Good afternoon. Thank you for attending today's Century Aluminum Company first quarter 2023 earnings conference call. All lines will be muted during the presentation portion of the call with an opportunity for questions and answers at the end. If you would like to queue for a question on today's call, you can do so by dialing star one. I would now like to pass the conference over to your host, Peter Trpkovski, Vice President, Finance and Investor Relations with Century Aluminum. You may proceed.
Thank you, operator. Good afternoon, everyone, welcome to the conference call. I'm joined here today by Jesse Gary, Century's President and Chief Executive Officer, Jerry Bialek, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, and Shelly Harrison, Senior Vice President of Finance and Treasurer. After our prepared comments, we'll take your questions. As a reminder, today's presentation is available on our website at www.centuryaluminum.com. We use our website as a means of disclosing material information about the company and for complying with Regulation FD. Turning to slide one, please take a moment to review the cautionary statement shown here with respect to forward-looking statements and non-GAAP financial measures contained in today's discussion. With that, I'll hand the call to Jesse.
Thanks, Pete. Thanks to everyone for joining. I'll start today by quickly reviewing our strong first quarter financial performance before turning to a brief summary of market conditions. Jerry will then take you through the financial results, and I'll finish with a discussion of our exciting new acquisition of a controlling interest in the Jamalco Alumina Refinery in Bauxite Mines. Turning to slide 3, market conditions for aluminum improved in the first quarter, with both LME prices and regional premiums increasing from Q4 levels, driven by further supply-side reductions in Europe and China. At the same time, input costs largely decreased quarter-over-quarter, with U.S. power prices falling most significantly. These improving market conditions, paired with strong operating results, drove Q1 adjusted EBITDA of $24 million, which is an improvement of approximately $36 million over Q4.
These good results were enabled by a tremendous effort by our operators across our locations. Safe and stable operations are a core requirement for success at Century. I'd like to commend all of my colleagues for the excellent operating performance they delivered in Q1. This begins first and foremost with health and safety, which is our most important priority here at Century. While we continue to strive towards our ultimate goal of an injury-free environment, I'm pleased to report a continued reduction in total recordable incidents from 2021 levels when we first implemented our new safety initiatives. We still have room for improvement and will remain dedicated towards reaching our ultimate goal. I'd like to welcome all of our new colleagues at Jamalco to the Century team.
On May 2, we closed our acquisition of a 55% stake in the Jamalco Alumina Refinery in Bauxite Mines, located in Clarendon, Jamaica, where we now become the operating partner. Century has long been one of the largest customers of Jamalco due to the high quality of the alumina that it produces and its strategic location in close proximity to our smelter locations in the Atlantic. We are very pleased to add this excellent facility to the Century portfolio and to reduce our short position in bauxite and alumina to more closely match our smelter capacity. I'll return to Jamalco at the end of my remarks to further discuss the strategic rationale for this transaction and what to expect from Jamalco going forward.
Turning to the market environment on page 4, you can see the global supply and demand were roughly balanced as we entered the second quarter, with additional smelter curtailments in Europe and Yunnan offsetting restarts elsewhere in China. In Europe, two additional smelters announced curtailments in Q1 due to continued high energy prices. In total, 1.2 million tons of capacity has now been curtailed in Europe since the energy crisis began, representing over 50% of the total EU capacity. As you can see from the graph on the bottom right of page 5, EU energy prices are expected to increase further from here. We therefore see risk of an additional 250,000-500,000 tons of European curtailments over the next 12 months.
We do not anticipate any significant restarts during this time period, as forward energy prices above $150 per megawatt hour remain well above levels needed for economic restarts. In China, continued low reservoir levels in Yunnan drove an additional 600,000 metric tons of curtailments in the province in the first quarter, partially offsetting restarts in Sichuan and other provinces. In addition, increasing water shortages in Yunnan and Qinghai present continuing risk of further Chinese output cuts in 2023. These supply-side headwinds continue to reduce global inventories, which are now below 50 days of global consumption. With inventories at these historically low levels, LME prices and regional premiums should respond swiftly once demand conditions improve. In Q1, the three-month aluminum price averaged $2,438 per ton, up nearly $100 from Q4 levels.
