Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for standing by. My name is Jessica, and I will be your conference operator today. Welcome to the Fortis Second Quarter 2018 Conference Call and Webcast. During the call, all participants will be in a listen only mode. There will be a question and answer session following the presentation.
At this time, I would like to turn the conference over to Stephanie Amaimo. Please go ahead, Ms. Amaimo.
Thanks, Jessica, and good morning, everyone, and welcome to Fortis' 2nd quarter results conference call. I'm joined by Perry Perry, President and CEO and Jocelyn Perry, Executive VP and CFO, other members of the senior management team as well as executives from certain subsidiaries. Before we begin today's call, I want to remind you that the discussion will include forward looking information, which is subject to the cautionary statement contained in the supporting slideshow. All non GAAP financial measures referenced in our prepared remarks are reconciled to the related U. S.
GAAP financial measures in our 2018 Q2 MD and A. Also, unless otherwise specified, all information is referenced in Canadian dollars. With that, I will now turn the call over to Barry.
Thank you, Stephanie, and good morning, everyone. Before we get into the details of the quarter, I want to acknowledge Carl Smith's retirement at the end of May. Our new CFO, Jocelyn Perry is with us today and I can tell you she is off to a great start. Performance in the first half of twenty eighteen has positioned us well for the remainder of the year. In terms of capital expenditures, we've invested $1,500,000,000 in our systems through June, and we remain on track to invest $3,200,000,000 in 2018 as part of our 5 year capital plan.
On the regulatory front, we continue to work with our regulators in a constructive and respectful manner. This was demonstrated at Central Hudson with its rate case settlement in June, reflecting all of the key elements of the joint proposal filed in April. This 3 year rate plan, which commenced on July 1, 2018, includes capital expenditures, which total approximately US650 $1,000,000 and represents a balanced outcome for customers and stakeholders. As a whole, we expect our regulated and non regulated businesses to grow nicely in 2018. However, there are a number of factors tempering earnings growth 2018 that are not reflective of our ongoing business.
These include mark to market losses on natural gas derivatives associated with Aitken Creek Storage Facility and the U. S. Tax reform impacts. Overall, we are focused on growing our base regulated businesses. In fact, we are building momentum.
For the remainder of the year, we will continue to focus on ways to grow our base business beyond our current plans, all while meeting the needs of our customers and maintaining constructive regulatory relationships. Turning to Slide 5, our 5 year capital plan of $15,100,000,000 through 2022 is designed to meet the energy infrastructure needs of our customers, while modernizing our energy networks to address the changes occurring in the utility industry. These investments through 2022 translate into a consolidated midyear rate base of nearly $27,000,000,000 this year $33,000,000,000 by 2022, equating to a 3 year rate base CAGR of 6.2% to 2020 and a 5 year rate base CAGR of 5.4% to 2022. Our capital program consists of a diverse mix of highly executable low risk projects. 1 of the larger projects, the Watanakitiyap Transmission Power Project in Northern Ontario, includes building 1800 kilometers of transmission lines to connect 17 remote communities to the Ontario grid.
This project is progressing well. We have filed a lead to construct application with the Ontario Energy Board detailing project elements such as the time line, design and associated costs. Approval of the application is expected in early 2019. The project is expected to provide economic and social benefits in addition to reducing environmental risk by decreasing the greenhouse gas emissions associated with the diesel generation currently used by the communities. Beyond executing our base capital plan, we have been focused on finding opportunities to grow our existing regulated utility businesses to the benefit of our customers and shareholders.
We are pleased with the results we are seeing to date and remain confident that our growth efforts will support our dividend growth target. Sources of upside growth in the existing businesses include projects that improve the transmission grid, address natural gas system capacity and gas line integrity, increase cyber protection and allow the grid to deliver cleaner energy. We plan to roll out our new 5 year capital plan this fall. With operations in 10 regulatory jurisdictions across North America, Fortis is among the most diverse utilities on the continent. This diversity reduces our business risk and when coupled with our organic growth profile, gives us the confidence to provide our average annual dividend growth guidance of 6% through 2022.
We have increased our dividend for 44 consecutive years and remain committed to ensuring this track record continues. I'll now turn the call over to Jocelyn for an update on our Q2 results.
