We're moving along here. Thanks everyone for coming out. Really excited to have the team from Cummins here. The brief hiatus last year, they've been long and loyal supporters for this conference. Thank you guys for being here. Chris Clulow, directly to my left, heads up IR. Jeff Wiltrout runs corporate strategy for Cummins. Well, I gotta work through a series of questions, but if anyone has anything they wanna get to, just put your hand up and make sure I see you. With that, maybe I'll start with you, Jeff. You know, as head of strategy at Cummins, it probably keeps you pretty busy just given all the things, the moving pieces and all these evolving technologies.
I'm curious from your perspective, having worked under Tom and now the transition to Jen, just any difference in terms of approach or philosophies and again, from your standpoint that you would call out? Or is this just kind of a continuation of a lot of the work that Tom had put in place?
Yeah, sure. So there are, of course, some differences, as you would expect with any leadership change. Tom and Jen are very different people. You know, Jen comes with a different background, a much deeper technical background in particular, CTO and kinda coming out of the engineering organization, which is different than Tom's background, of course. What I would say from my vantage point and perspective from my responsibilities is Tom and Jen and the leadership team did a lot of work in leading up to the transition. Some of the Destination Zero strategic principles we've put together, and so from that perspective, a lot of consistency. You know, they built that together with the leadership team, and so that has been, like I said, consistent, positive and no big changes or swings in our strategic direction.
We still feel comfortable and confident with kinda where we're headed. Some personal dynamics and differences as you'd expect and, but broadly, what it means for us and where we're prioritizing investments, no big changes.
Got it. If we went back, it was about a year ago, almost to the day, I think, when you had your Analyst Day, and you guys put forth some of the zero-emission vehicle kind of adoption curves. You know, a lot has happened from a regulatory perspective, you know, just level of interest rates, et cetera. The world looks quite a bit different. I'm just curious, if you were drawing those curves today, would they look much different in terms of... Again, we all expected that different markets and geographies are gonna move at different speeds. Has any of that kinda changed up or back since we looked at that a year ago?
Yeah. Well, broadly speaking, I mean, it's hard to extrapolate at such a high level. We tried to do that last year. We do run those curves with a high regularity and go pretty granular by market, by geography and cut it, slice and dice it in various different ways. What I would say over the last 12 months, especially relative to what certainly others are saying is I think have been relatively consistent in the message that our belief is this transition towards kinda zero carbon solutions is take a long time. It's gonna take a while. That's a function, of course, proving the reliability of the underlying technology, getting the costs right, getting the infrastructure in a place where it's ready to suit broad commercial and industrial applications.
That's a long time horizon. I guess at the simplistic level, I would say those curves that underpin what we said a year ago have not fundamentally changed from the sense that we were kinda saying then, we continue to say this is a pretty long transition in our end markets. I think, if anything, what we're saying is that that's getting more broadly, I think, you know, acknowledged, I might say. Secondly is what does that mean for how we're obviously pacing our discrete investments now with our engine programs, with our new power investments to kinda be well-positioned alongside those curves. Anyway, no big changes.
For us, that uncertainty, because we can, we think, have a breadth of solutions and the cash flow to make the entire journey, we actually think that uncertainty at some level plays to our advantage.
Interesting. Maybe, if we move to Meritor, several months into that integration, just how has that gone relative to, you know, to your expectations? Then, you know, you have been I've always thought of truck design typically starts kind of at the axle and move forward. Now you're at the early stages of that, owning Meritor. Just how has that experience gone? I know there's only so much of this happens in, you know...
Yeah.
Nine months, what are your views on that?
Yeah, sure. I'll start with, you know, the base strategic and financial thesis for us has held true, and we continue to believe in it. And that was, of course, based on a couple of different things. First of which is it's a business that generates cash flow, is well-positioned, has solid market share, and there are some synergies to be delivered in how we serve that market, serve our customers in those spaces and things like that. Of course, we have been working very hard and making solid progress in conjunction with the stated synergy targets we articulated to help finance the deal. That's point one.
Then, of course, point two is, as we transition to, you know, zero-emissions technologies, that it is our belief that that kind of integrated eAxle becomes increasingly important, increasingly valuable in the architecture, which you rightly alluded to. That us being in there and leading in that space and working with current OEM customers and potential future customers on developing, refining.
Delivering that technology at scale actually puts us in a pretty good position, in the near, medium, and long term. Across all those fronts, like I said, the basic thesis for why we did the deal to begin with still holds. We are on track with where we intended to be from the pure near-term financial synergies to help make sure that the math works. Some near-term performance in 2022 was not quite as solid as we'd like from a margin perspective, but we have taken actions to make sure that gets back in line with where we want.
Thirdly, kind of that longer-term positioning relative to these new vehicle architectures and the importance of that eAxle, ePowertrain technology we still believe is important and is where we're focusing a lot of our energy and investments to help supplement that.
Well, in terms of the steps you can take, is that more on the pricing side or what in terms of the underlying performance?
