believe so, Rupert, and again, we you know we're proud of the fact that we are pretty much entrepreneurs in this area. We look at it across our existing fleet. In fact, even on our water utilities, which there's a lot of energy that goes into moving water, and we look at that as well as an option. Even when we acquired BELCO, one of the attractions for us was the fact that in an island economy, it was pretty much all of it is a thermal generation, and with customers paying over $0.30 per kilowatt hour. And we strongly believe that there's a lot of ability to bring the fleet in that case, as well. So that's something we look at in pretty much every instance, whether it be with our existing portfolio or anything new. Possibilities we'll look at as well.

So how long before you think we could see some more greening and fleet initiatives like at CalPeco for example?

Stay tuned, Rupert. We're obviously excited to let everybody know as soon as we are able to announce it.

Okay, I'll leave it there. Thank you.

Thanks Rupert.

And your next question comes from the line of Nelson Ng.

Thanks, everyone. Just to follow up on Rupert's question, now that you have finished greening or you finished the first phase of greening Empire. I'm just wondering, like bigger picture, now that you've kind of gone over that hump on your capital plan, spending about a third of your five year capital plan in the first six months. If you like, I guess the question is, if you see an opportunity that's similar to Empire, where you had the opportunity to buy some assets that has coal, like, would you do it? Like would you buy a utility with significant coal assets? Is that something you would look to do?

Look, it's a speculative question. And so, I'll answer in a similar way, right. So, first of all, we have a very attractive ESG profile. I mean, when you look at our carbon intensity at 0.0013 per dollar of revenue, that's among the lowest-lowest among our peers, right. And in our history, Nelson, I like to repeat this fact, in our 33 years of existence, we've never ourselves develop and therefore added to the world stock of industries. And at the same time, we are very good stewards of infrastructure. And so, some of the numbers we gave you around Midwest greening with a reduction of 26% carbon intensity in just three years, in CalPeco 46% reduction in carbon intensity in just three years. I think, besides what we do on a renewable energy side of the business, in terms of investing in renewable energy assets for the good of our customers and our shareholders and the world at large, I think it's a similar profile on the regulatory side on greening the fleet, which I believe is good for our customers, our shareholders and the world at large. So, if there are similar kinds of opportunities where we can utilize our greening the fleet initiatives, we will take a hard look at that.

Okay, thanks. That's clear. And then just moving over to CalPeco in terms of the rate case falling, I haven't gotten a chance to go through it, but the roughly $36 million increase seems like a big increase for utilities. That's not that big. Could you just run through some kind of big picture items in terms of what's driving the rate increase there, at CalPeco?

Let me give the big picture and I'll turn it over to Johnny. So, the vast majority of that increase is really associated with wildfire mitigation. As you know, in California in that reserve geography, that's obviously something extremely important. We want to make sure we keep our customers and communities safe. Johnny?

Yeah, I mean, I think the short story is, it's really is what our wildfire costs have driven that increase. And it's the investments that we're making to reduce the risk of future impacts in the area with the ongoing activities or increasing our tree trimming, and monitoring so that we are able to sort of take our lines out of service at high risk in periods of time. I think maybe the important point to note, despite the significant increase, even with, if it were fully approved, would still be one of the lowest cost rates in California. And actually, if you look at what the other California utilities have been filing in terms of their rate increases, the majority of them have had 30% to 40% increases, that sort of in this time frame really driven by similar activity. So, it is a big step up. There's no doubt. And we're always very focused on the billing path for our customers. But really, this has been driven by the evolving landscape in California.

And just a follow up on that, like, is that increase – Is it mostly to service higher operating costs? Or are you making a lot of capital investments? What was the mix roughly?

It's roughly 50-50. And so, it is very significant investment going in, in terms of putting in semiconductor, modernizing our switching and fusing technology, as well as some of the operating cost expenses that are covered. So, these are roughly 50-50.

Okay, thanks. I'll get back in the queue.

Thanks Nelson.

And your next question comes from the line of Ryan Greenwald with Bank of America.

Good morning, everyone.

Good morning, Ryan.

Good morning. Appreciate your commentary earlier on potential coal opportunities and transition, but kind of given the media reports earlier this week, can you comment a bit more broadly, just on your overall assessment of the regulated M&A landscape ahead independent CapEx update at the end of the year here?