Thank you, Barry, and good morning, everyone. Before getting started, I wanted to say it's great to be back with the Fortis team in my new role as CFO. My first official task is to walk through the Q2 financial results for 2018. As shown on slide 10, adjusted earnings per common share were $0.57 for the quarter, down $0.04 compared to last year. Adjusted earnings for the quarter were $240,000,000 compared to $253,000,000 for the same quarter last year.
On a year to date basis, adjusted earnings of $533,000,000 was down slightly from the previous year and adjusted earnings per common share of $1.26 was $0.05 lower than the first half of twenty seventeen. As Barry mentioned, mark to market adjustments at Aitken Creek and U. S. Tax reform tempered our earnings during the quarter. Ignoring these two factors, the growth in our base businesses increased earnings per common share both in the second quarter and in the first half of twenty eighteen.
As noted on the previous slide, adjusted earnings per common share decreased by $0.04 compared to the Q2 of 2017. 2 key drivers impacting the quarter were unrealized net mark to market losses on derivatives at the Aitken Creek Natural Gas Storage Facility and U. S. Tax Reform. As a reminder, the Aconcrete business hedges its physical gas inventory with forward financial instruments.
U. S. GAAP requires these financial instruments to be valued at the current spot rate on each reporting date and this creates unrealized gains and losses. These accounting adjustments are purely timing. Unrealized losses for the Q2 reduced earnings per common share by $0.03 US tax reform also negatively impacted earnings per common share by $0.03 As noted in the past, we still expect US tax reform to impact consolidated earnings per share by approximately 3% on an annualized basis.
Performance at our utility operations including our non regulated energy infrastructure assets contributed $0.04 to earnings per common share. This increase was driven by higher gas volumes and favorable pricing at Aitken Creek as well as increased hydroelectric production in Belize as a result of higher rainfall. Growth in ITC's transmission business related to the execution of its capital plan contributed $0.02 compared to the Q2 last year. In addition, earnings at our other electric utilities netted to an overall $0.02 increase in earnings per common share during the quarter. Key drivers include a $5,000,000 business interruption insurance claim settlement associated with Hurricane Irma at Fortis, Turks and Caicos.
The economy on the Turks and Caicos Islands has rebounded and we are pleased to have settled the business interruption insurance claim. UNS earnings contributed to a $0.02 decrease in earnings per common share during the quarter primarily due to higher operating costs for planned generation outages. Changes in foreign exchange rates resulted in a $0.01 decrease in earnings per common share. The average U. S.
Dollar to Canadian dollar foreign exchange rate was $1.29 this quarter compared to $1.34 in the Q2 last year. And finally, higher weighted average number of common shares outstanding as a result of the strong uptake in our dividend reinvestment plan lowered adjusted earnings per common share by $0.01 compared to the same period in 2017. Now turning to the first half of twenty eighteen, adjusted earnings per share decreased 0.05 dollars compared to the same period in 2017. Similar to the quarter, both unrealized mark to market losses at Aitken Creek and U. S.
Tax reform have negatively impacted earnings during the first half of twenty eighteen. Operating performance from our non regulated energy infrastructure assets contributed $0.03 to earnings per common share. Again this was primarily driven by increased gas volumes and favorable pricing at Aitken Creek and increased hydroelectric production in Belize as a result of higher rainfall. Growth at ITC equated to an increase in earnings per common share of $0.02 and was driven by rate based growth, partially offset by higher business development costs related to our efforts to progress our pump storage opportunity in Arizona. UNS Energy improved earnings per common share by $0.02 driven by the rate settlement implemented at Tucson Electric Power in February 2017.
Our remaining regulated utilities improved earnings per common share by $0.01 for the first half of twenty eighteen. Partially offsetting growth in our utilities was foreign exchange of $0.03 as a result of the average U. S. Dollar to Canadian dollar declining from $1.33 for the first half of twenty seventeen to $1.28 for the same period in 2018 and $0.03 due to increased common shares outstanding driven by our dividend reinvestment plan and a $500,000,000 common equity private placement that occurred in March 2017. Fortis' low business risk profile and standalone nature of each regulated subsidiary supports the investment grade credit ratings that we have today.