Yeah. The near term, and Chris, you can speak to that, if you want. What we saw in 2022, which led to a little bit of kind of the weaker than certainly our preferred performance in the back half of this year, was a combination of things, but pricing was certainly one of them, that didn't quite get delivered through all of 2022 to the extent that was probably fully expected. We did a lot of work once we kind of took the keys in August and closed on the transaction to drive very quickly to address that.
What we start to see heading into this year is to kind of return that business to the margin profile that's more consistent with what it was and start to now layer on, like you said, some of the cost synergies that we've been aiming and delivering on to kind of get this back to where it needs to be and on a trajectory to operating much more close to the margin profile of our components business and Cummins more broadly. And you.
Yeah. The only thing I'd add, Tim, is there's also a lot of headway we're gonna make this year on cost. And, and it's not necessarily a big driver of revolutionizing their supply base, but just getting them onto our freight contracts as an example, or moving them and making progress there. It's about 180 basis points improvement on just the supply chain costs.
Mm-hmm.
We're not seeing that same level of improvement in our core business quite yet. We do expect that on to come as freight and material costs come down.
Okay.
Maybe we can dig into some of the bigger markets for you, starting with the largest being the North American on-highway. I spent time last week at your largest customer, and, you know, the mood there was, you know, as would to be expected, pretty upbeat. You know, I think their outlook, while not quantifying it, is a bit more optimistic than it seems to be in terms of your market forecast for North American Class 8. You know.
Yeah.
They're not your only customer, obviously.
Sure.
maybe just dig into that.
Yeah. I would say our outlook for 2023 assumes like, you know, we have good visibility in the first half, see very good strength, and that is going into the third quarter now. I'd say we have less visibility as we get into the fourth quarter. It's starting to firm up some. I mean, we're still seeing decent orders come through month by month. Really saw very strong ordering, of course, in the second half of last year and a strong backlog. I would say our guidance is based on some moderation in the fourth quarter. Whether that happens or not, I think it remains to be seen. I think that's probably the differentiation between us and maybe some of the OEMs. We're about in line with where ACT is right now.
It's, I guess that's something we continue to watch is whether that continues. It's a tough one these days 'cause all of our, we were saying earlier today, all of our rules of thumb on cycles are kind of turned upside down.
Yeah.
We never had a peak. How long does this last? We have a, you know, a very large change in emissions coming up in 2027, which seems really far, but, given the turbulence the last couple years is playing into people's decisions now.
Yeah. It, you know, maybe shift to parts. You went out of your way a couple years ago to highlight, hey, everyone talks about North American engine share, but you know, parts has become a bigger and bigger piece of that revenue pie for you. It was one of the, or probably the largest public truckload fleet just presented this morning, and they were talking about how they used to target X years for an average age perspective. You know, they've gotten more comfortable with, you know, push extending that out. Just because they're, you know, they have better visibility in terms of the repairers and the work they've done with preventative maintenance. What do you guys have a good lens into that through your distributors? Is that something that's more, you know, widespread in terms of...
Could we getting now to the point where those trade cycles maybe have elongated?
Yeah. I think that is the case, certainly in the heavy-duty space where things are they're in use longer. It used to be a, like, a 10-year rule of thumb is getting closer to 12 years, now. It speaks to the durability of the products. It is, I would say as a finance guy who's been involved in some warranty and product coverage issues in the past, it's somewhat surprising given the complexity and ongoing challenges from an emissions perspective, this is the best products we've put out in a long time.
Yeah.
You know, it you can see it in our product coverage rates are quite low, continue to have really high quality, which helps the customers, and it elongates that cycle. It does, to your point, elongates the parts consumption cycle as well.
Mm-hmm.
Increasing, 'cause heavy duty is one of the bigger drivers of our parts sales, alongside with our Power Systems business probably being the other big driver in parts.
For NAFTA and, from a market share perspective, as we move towards and you begin to push more of this fuel agnostic, parts, you know, products. What do you think that? Obviously market share predicting next month is difficult. Where do you think that could play out as we look out over the next several years?
Yeah, that's the big question for us. Tim and Jeffrey, welcome your thoughts as well. It is... You know, we've made really good headway in medium-duty space, where that used to be a space where it was difficult to gain market share. We've gained, you know, very strong market share, expect to hold that for as long as diesels remain. Heavy-duty is the big opportunity. It is heavy duty or what niches can we help the OEMs play where it's just more and more challenging for them to meet, one, the emissions that are coming in 2027, but also in terms of what are there other investments they need to make. I think that's...
There is some opportunity for us to continue to grow on the share side, even with assuming e-everything remains equal, natural gas will become a more, a bigger piece of the pie, we expect over the next few years, helps on the emission side and it's strong, durable product. That will, you know, as we're the only provider on natural gas, that'll help us along as well on the share side. I think there's some opportunities for us to make continued headway. Do you have anything else?