Sure. So as everybody well knows just the number of regulated M&A opportunities out there, when you look at it in 2010, for example, or 2000 versus now, that landscape has significantly short. So, just a number of utilities out there, are fewer with some of the consolidation that has been going on. And if you look at our $9.4 billion five-year plan, we only include acquisitions that we've already announced. But you'll find New York American water in there. Our $9.4 billion plan does not depend on any future acquisitions. But having said that, we do look at that as a possible lever, another growth lever to enhance our growth even further and provide more shareholder value. So, that's really the context.

Great, thank you for that. And then given broader concern around the supply chain and inflationary pressures, this having any impact in the way you think about the development pipeline? Any hesitation to go through with some of the potential projects given pressure on returns?

So far, we are not seeing that, Ryan. And again, what we have seen is some of the increase on the supply chain has been offset by price increases on the optic side of the ledger. And also, one of the strategies we deploy is try to finalize the supply contracts, the construction contract, and the optic contract as close together as possible so that there's very little residual risk that we're taking in terms of commodity increases and the light. So, so far we continue to accelerate our Greenfield pipeline and other such projects, but we always have the options of delaying anything if such a contingency does happen.

Great. I'll leave it there. Thanks for the time.

Thanks, Ryan.

And your next question comes from line of Rob Hope with Scotia Bank.

Morning. First question is just on the 2021 EPS outlook that you reiterated. As we're kind of halfway through the year, can you talk about the puts and takes? And it looks like taxes have been pretty strong tailwind so far. Was that originally anticipated or is that offsetting kind of some of the weakness we’re seeing in the renewable generation side?

Yeah. Good morning, Rob. It's Arthur here. So sure, I can speak to that. So well, in terms of outlook for the rest of the year, like I mentioned in my prepared commentary, we are reiterating our guidance between the 71 and 76. And in terms of when setting that guidance, I mean, we factored in several things. One of the things obviously being impacts of COVID, which thankfully, we actually didn't see. So that is providing us a little bit of room. On the flip side, I mean, we did have a little bit of milder weather, obviously throughout the year as well. So those two things are some extent offsetting. Now to your second question around tax credits, and I would say, portion of the tax credits, yes, we're not unplanned but maybe it's more of a function of geography or where they're recorded. And I'll explain a little bit further. As you're aware, we had the delays in the final commissioning of Maverick and Sugar Creek due to the blade issues there. So, what that basically did is, in essence, it delayed the final investment by tax equity into those projects. So normally, what we would have seen for the year is tax equity invested, we would have seen that those credits that were generated from the turbines that were operating, going through HLTV. Versus here, we had the opportunity to obviously take those credits and self-monetize them. So, you're maybe seeing a little bit more in the tax line, versus you would have been seen a little bit more in the EBITDA line. Otherwise, if that wasn't the case, but overall, it kind of washes in the results.

That's some great color. Thank you. And then maybe just a follow up question on the Ares partnership there. Can you just walk us through your thinking of not taking 100% of ages, as well as whether or not, I guess what does Ares bring to the table and kind of what future partnerships could look there?

So, Rob, just to give you context, as you know Abengoa was our 50% partner on ages. And given all of the challenges that they were having with restructuring, we felt it was timely for us to find a new partner. And so, we have exercised the option and we believe Ares does provide quite a bit of constructive experience and know how in this sector, and they were in 2020, for example, one of the 10 largest wind financers. They also have companies that are in the construction business as well. So, we believe that that they bring both the development and construction expertise as well as the financing capability to develop and to finance our construction activities. And that's where the fill is.

Thank you.

Thanks Rob.

And your next question comes from the line of Ben Pham with BMO.

Hey thanks. Good morning. Got a couple of follow-up questions on utility M&A. Could you comment more broadly the criteria that you're most focused on now as size, geographic diversification, synergies, and anything else you can share? And then more specifically, just listening to your answers to earlier questions. And with these Kentucky assets, would that fit into your overall preferences or targeting?

Sure. Ben, a lot of questions in there. So let me try to walk through those questions. Right. So, first of all geographies is pretty clear. I mean, it's North America. And again, we don't say never other than North America. So, for example, Chile was a case in point but by and large, the geography is North America. Right. We are one of the few companies that are across all three modalities, electric, water and gas. We are very, very bullish on electric and water. They fit extremely well with our ESG profile. Right now, on the gas side, we are focused much more on deploying renewable natural gas into our facilities. We have filed the first one in New Hampshire, we're looking at a pipeline of a lot more. And we're also looking at Green hydrogen, New Brunswick, for example, we participate in a maritime study. And we are following on a number of other pilot projects that are out there in Green hydrogen, that's our focus on the gas modality. So, but on specific transactions, we have a policy never too common and specific transactions are probably used at that.