From a liquidity perspective, our consolidated credit facilities total approximately $5,000,000,000 At the end of June 2018, there was $3,800,000,000 of unused capacity, including approximately $1,100,000,000 of unused capacity under our committed corporate credit facility. The current 2018 to 2022 5 year capital plan of $15,100,000,000 is expected to be funded through debt raised at the utilities, cash from operations and common equity contributions from the dividend reinvestment plan. Our at the market common equity program is available as well to fund incremental growth as needed. As Barry highlighted, during the quarter we made progress in New York with the approval of Central Hudson's 3 year rate settlement agreement establishing rates effective July 1, 2018. The approved rate plan consists of an allowed ROE of 8.8% with equity thickness of 48% in year 1, 49% in year 2 and 50% in year 3.
This result provides a certainty and validates our approach to maintaining constructive regulatory relationship. At ITC, we continue to await a decision from FERC on the MISO based ROE complaint. As a reminder, we continue to earn up to 11.35 percent in MISO until a decision is rendered. With interest rates trending upwards, coupled with FERC's support to incentivize transmission ROEs above state levels, we remain confident there will be a reasonable conclusion to these complaints. Further, we awaited response from FERC regarding the 3rd party complaint filed in April 2018 challenging ITC's independent incentive adders included in ITC's MISO subsidiaries regulatory compact.
But as a whole, we believe ITC has a strong position against the complaint. I'll now turn the call back to Barry.
Thank you, Jocelyn. Our utilities are at the forefront of changes occurring in our industry, driven by increased customer expectations, focused on delivering cleaner energy, grid resiliency and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. With over $50,000,000,000 in total assets and 10 utility operations across North America, Fortis is poised to grow through investing in its existing utility portfolio. We remain confident in our strategy to provide 6% average annual dividend growth through 2022. And now I will turn the call back over to Stephanie.
Thank you, Barry. This concludes the presentation. At this time, we'd like to open the call to address questions from the investment community. Thank
you. Your first question comes from the line of Robert Kwan from RBC Capital Markets. Please go ahead.
Good morning. Good morning. Barry, I'm just wondering if
you could give an update on the wood fiber pipe side of things, just generally around the project and if there's some specifics around the nature of the work that you're actually doing at this point in time on it?
Robert, thanks for the question. Wood fiber, yes, we're really hoping obviously that this is the year that they make their final investment decision to proceed with the project. We are doing a fair bit of work for them at this point in time and sort of focused on the pipeline construction costs to bring gas to their site. And we've reactivated all of that work at this point in time. So we're focused on that.
There's a fair bit of work to do there. So we're a fair bit of resources on that at this point. So hopefully, by the fall here, we'll hear something from them. I know that the province of BC is really trying to see if there can be some of these decisions made, not just with wood fiber, but with LNG Canada, I think, before the end of this year. So we're hoping that we'll get that call and that they'll be proceeding with the project.
Got it. I guess just turning to capital plan, as you kind of get through that, and let's just say the capital plan produces rate base growth similar to what you've got or even better. I guess just thinking about the dividend, are you comfortable with the 6% growth? Would you do you think that you're getting appropriate value in your share price? And so if you have the same underlying growth, would you consider kind of scaling it back to increase your cash flow?
Or if the rate base growth proves out to be higher, would you consider going higher with the dividend growth rate?
I don't think we'll be considering going higher with the dividend growth rate. I'll answer that question first, Robert. What we want to be certain of is that we can deliver on our dividend guidance. And I feel comfortable with that at this point, the 6% dividend growth guidance that we have. We are as a company, when I look at our peers, I still believe we are growing nicely, but we still have some room to increase our growth rate to focus on areas in our industry that would present some opportunities, they being really investing more in our transmission networks, really moving more to cleaner energy and cyber and increasing the integrity of our pipeline network on our gas business.
All of these areas are presenting opportunities for us to increase our growth rate. And so that's our goal is to refresh all of that this fall. And so I don't see us increasing our dividend guidance. I think what you'll find is that increased growth rate in the underlying business will give the market the confidence that Fortis will be able to deliver on its 6% dividend growth guidance going forward. And hopefully, that gets reflected in our stock because I think when I compare Fortis to our U.
S. Peer group, especially, we're doing well compared to our Canadian peer group. But compared to the U. S. Peer group, we are still trading at a fairly significant discount to that peer group.
And I'm not satisfied with that, frankly. And I think we are our business model, the low risk nature of the diversified group of utilities that we have, I'm hoping that I can convince shareholders that we can narrow that gap on as we compare ourselves to the U. S. Peer group.