Regional delivery premiums witnessed quarter-over-quarter improvements as well, propelled by better-than-anticipated demand and low inventories. U.S. premiums have recently receded slightly but remain elevated, while EDPP strengthened throughout the quarter given EU supply curtailments. As discussed in our previous call, billet demand was muted during Q1 in the U.S. and Europe. With the market seeing a gradual recovery in demand after January, as customers have largely concluded destocking and tight secondary margins support the market. Building and construction demand was the most challenged of our markets in the first quarter, likely dampened by rising interest rates. Automotive and renewable energy markets, on the other hand, experienced the strongest demand improvements as automotive supply chain issues were alleviated and increasing government support for renewable energy projects started to boost the sector.
Despite this recent weakness, we continue to anticipate very constructive long-term billet and slab demand growth in both the U.S. and Europe, driven by the global macro trends towards sustainability, light weighting and electrification. Automotive demand will benefit from all three trends as aluminum content per vehicle has steadily increased in order to meet the industry and regulators' requirements for fuel efficiency, lower emissions and increased production of electric vehicles. For example, the U.S. EPA's announcements last month proposing new emissions reduction requirements that would be measured on a total fleet basis will require significant EV conversion, with the EPA estimating that more than two-thirds of all light vehicles produced in 2032 needing to be electric vehicles in order to meet the standard.
The automotive industry continues to turn towards high-performance aluminum alloys and advanced extruded enrolled solutions in place of heavier, traditionally steel components, driving long-term billet and slab demand. Turning to the cost side, U.S. energy prices returned to normalized levels in Q1, with Indiana Hub averaging around $33 per megawatt hour, a nearly 50% reduction over Q4. U.S. energy supply and demand fundamentals remain constructive, with natural gas reserves sitting 35% above year-ago levels and utility coal stockpiles 28% above year-ago levels. Alumina prices did rise during the quarter, with API averaging $360 for the first quarter from an average of $317 in the fourth quarter. Prices have been supported by alumina production curtailments in Australia due to a natural gas supply shortage and bauxite mine permitting challenges.
I'll return to alumina at the end of the call when I discuss our Jamalco acquisition after Jerry walks you through the quarter and our Q2 outlook. Jerry?
Thank you, Jesse. Let's turn to slide 6, and I'll walk you through the results for the first quarter. On a consolidated basis, Q1 global shipments were 181,000 tons, supported by higher plant utilization levels and sell-through of finished goods. Realized metal prices improved to help deliver net sales for the quarter of $552 million, a 4% increase sequentially. Looking at Q1 operating results, adjusted EBITDA was $24 million, an improvement of $36 million sequentially. Adjusted net loss was $11.3 million or $0.11 per share. This was an improvement of $20 million compared with prior quarter.
In Q1, the major adjusting items were $47.8 million for the unrealized impacts of forward contracts, partially offset by $25.6 million for lower of cost or net realizable value on inventory, and $5.4 million of capacity charges due to the curtailment of Hawesville, the latter of which were reduced to zero by the end of this month. Liquidity remains strong at $241 million at the end of the quarter, consisting of $30 million in cash and $211 million available on our credit facilities. Turning to slide 7 to further explain the $36 million sequential improvement in adjusted EBITDA. Realized lagged LME prices were slightly better than anticipated in the outlook we provided during our last call.
First quarter realized LME was $2,350 per ton, up $42 versus prior quarter, while realized US Midwest premiums of $573 per ton were up $104. Realized European delivery premiums of $290 per ton were down $209, reflecting a full 3-month lag. Together, these factors contributed a $3 million benefit in the quarter. Realized alumina cost was $390 per ton, $10 lower on a sequential basis. Realized coke prices decreased 5%, while realized pitch prices increased 10% in line with expectations. Together, alumina and other raw material costs contributed $7 million to EBITDA.
Power costs nearly halved from prior quarter for our MISO Indiana Hub exposure, as well as a 34% reduction in Nord Pool market prices, adding $35 million of incremental EBITDA, slightly better than expectations. Sales mix was unfavorable, resulting from the customers destocking that Jesse referenced, and that we had forecasted on our last call. In total, adjusted EBITDA for the first quarter was $24 million, a $36 million improvement sequentially. Let's turn to slide 8 for a look at cash flow. We started the quarter with $54 million in cash and added $24 million in adjusted EBITDA. Borrowing against our casthouse facility offset $10 million in CapEx for the Grundartangi casthouse project. All other CapEx totaled $4 million. Hedge settlements contributed $10 million.