Okay, and then accretion, you want accretion on the date?

On the financial? Absolutely. I mean, look, we don't -- we look at from a strategy perspective, clearly, it has to fit all of our strategic objectives. But we do not make -- do transactions based upon strategy. And these transactions absolutely have to stand on their own. We look at a lot of different metrics. And we are extremely disciplined around those. And we obviously end up not doing many more transactions than we end up transacting on. So, absolutely extremely disciplined around the financial metrics.

Okay, and then the second one is, it made sense on the funding side, and here, we execute something make it larger than UCDF every month your balance sheet offers Medicare convert to their own you mentioned the hybrids like, how would you think about that impacting your funding plan?

Yeah, from our perspective, I mean, one thing I would say we generally -- look, we've never kind of fallen behind on our balance sheet strength. We always maintain a strong balance sheet, but I think that that itself kind of brings us from a position of strength, call it. To some extent, I mean, speculating around any funding sources as I said in my prepared remarks. Lots of tools in the shed, in terms of what to be able to -- where to source capital.

Okay, that's great. Thank you.

And your next question comes from the line of Mark Jarvi with CIBC.

Thanks, good morning everyone. Just wanted to clarify one thing on the response to Ben's question, we talked about the different financial metrics you'd look at, for a deal making sense. Was EPS accretion, sort of the top list? Wasn't 100% clear EPS accretion has to be on day one?

Absolutely. We look at our EPS accretion that’s probably our most fundamental and most important metric we'll look CalPecoat. Absolutely, Mark.

Perfect. Thanks for that. And then also lots of welfare auction in California this year. And we've seen reports of UI center de energized lines at CalPeco. Can you just update in terms of any earnings hit or any potential liabilities that might be faced or so far, you've been unscathed by the wildfire action?

Sure. So, I think, Mark, we did report earlier, we talked about the Mountain View wildfire, and the investigation continues on that one. We also recently faced another wildfire, the Tamarack wildfire, which is a much smaller one in comparison, that one is largely contained. We are looking at our employees did an amazing job, in terms of mitigating a wildfire. And bringing all of our customers back online in a very, very short time, is extremely impressive to see a lot of what our employees were able to do out there even bringing generators in places, even for just a few customers. Because reliability is so important. And yet, and that was all of background and context behind what we're seeking for in terms of a new rate case, because we do believe we need to continue to invest in wildfire mitigation aspects. And that is really the context behind the most recent rate case filed.

Okay, and then just one more thing, just on the Ares partnership in the simplification. Maybe Arthur, you can explain in terms of will all investments fall through your own financial statements, or is there still some SPVs involved in some of that stuff? And any capital commitments from Mary's on any investments going forward?

So, maybe the simplest answer is, in essence, how it's going to flow through the financial statements. It's basically status quo in terms of how you currently see it, the extent that you will still see being accounted for as a joint venture.

Okay, thanks a lot.

And your next question comes from line of Naji Baydoun with IA Capital Market.

Hi, good morning. I just want to start with the renewable projects that are already in the hopper. Can you just remind us of what's contracted? So Shady Oaks, you have the contract with JP Morgan. What about the Ohio solar projects or some of the other projects coming down the pipeline?

Yeah, go ahead.

Yeah. Thank you, Arun. Happy to do that. And you're absolutely right with Shady Oaks do in terms of the uptake with JP Morgan, the new market, that portfolio is also contracted. And all the projects that we have under active construction are contracted.

Okay, I guess the other projects that are in cognitive bank development, are those -- what's still left to be contracted from those?

Yeah, the two -- we've got the Sandy Ridge 2, which is an advanced development, which is contracted and we've got Deerfield to which we're an active discussion on contracting, but have not signed the contract yet.

Okay, okay. Got it. That's good. And just on the larger –

Just for context, I mean, the offtake contracting happens towards the really very end before what we say internally has notice to proceed. So, that's where we try to make sure we -- the supply contract, the construction contract, and offtake contract comes together. And that's when we go notice to proceed. So, usually, it really happens towards the end of the development cycle.

And I fully agree, and that's very intentional on our part. So, the reason decided earlier in terms of and hit alignment and the offtake.

Understood. And just on the Luning project, is this both the solar and the storage system together that you're working on?

That is correct. It's a solar plus a 240 megawatt hour battery storage system. That's correct.