Got it. Maybe if I can finish here with Acan Creek. Presumably, you've hedged spreads over several quarters. So I'm just wondering if there's some directional guidance as to when we might expect those accruals to reverse? Or put differently, there was a statement earlier in the call of these marks being headwinds to 2018.
So I'm presuming that the accruals will not at least all reverse in 2018 and will kind of carry over into 2019?
Robert, this is Jocelyn. Yes, with respect to the unrealized losses, theoretically, they should reverse in the following year. And we did have $26,000,000 of gains in the previous year, of which $15,000,000 of the losses have been recognized this year. Really hard to predict out to the end of the year, because it will obviously depend at the price at December 31 and what volumes we're holding at that time. So it's difficult to predict, but theoretically, yes, the losses are the gains from previous year should be reversed in the current year.
Okay, that's great. Thanks very much.
Your next question comes from the line of Rob Hope from Scotiabank. Please go ahead.
Good morning, everyone. Just wanted to follow-up on Robert's first question regarding the growth outlook. Barry, in your prepared remarks, you did speak to the potential for growth in excess of your secured plan. Some of these would be more near term in nature like cyber and gas integrity, and I guess some would be more longer term in nature such as your larger projects. When you look out to the fall, it would appear that you're pointing to a higher kind of overall capital plan, but is this more front loaded or is this more filling out the tail end of the plan?
I would say it's across the curve, Robert. It's not all like in years 4 5. So it's interesting that we're seeing we are seeing some lifts in the early years as well. And obviously, we haven't locked all these details down. We're working feverishly at this point as we get ready for our Analyst Day.
But it's definitely you're going to like how it affects our 5 year CapEx program.
All right. I appreciate that. Thank you. Okay. Moving south of the border, UNS, so after a strong Q1, Q2 was a bit more normal.
Can you speak to the impact of the planned generation outage in the quarter? And I guess moving forward, how economic activity is trending in the region and weather and how they should
play out for the rest of the year?
Well, I'll have David on the call. I'll let David chip in, in a second. But this is just some normal stuff happening in the quarter on generation outages, Rob. So nothing there. I will tell you that I am very optimistic about where we are in Arizona.
There's lots of opportunities to grow the business there. The economy is picking up. David heads up the Local Economic Development Association. I think it's called Suncor there. And they've landed a couple of large new investments in the Tucson area that's creating lots of new jobs.
And I'm sure they're working on others that we're not able to disclose at this point in time. But there is real optimism in the region at this point and very excited about our investment in Arizona. David, do you want to add to that?
Yes. Thanks, Barry. I would just add that we are seeing some very good growth momentum, some nice green shoots for growth opportunities down here in Southern Arizona. We see that picking up this year. We see it a good pipeline of additional projects going forward.
The outages are just kind of a year to year variance. There's nothing really to see or anything all that interesting about those quarter to quarter variances. And Rob, I can guarantee it will be hot here. I just can't guarantee that it will be hotter than normal.
That's fair. Thank you for the color.
It's cool down there today. It's 100, so
Thank you. I'll jump back in the queue.
Thank you.
Your next question comes from the line of Ben Pham from BMO. Please go ahead.
Okay. Thanks. Good morning. I was wondering with your Investor Day and listening to your comments, it seems like the plan is to keep with the 5 year forecast and CapEx, rate base, dividend expectations. But as you think longer term though and just seeing what's going on with maybe some of your peers in North America moving towards our shorter forecasting period.
Do you guys see really a benefit of keeping a 5 year forecast when you look at the pros and cons? And maybe even a step further, even do you even really need a dividend growth expectation when you have some good visibility in rate base?
Good questions, Ben. Once you're out there on these things, it's hard to roll them back, obviously. If I'm sitting here today and we were announcing guidance for the first time, I'd probably be talking about 3 years rather than 5. But we've retooled the company to focus on the 5 year growth rates and I'm comfortable that of where we are and that it's not our plan at this point to roll them back to 3 years. The interesting conversation revolves around dividend sorry, earnings guidance.
Some of our U. S. Shareholders would like us to provide earnings guidance and maybe are not as concerned about dividend guidance as such. For this at this point in time, we're still thinking we will stick with the dividend guidance. They are obviously closely related because your payout ratio is the governor on all of that.