We repaid $19 million on our revolvers and other debt, and the Hawesville curtailment power charge was $5 million. Working capital other used $29 million of cash during the period, about $20 million of which can be explained by normal fluctuations in inventory and accounts payable, leaving us with Q1 ending cash of $30 million. Now let's move to slide 9 for insight into our expectations for the second quarter. For Q2, the lagged LME of $2,380 per ton is expected to be up about $30 versus Q1 realized prices. The Q2 lagged U.S. Midwest premium is forecast to be $570 per ton, down slightly, and the European delivery premium is expected at $305 per ton or up about $15 per ton versus the first quarter.
Lagged realized alumina is expected to be $400 per ton, up slightly. Taken together, the LME delivery premium pricing and alumina changes are expected to increase Q2 EBITDA by approximately $5 million versus Q1 levels. Power prices continue to show signs of moderation, and we expect a slight reduction in total energy costs to contribute approximately $5 million of improvement to EBITDA compared with Q1. We expect the impact from coke and pitch to be neutral to EBITDA compared with the first quarter as a reduction in coke prices is expected to be offset by stubbornly elevated pitch prices. With respect to Jamalco, we expect a break-even or better impact to adjusted EBITDA for the second quarter.
We're excited about future benefits related to increased volume and cost efficiencies and expect Jamalco to be accretive to our financial results at current spot prices beginning in the third quarter. Jesse will elaborate on this in a moment. OpEx and other costs are expected to increase $5 million-$10 million due to maintenance cycles, wage inflation, and the addition of seasonal labor to maintain smelter stability during the summer months. All factors considered, our outlook for Q2 adjusted EBITDA is expected to be in a range of between $25 million-$30 million. Just a few more points to make. From a hedge impact standpoint, we expect a realized gain of between $5 million-$10 million in the second quarter. We expect tax expense of approximately $5 million–$10 million. As a reminder, both of these items fall below EBITDA and impact adjusted net income.
Finally, I'd like to point out that we do expect to fund between $10 million–$20 million in working capital at Jamalco during Q2 as we continue to ramp up production there. With that, I'll turn the call back over to Jesse.
Thanks, Jerry. Turning to slide 10, I'll walk you through the key details from our exciting Jamalco acquisition, which closed last week. This transaction is highly strategic for Century as it secures a long-term supply of high-quality alumina and bauxite for our smelters and achieves increased transparency in our alumina purchases. This will create a more balanced, consistent, and robust operational footprint and better position us to deliver strong performance through commodity cycles. Jamalco was originally built by Alcoa and went through a series of major investment and expansion programs in the late 2000s to bring it to its current nameplate capacity of 1.4 million tons. The refinery operates as a joint venture with the remaining 45% stake owned by the government of Jamaica through its holding company, Clarendon Alumina Production Limited. We are very pleased to have both as partners at Jamalco.
We've long identified Jamalco as a strategic asset for Century, given the high quality of its alumina, long-term access to domestic bauxite, and excellent workforce. Its strategic location in the Atlantic Basin is in close proximity to all of Century's operating locations, providing short and secure supply lines and low logistics costs to each of Century's smelters. Jamalco also has existing mining and exploratory licenses to provide sufficient high-quality bauxite for over 30 years of nameplate refinery production, providing a clear runway for long-term operations of the refinery. Perhaps most importantly, Jamalco has a very experienced and talented workforce that shares Century's cultural focus on operating safe and sustainable facilities with first-class environmental stewardship and community engagement. The refinery has recently been through some difficult times, but it is well on its way to regaining its full potential.
In August 2021, a fire broke out in the plant's powerhouse, which halted production of alumina for about a year before it resumed partial operations with only 1 of its 2 digesters this last summer. Given these challenges, it was very important to us that we have time to conduct thorough due diligence process to ensure the full recovery of the refinery. Due to a unique acquisition structure where we provided interim funding to allow for the restart of the second digester in exchange for an option to purchase a 55% ownership interest for $1, Century teams have been able to conduct extensive due diligence and have an almost continual presence on-site at Jamalco since early February. This allowed us to confirm our expectations that despite the 2021 fire, Jamalco retained the potential to return to a second quartile asset.
The team at Jamalco has done a fantastic job restarting the second digester, with the plant now running near an annualized production rate of 1.2 million tons. We expect production to continue to increase and exceed 1.2 million tons over the next several months. The additional volume and efficiency has already significantly lowered Jamalco's cost structure, and we expect further improvements as the volumes continue to increase. As Jerry mentioned, at current spot prices, we expect Jamalco to be roughly break even or better in the second quarter and to be accretive to our financial results beginning in the third quarter.