Okay, I just want to get your thoughts broadly on, I guess how you're thinking about storage. This is maybe the first project within the utility business, but just wondering how are you thinking about storage, both within the regulated portfolio, but also maybe the non-regulated side of the house?

Actually, we already have around what 20 megawatts worth of capacity on the regulatory side of the business on storage. And on the renewable energy side of the business, our first project in New York State is under construction, that is a solar plus battery storage project. Look, given the prices on storage and ability to shape perhaps, the energy outflows, we look at storage on every wind and solar project to see if it makes sense. And so, it's very much part of the equation already.

Okay. So it sounds like there's maybe opportunities on to add on both sides?

Absolutely. And again, the reason I was telling you about the 20 megawatt plus on the regulated side is we're already deeply in it. We already have a lot of know-how and experience in operating these battery storage systems. So, we absolutely will continue to look at stories as yet another area of technology growth.

Understood. That’s very helpful. Just I guess, last question on that is, what else you meant by regulated versus non-regulated? Maybe how you think about the risk and the returns? And if you had to choose a project, would you on the storage side does it make more sense for you today to have it within the utilities or not?

I mean, look the risk profile is somewhat different on the two sides, but that much, given the fact that even on our renewable side of the business is largely contracted with long term contracts, remainder average weighted life of 13 years. But still, there is some risk reward difference. But it's not large enough for us to say, we're going to put all of our capital on storage on one side or the other. And we believe that there's a lot of opportunities on board, the regulator and the renewable side of the business.

Okay, got it. Thank you.

Thanks, Naji.

And your final question comes from line of David Quezada with Raymond James.

Thanks, morning, everyone. Just one quick one for me. Arun, you mentioned renewable natural gas a little bit in your comments. Just wondering if there's any color you can provide around the timing and maybe the quantum of that opportunity/ And given the tax credit that has been, I guess, proposed could you look at that outside of the regulated footprint?

Absolutely. David, we are already looking at it outside our regulated footprint as well. We have a development pipeline across every one of our gas utilities that is looking at renewable natural gas. We believe that at its maximum, it could actually substitute for approximately 25% of all of the magic guys that flows through our gas leasing system. So, it's pretty attractive from that perspective. The pricing is something obviously we're working on. One of the things we're very focused on, is trying to make sure that it doesn't impact customer bills. So, we're looking at different types of structures. It reminds me of the days of renewable energy, a decade ago when the prices were higher, but there were enough of a customer base out there that were willing to pay higher prices for the sustainability gain for renewable energy. And I think, we see a similar pattern on the renewable natural gas side as well, where there's enough of our commercial and industrial customer base that is willing to pay the initial higher prices on renewable natural gas. Now, a lot of the stuff that is going on in with the Biden administration and climate action bill should help in terms of bringing that clock down even further. So, we're absolutely looking at that and have a fairly robust development pipeline analogy.

That's great color. Thank you very much.

Okay, David, thank you very much. And thank you everyone, for taking the time on our call today. So, with that, please stay on the line for our disclaimer.

Thanks everyone. Our discussion during this call contains certain forward-looking information, including but not limited to expectations regarding earnings, capital expenditures and size and timing for completion of our projects. This forward-looking information is based on certain assumptions, including those described in our most recent MD&A filed on SEDAR and EDGAR and available on our website, and is subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from historical results or results anticipated by the forward-looking information. Forward-looking information provided during this call speaks only as of the date of this call and is based on the plans, beliefs, estimates, projections, expectations, opinions and assumptions of management as of today's date. There can be no assurance of forward-looking information, it will prove to be accurate. And you should not place undue reliance on forward-looking information. We disclaim any obligation to update any forward-looking information or to explain any material difference between subsequent actual events and such forward-looking information, except as required by applicable law. In addition, during the course of this call, we may have referred to certain non-GAAP financial measures, including but not limited to adjusted net earnings, adjusted earnings per share or adjusted net EPS, adjusted EBITDA, adjusted funds from operations and divisional operating profit. There is no standardized measure of such non-GAAP financial measures. And consequently, AQN’s method of calculating these measures may differ from methods used by other companies and therefore they may not be comparable to similar measures presented by other companies. Or for more information about both for looking information and non-GAAP financial measures, including a reconciliation of non-GAAP measures to the corresponding GAAP measures, please refer to our most recent MD&A filed on SEDAR and CADA or EDGAR in the United States, and available on our website. And that concludes the conference call.

And this concludes today's conference call. Thank you for your participation right now. You may now all disconnect.