So I don't think we're going to be changing where we are at this point. I will tell you that it's my goal to remove every impediment in our business that could be seen as a reason why we trade at a discount to our typical U. S. Utility. As a management team, we're focused on that.
We're obviously running good utilities at good regulatory relations across all of North America, but we need to remove any impediments that point to our reasons why our stock trades at a couple of term multiple to the typical U. S. Regulated utility. And we're going to knock these things off over time, so.
Okay. All right. And second question on the MISO ROE. Are you expecting a decision this year in your plan? And maybe you can remind me and folks listing the incentive that or what what was driving that initially?
The decision in terms of MISO complaints, it's hard to predict. As you now know, I guess, there is a FERC commissioner that's leaving in mid August. That may cause some changes to scheduling for decisions around this stuff. So it's hard to predict if we will get a decision in the second half. So I think your judgment and information on that is maybe as good as ours, frankly, at this point in time.
In terms of this incentive adders, I would tell you that where that comes from is the owners of the utilities that in the regions that we operate in are always trying to find ways to reduce costs for their own customers and the transmission cost is a part of their bill. And I suppose they see it as their job to continue to challenge those costs over time. And we feel very confident that the incentive adders are appropriate and that FERC will see that to be the case since they are mandated essentially to promote investment in transmission. And so we are optimistic that the risk there is low. But we'll always face these kinds of complaints because it's just part of what the state regulated businesses are essentially required to do.
Your next question comes from the line of Robert Catellier from CIBC Capital Markets. Please go ahead.
Hey, good morning, everyone. I think I'll follow the line of questioning that Ben had here on the FERC. You gave your sort of view that it's hard to predict timing given that there's a commissioner leaving, but does that also make it more difficult to just to get decisions now that there'll be a period where it'll be split along party lines?
It's possible, but I would tip my hat to FERC on this. I think FERC is a big organization. They need to function and these things happen. So I would expect that decisions would continue to flow from FERC. There's been consensus on certain topics between both parties.
So I think that is possible. So I'm not going to sit here and think that we're going to a shutdown mode at FERC at this point in time. So I'm hopeful that we'll move forward on some of these key matters at FERC and we won't lose ground. But I suppose the other side of it, maybe that's possible. So it is hard to call it at this point in time.
Okay. There's comment in the MD and A about TEP and a rate reduction proposed for the FERC. Can you quantify that impact? And is that basically within the keeping of your guidance?
Sorry, Robert, can you repeat? I sort of lost
Yes. TP proposed a rate reduction to FERC.
Yes. This is related to tax reform. So go ahead.
So the question is if you can quantify whether it's contained within your previous guidance?
Guidance on our dividend guidance or No,
no, no, just earnings and cash flow.
Yes, it is. The 3% EPS impact would include that as well.
And then finally for me, I wonder if there's any substantive updates you can give on Lake Erie given the recent change in government?
No, there isn't really. There's been lots of activity obviously in the province since Premier Ford was elected. He's been focused on, I think, other things. And so I would say the project is still there. We have all the permits and we're ready to move forward.
But it will take some time for us to get in front of the Premier and to really, obviously, bring forward the benefits of the project in the new administration. So we're fortunate that the permitting is good for some period of time, and we're not spending any large amounts of money on that project right now. So we're in a reasonable spot to deal with this transition that's occurring in the province.
It's understandable that it takes some time to get in front of him given his other urgent priorities. But you have a sense of when
how long it
would take for you to get an audience and get the momentum going again?
We don't really. I would hope that it happens this year, Robert. What you have that sort of stand on is the benefits of project. It connects Ontario to the largest wholesale market in the world, I believe it is, and especially the U. S.
With a direct line for the first time. The NEB has estimated the benefits of $250,000,000 a year to have this line in place. So we're hopeful that the commercial side of this will convince the province that it's a viable option. And we need to have those conversations,
Your
Your next question comes from the line of Andrew Kuske from Credit Suisse. Please go ahead.
Good morning. Barry, you mentioned this a couple of times on the call already just on the valuation discount that Fortis suffers from at this point in time versus the peers in the U. S. So maybe let's just go to the heart of it. What do you think the big issue is for just investors stateside?
Is it really misconceptions or misperceptions of the balance sheet at this stage or just not understanding the Canadian model and how you approach things?