In order to return the asset to its full potential and 1.4 million tons of capacity, we have identified a series of operational improvements and investment opportunities, which we are calling Project Restore, which should return Jamalco to its historical location in the second quartile of the global cost curve and drive further improved profitability. We expect approximately $10 million-$20 million in Project Restore CapEx over the balance of the year, which should begin driving additional cost savings and production increases as soon as Q4 2023. The bulk of the remaining Project Restore investments and volume gains will occur over 2024-2026. All Project Restore investments are expected to have double-digit unlevered IRRs that meet Century's investment requirements. We will provide you additional detail on the full scope of Project Restore later this year.
We are very excited to add Jamalco to the Century team and believe strongly that Jamalco will provide Century a meaningful opportunity for long-term value creation for all of our stakeholders. We look forward to your questions today, we'll turn the call over now to the operator.
We will now begin the Q&A session. If you'd like to ask a question, please press star followed by one on your touch tone keypad. If for any reason you would like to remove that question, please press star followed by two. Again, to ask a question, press star one. As a reminder, if you are using a speakerphone, please remember to pick up your handset before asking your question. We'll pause here briefly to allow questions to generate in queue. The first question is from the line of Lucas Pipes with B. Riley. You may proceed.
Thank you very much, operator. Good afternoon, everyone, and congratulations on the announcement regarding Jamalco. I do have a few more questions on that, and thank you for the detail already on the call. My first question is, why now? Is there anything that has changed in your view of the strategic landscape that makes vertical integration more attractive today than maybe in the past? Thank you very much.
Thanks, Lucas. It's Jesse. This is something that we've been looking at and talking about for quite a while now, being backward integration up into the alumina and bauxite supply chain. We've been patient in waiting for the right opportunity to arise. In Jamalco, we found an asset that we knew well. As I mentioned, we've long been the largest customer there. We're very familiar with the high quality of the alumina that they produce. It also fits well within our footprint, so we can take and have taken Jamalco Alumina to all of our operating smelters. Works well in all of them. We also found an asset that has high potential. We know it has long operated in the second quartile, and had sort of an exogenous event that created hard times.
Given the sort of unique acquisition structure we're able to set up here, we were really able to get our arms around the asset, feel very confident that we can put it back into the second quartile. It'll ultimately just de-risk Century from another exogenous risk of high alumina prices over the long term. It fits with what we've always said on M&A, that we'd like to find assets that fit those factors. We'll also be opportunistic and look for the right opportunity. For those reasons, we felt like this was the right time in Jamalco.
Very helpful. Thank you for that. My follow-up question is on some of the points you just raised. Putting the asset back into the second quartile, could you comment on what sort of capital may still be necessary in addition to what you outlined for the second quarter? I think that's $20 million–$30 million of working capital. More broadly, you mentioned that the asset will be accretive to your financial metrics. I think you said Q three. I wondered if you could hone in on what the incremental improvements are that drive that accretion in Q three versus Q two. Thank you very much.
Yeah, sure. I'll just start with the second question first, and then I'll get to your CapEx question. Most of the beneficial gains will come in two factors. One, as we continue to ramp up the volume over the back half, these will occur both from capital projects that we'll implement, but also continued operational improvements that come with the restart of the second digester and the stabilization of operations at the site. As we add that volume, along with it will come lower costs as we spread our fixed costs over that additional volume, but also a variety of operational improvement programs which will further push the cost down. It's really twofold, both volume and cost savings on the incremental benefits.
On the CapEx side, we did mention that we expect about $10 million–$20 million over the back half of this year. Go forward, there will be a number of capital projects remaining for the 2024-2026 timeframe. We'll come back and give you additional guidance there as we go into the back half of the year.
Got it. I appreciate that color. I'll turn it over for now. Thank you very much.
Thanks, Lucas.
Thank you. The next question is from the line of Timna Tanners with Wolfe Research. You may proceed.
Hey, good afternoon.
Hey, Tim.
Wanted to ask about some items I didn't hear you mention. First off, we had in our notes $28.5 million from a sale of land from Mount Holly. Is that gonna appear in the second quarter, or am I missing something there?
No, thanks, Timna. Yeah, that transaction continues to move forward. There is a little bit of zoning issues that are going on with the sale, just normal process. We now expect that that will close in the second half. The rest of the metrics.
Got it.
for that transaction should be the same.