It's probably all of the above. One of the fundamental thoughts, Andrew, is the sort of Canadian regulatory landscape, right? Got we got $10,000,000,000 of rate base in Canada that is if it was in the U. S, would generate about $150,000,000 more of earnings under, if you assume, the average ROE in the U. S.
And equity thickness in the U. S. So that Canadian business, albeit a very strong business and we're very much a believer in the Canadian business, it does generate less returns for shareholders compared to a typical U. S. Investment.
And so we have to, over time, find ways to improve that regulatory compact in Canada, and we'll continue to work on that. It will take, I think, some time to fundamentally change some of that. But we do have to work on that.
And then maybe just as an extension on that regulatory compact, when you look at the comparative jurisdictions, you tend to have a lot less regulatory volatility in Canada than you'd see in the U. S. I mean, you have best in class utilities in the U. S. And so maybe you have less than some other peers in the U.
S. But do you think you get credit for having lower vol in Canada versus the U. S?
Well, obviously, we could you and I could debate some of this stuff for a little while, Andrew, but I'm not seeing what you're suggesting in the U. S. In terms of volatility. The U. S.
Regulatory compact has dramatically improved over the last 10 to 15 years. So many U. S. Utilities have worked with their regulators to remove some of the issues around that volatility, whether it be putting in 4 test years or pass through mechanisms. They have really improved their situation.
And at best, I think the Canadian regulatory compact has stayed the same. So that's a problem and we need to work on that. So listen, I'm committed to our Canadian business. It is a really good business and all of that. But increasingly, it becomes pretty stark, the comparison between outcomes in Canada versus outcomes in the U.
S.
Fair enough. Thank you.
Your next question comes from the line of David Quezada from Raymond James. Please go ahead.
Thanks. Good morning, everyone. Just one question for me. Just related to the Arizona pump storage project, I know there was some commentary last quarter that there was some good momentum there. Wondering what kind of timeline, if you have one, for it to be included in any kind of formal capital plan?
And what kind of milestones we should be looking for there?
Jeremy, we're just at the early stages. This is a really large project. We would have to bring in utility partners, I would expect, to be involved in it. This is an ITC driven project. So already our Arizona utility is getting involved in it, but we would need much more broader participation.
We've had some open houses in Northern Arizona. Clearly, the big issue there is water resources, and we had to obviously allay any real concerns around those issues for local stakeholders. So I would say we're some ways away from building this one into our capital plans at this point in time. We do we have allocated $10,000,000 at ITC for this year to progress the project to a point we have to decide do we allocate more capital in the upfront development of the project. This is a kind of project you may have to spend $100,000,000 to $150,000,000 on before you would know if it was going to what's the support in the state for it.
We know that we're what's the support in the state for it. We know it's what the Southwest system requires. This project is going to allow substantial more renewables to come onto the grid. And if you're going to build solar and wind and all that, the Southwest is a good place for it. So this is the kind of project that supports all of that.
But it is a large project, and we'll see where we are at the end of the year once we do some more work on the development side.
Okay, great. Thank you. Appreciate that. Thank you.
Your next question comes from the line of Jeremy Rosenfield from Industrial Alliance. Please go ahead.
Thanks. Just following on some of your earlier comments, Barry, around the different return opportunities, the return levels in the U. S. Versus Canada. Does it make sense to try to right size some of the business a little bit and repurpose capital from some of the Canadian utilities and maybe by selling some of the smaller components and put that capital to work with higher return opportunities in the U.
S?
Well, as a steward to the business, we always got to look at opportunities, right? If someone was prepared to pay us a lot of money for any part of our business, we'd have to look at it. We're not actively marketing any of our businesses. Our goal really is to work with our regulators to improve our situation. That's our goal.
And I think that's where most of the value lies. That being said, as our business continues to grow faster, we will have to look at funding opportunities for that business. It doesn't necessarily mean we always have to go and issue equity, for example. It's we have to be smart about that, and we will be smart about it going forward.
And then just thinking about also opportunities. Are there more opportunities on the sort of contracted renewable side of things, also following on comments that you made earlier, versus rethinking contracted renewables or rethinking rate based renewables when you talked about renewable opportunities?