Okay, thanks. Land sale closure second half. The other question is just going back to Hawesville. I was just rereading some of the news, you know, it was late June where you said it was closing for 9– 12 months, and you have some positive commentary on the market environment and lower Kentucky energy prices. Just wanted updated thoughts on the future of Hawesville.
Sure. It's a great question. As we mentioned when we curtailed it, we did curtail it in a very controlled manner, and we continue to maintain the site as necessary in order to enable a restart. That restart decision, obviously, is the decision that we'll look at in the context of the totality of the circumstances. For Hawesville specifically, we're talking about main drivers being a prolonged period of power prices at historical levels, and then an aluminum price that can maintain levels to justify the restart expenses required and also the cost required to bring that plant back to full capacity.
While we have seen conditions improve, we're continuing to wait to see the volatility reduce, in both of those components and then ultimately just finding a level that will drive those long-term re-returns that we need to undertake the expense. One item just to note.
Oh, yeah.
... on the holding costs there. Sorry, Timna. Just one item to note on the holding costs there. We do expect that the existing power capacity that was purchased last year for the facility, those costs will now roll off, so that's about $2 million a month per potline that will roll off.
Okay, thanks. In other words, there's no specific commitment or requirement to restart, and you're waiting for more accommodating power prices and aluminum prices. Is that what you're saying?
That's a good summary, Timna. Yeah. It's a holistic decision. We need everything to align. It's something that we'd really like to do, but we just need to wait for the right market conditions in order to move that forward.
Understood. If I could just follow up and lastly on the last line of questioning around Jamalco. I guess the thing that makes me nervous is whenever you get something for $1, you wonder, okay, what's along with that? Just was there any specific commitment given to the Jamaican government or anything that we should be aware of in terms of the amount of CapEx, you know, anything else that we should be thinking about in terms of cash requirements going forward? Thanks again for all the detail.
No, it's a fair question, Timna. Just as a reminder to start, we did not purchase our 55% interest from the Jamaican government. We purchased it from Noble, who are the former owners. The Jamaican government does own the other 45% of the asset. Yeah, just to your question about the $1, it was a really unique set of circumstances that enabled this to happen. Just to give maybe a little bit more color, we've, as you might imagine, as a major customer of the facility, have been watching the financial situation there closely. You know, post-fire, they had a difficult period with some long time frames in order to rebuild the facility and get it restarted after 2021.
Once they restarted it last year in 2022, they started a single digester. As you know, with these sorts of assets, it really is important to get them back to full production or to bring the cost structure down. They found themselves in a situation where they couldn't fund the additional monies that were needed to restart the second digester. We worked out a situation where we're able to provide some interim funding. As you might imagine, before we agreed to put the funding in, we wanted to be sure that there was a return there for ourselves.
We were able to negotiate this option structure, which gave us a few months to watch the second digester come up, and make sure that we're comfortable with the rest of the due diligence around the asset, and then have the right to exercise that option for $1. That's really the sort of reasoning around that dollar structure. And, you know, some of that interim funding you'll see, you know, that's a part of the $10 million–$20 million that Jerry mentioned that we'll be contributing as part of the working capital build. It came in the form of a prepay for alumina, and so some of that will then be reflected in that $10 million–$20 million in working capital build going forward.
Just to your ultimate question, no obligations on the CapEx side, although we are excited about those projects. We think they're very good projects. And, you know, no sort of liabilities assumed. There's no debt on the asset or anything like that. It is what it looks like, and we're really excited about the asset.
Okay. Thanks again.
Yep.
Thank you. The next question is from the line of John Tumazos with John Tumazos Very Independent Research. You may proceed.
Thank you.
Hey, John.
Staying with Jamalco, are you going to have any on-balance sheet liabilities assumed for reclamation, post-employment costs or other issues? Can you give us some guidance as to those amounts?
Yep, sure. Sure, John. All of the liabilities assumed are what I would call ordinary course liabilities for alumina refinery. As you mentioned, there are reclamation liabilities associated with the bauxite mining, and ultimately some of the residual storage areas. The great part about this asset is that it does have significant mine life left, so we view it as a very long-term asset. It has over 30 years of mine life left of high quality bauxite with their existing mining licenses. We think, you know, this is an asset that we will be operating, especially given its place in the, in the second quartile on the cost curve, for a very long time.
Might that consolidated liability we see after closing be more like $50 million or $100 million?
Yeah. We'll give you the exact detail when we come to the back half of the year here after we work through all the accounting. It's more towards the, your first assumption than your latter assumption. Still running through the final accounting on that should give you a sense.
You have the right to buy all the output?
So-
Great. Thank you.
Sorry, John, can you just repeat the question?
You'll have the right to buy 100% of the output.
No. The Jamalco's structured as a unincorporated joint venture where each of the partners takes their share of the output at cost. We take our 55% of the output, and CAP takes their 45%.
Thank you.
Thanks, John.
Thank you. The next question is from the line of Katja Jancic with BMO Capital Markets. You may proceed.
Hi. Thank you for taking my question. Just first for a little bit of clarification. You said the $10 million–$20 million in working capital, that's considered what was pre-funding for the second digester?
Yeah. A portion of that was part of a prepayment for alumina, which will now be delivered in the second quarter and will be part of that $10 million-$20 million in working capital build.
How much was the total pre-funding? Can you provide that number?
We're not disclosing that, but it is within the $10 million–$20 million. The rest of that $10 million–$20 million represents a buildup in inventory, payables and receivables as the production is increased at the facility.
Okay. On slide 17, you typically provide your sensitivities, and it's clear that it doesn't include Jamalco, but can you provide any direction as how, you know, the contracts, how the sensitivities, especially for alumina, are gonna change going forward?
Yeah. Sure, Katja. No, no problem. For Q2, given there's sort of an existing cargo mix, and sales coming out of Jamalco, our internal mix will stay roughly the same as what you see on page 17. As we integrate and take our share of the Jamalco production going forward, what you'll see is our mix will change towards roughly half LME linked and half at Jamalco's production cost. That's sort of our 55% share of Jamalco is about 650,000 tons of alumina, which is roughly half of our requirements. That gives you a sense, and we'll give you some additional detail there going forward, but hopefully that roughly balanced half LME percentage, half Jamalco production cost will be pretty close.
You can't provide information what the production cost is right now?
No, we don't break down production costs, by individual asset level. We will provide some sort of additional input, on the Q3 call as to what, how Jamalco is integrated into the system. Given that the transaction closed last week, need a little more time to give the specifics there.
Okay. Thank you very much.
Thanks, Katja.
Thank you. The next question is a follow-up from Lucas with B. Riley. You may proceed.
Thank you very much. Just a few quick follow-ups. First one is on slide 9. OpEx other head of $10 million– $5 million in Q2. Can you remind us what that headwind is? Is it a one-off, or would it repeat, i.e. stay in the segments through the end of the year? Thank you.
Hey, Lucas. Jerry. As I said in my prepared remarks, that the $5 million-$10 million is made up of, you know, maintenance cycles. We had some wage inflation there, and we also have some seasonal labor. If you think back to the fourth quarter of last year, we did a fair amount of cost-cutting, and we've had some efficiencies that flowed through the fourth quarter into the first quarter. We're now approaching a cycle where we're going to invest a little bit of additional OpEx just to help us through the summer months and manage the seasonality, the difficult timeframe during, you know, stability is an important aspect in that timeframe. We'll put a little bit of seasonal labor in there as well.
Got it. We shouldn't expect the reversal in Q3, but maybe in Q4?
Correct.
That's helpful. Thank you. Then, back to Timna's questions on Hawesville. Two-part question. The first is, what is your sense for restart costs for Hawesville? How much capital could be required? Then second part, would you hedge Hawesville output with price mechanisms as you did in the past? I think the market was somewhat skeptical of that approach, but would appreciate your thoughts on that matter today. Thank you.
Thanks, Lucas. Obviously, once we make the decision to restart, we'll give additional detail probably on both those questions at that time. Obviously both of those are specific to the exact operating environment that you find yourself in when you make that restart decision. Maybe to give you a little bit of context, when we last restarted lines at Hawesville back in 2018, you'll remember it was about $25 million per potline that we brought back on. If you remember that time, those lines had been down and required full relines of the cells, which is much more capital intensive than the manner in which it would be restarted this time.
Because all of those cells were recently relined, from the more recent restart, when we restart the next time around, we'll have significantly less reline costs. I'd expect those restart costs to be significantly lower than that $25 million per potline. We'll give you additional detail once we actually make the decision.
Thank you. Again, if you'd like to ask a question, please dial star one. If there are no further questions waiting in queue, I'd like to turn the call back over to Jesse Gary for concluding remarks.
Thanks everybody for dialing into the call this quarter, and we look forward to talking to you on the third quarter call. Thanks.
This concludes today's conference call. Thank you all for your participation. You may now disconnect your lines.