I'd like to do rate based renewables preferably, but I know David and his team have had a mix appropriately so in Arizona, always making sure we do the right thing from a customer perspective. But as renewables have become pretty cheap here, and solar and wind are getting down to $0.02 $0.03 a kilowatt hour, it's becoming, I think, more acceptable to have those move into rate base. And some regulatory jurisdictions in the U. S. Have approved fairly large chunks of renewables to be included in regulated rate base for certain utilities.
And we are hopeful over time we might be able to achieve some of those outcomes in our Arizona business. David, anything you can add there?
Yes. I would just say that that's one of our big focuses going forward is making sure that as we build out our renewable portfolio that we get a better PPA assets. And right now, it's tipped very heavily towards the PPA. So you shouldn't be surprised to see most of our projects on a going forward basis coming into rate base.
And how long do you think that David, following on that, how long do you think that it takes to sort of shift those PPAs largely into rate base?
Well, it's not necessarily shifting the existing ones into rate base. It would just it would be the new projects that we'll be building. We've got 600 to 800 megawatts of renewables, solar and wind that we'll be looking at adding between now and 2,030. So most of that, I would see going in as rate base owned investments.
Okay. That's great. That's it for me.
Thanks. Thank you, Patrick.
Your next question comes from the line of Patrick Kenny from National Bank Financial. Please go ahead.
Yes. Good morning, guys. Just in Alberta, it looks like the
business is holding its own under PBR2. Just but maybe you can give us a quick update on your outlook in the province, both with respect to cost savings initiatives and also on the growth frontier after seeing the results of the final CMD and whatnot?
So Patrick, obviously, Alberta is still a very big part of our overall business, and we did have a pretty reasonable quarter there. And but every iteration of PBR gets more difficult, right? That's the nature of PBR. I'm sure there are some opportunities. And I'm going to let Jeanine Jeanine, you're there.
Jeanine is our CFO for Alberta business. Jeanine, do you want to comment on Patrick's question?
Sure. Yes. Obviously, we received the decision in the first half of first quarter actually of this year and have had some time now to digest it. I mean, any of these PBR proceedings are very long in terms of they go on quite some time. So we've had some time now to work through the implications and understand it and kind of get our heads wrapped around it.
And we have been able to respond, much like you referred to cost savings, really doing what PBR wants us to do, reevaluating how we run our day to day business and making sure we're doing it as efficiently as possible for customers. And in that respect, PBR is working and we're finding ways to respond. And so our results were fairly strong for the quarter. I mean, we did have recently appointments now finally with the commission. So we now know who the ongoing chair will be.
And that we think will offer some stability and allow us to get a bit of a longer term view of regulation in Alberta for the next 5 years.
Thanks, Janine.
Great. And then Barry, just to follow-up on the recent conversation with respect to the discount Canada versus U. S. When we looked at the Canadian utilities here, BC, of course, you're waiting on LNG. Ontario, you've got the upside there with Lake Erie and whatnot.
I'm just curious and maybe you'll have more comments in the fall at the Analyst Day. But when you look at potential dispositions across the portfolio, and I know you'll be waiting for the GCOC decision in a week or so in Alberta, but would Alberta fall into the camp of more of a disposition candidate longer term?
Absolutely not. Listen, Canadian business is core to the company. And I made the point about trying to understand why there is this discount, right? And when you really look to the underlying business, you start to see these differences. And it's a management challenge really over time to find ways to convince our stakeholders the benefits of having stronger utility businesses in Canada and how that really benefits our customers.
And I that's our goal, and I think we'll have some success over the next 2 or 3 rate cycles. This is not going to happen overnight. This is something that has to take some time to achieve. So I don't be expecting us to be announcing sales of our pieces of our business. I make the point in that as a management team, we have to be wary of why there is a discount.
And we're again, we're doing better than most of our Canadian peers, but when you look at our peer group, we're using 23 American investor owned utilities and I guess 2 Canadians as our peer group. So we're focused on that high performing U. S. Peer group at this point in time, and we got to close that discount.
Thank you. There are no further questions. I would like to turn the call back over to Ms. Amaimo for closing remarks.
Thank you, Jessica. We have nothing further at this time. Thank you for participating in our Q2 2018 results call. Please don't hesitate to contact Investor Relations should you need anything further. Thank you for your time and have a great day.
Thank you for participating, ladies and gentlemen. This concludes today's conference. You may now disconnect.