Yeah. All of that is... I mean, I think now that we do start to get clarity on some of the emissions regulations in 2027, it's starting to kind of work its way through all the decision-making and prioritization for the engine requirements to meet those fairly stringent regulations on that time horizon. I think that's... It's a little too early to say. We certainly think there's upside, exactly to Chris's point, but that's what's the conversations that are gonna happen in the next six, 12, 18 months is around who is gonna be prepared to meet those regs and what that means.
We certainly intend to be, and this is why we've got some of the big R&D spending you see coming through to be ready with the right engine platforms across the breadth of medium-duty, heavy-duty, and in between when we get there.
That dovetails into the question. As we went back on from your fourth quarter results, far and away, the biggest question I've had from investors just revolves around the engine margin outlook and just kind of the lack of operating leverage. Just what you mentioned presumably plays a part of that in terms of a step up in R&D, but maybe you can talk through that and other factors.
Yeah. That is definitely the biggest factor in terms of, you know, from a financial perspective, a headwind. We do get strong pricing as we continue into this year. That is offset by our continued investment, this fuel-agnostic program, 'cause we're renewing our whole engine lineup, the 6.7 L, a 10 L which we just announced, and a 15 L. I think that takes a good amount of work. This is a heavy spend year, particularly with prototypes and other investments that we will continue to make the investment. For us, I guess the amount we need to invest is just another point to what Jeff's saying. It's like it takes a lot to meet this 2027 emissions regulation.
It's a big capital investment, big R&D investment. It shows our commitment to meeting there. We're gonna be there, and we're gonna be playing in 2027. It just gives an indication of what it takes. It is certainly from a margin perspective, you know, a headwind for us this year, along with there's some other smaller ones, like product coverage is a little bit higher as we just expect a little bit moving back towards the norm, a few other things.
Presumably that stays with you looking beyond 2023 or?
Yeah. It will, it'll take us into 2024. We'll, we're not saying if it'll be higher or lower in 2024. I think it's gonna be a continued investment 'cause we'll start launching the products in 2025, 2026, 2027. We're not gonna launch them all January first, 2027.
Yeah.
That's, that's a lot to ask for our distribution network and others to support. We'll be launching them in stages, but that's, yeah. Leading up into that, it starts to the development curve tends to come off about a year ahead of launch.
Do you think on those 2027 regs, in order to meet them, do you think there will be a shift towards smaller displacement engines? You mentioned the 10 L. Do you think smaller displacement engines are part of the way to get there, or is that still TBD?
Yeah. I think it's TBD. We don't think it's gonna move the 15 L needs much. I think the 15 L are still needed particularly for the long-haul trucking when you're going across mountains, taking a long distance, carrying heavy loads, the 15L is needed. We can get it to the right emissions level. I don't think it's gonna change it too much. We will certainly be using a lot of the technology we've gained over the years. You know, I think of the acquisition we made of Jacobs just last year, has a Cylinder Deactivation technology, which will become a key part of lowering emissions, meeting emissions as we go forth, which we can apply to the 15 L.
Mm.
There's different methodologies you can get to get to the same space.
Got it. Before I move on, if anyone has a question, just put your hand up. Go ahead.
Sorry, I didn't catch the last piece of that.
Imparity levels.
Imparity levels?
Just repeat.
Yeah. That's it.
The question is around the TCO of your zero emission products relative to diesel, right?
It's a great question cause you will have, you know, an increase in cost as we get to the 2027 emissions. The price of a fuel, internal combustion engine is gonna continue to increase. As Jeff pointed out, the cost of the zero emissions is going to come down. That's kind of what we balance in our cycle. It's not, we have to make it all the way down from the zero emissions down to be comparable where diesel is now, as an example. It's gonna meet somewhere in the middle. It'll vary depending on the geographies. It'll meet sooner probably in a place like Europe that has carbon taxes.
I don't foresee any, you know, carbon taxes coming soon in the, in the U.S., for example. I think that's an area where it's gonna be different, why we have to assess it. Our, our curves are by geography as well as by application.
The only point I'd add is I think, and maybe there's certain examples that I'm not aware of, nowhere this decade does it ever get upfront cost, you know, like for like the parity, just to be clear. Like, it's a TCO equation, total cost of ownership, not an upfront cost equation. again, there may be an exception here or there on certain sub-applications and in Europe with carbon taxes, things like that, but usually it is higher upfront costs where the ZEV solution traded off through a lower operating footprint across a number of different vectors. I just want to make sure. The TCO crosses sooner rather than later, but the upfront doesn't happen this decade in the vast majority of applications.
Yeah, I think that's a great point, Jeff. I think that does play into the equation on adoption, because if you're a trucker and you're making pennies a mile, it's hard to bet on the upfront cost and assuming it's gonna come in the back end. I think that actually even slows adoption even a little bit further is where they need to see it play out in order for TCO to be really positive for them. This is a very cautious customer base because of just the economics they have to deal with. I think that does play into our adoption scenarios as well.
As I shift to Power Systems, I mean, that is a segment that you've kind of had some fits and starts over the years from a margin perspective, but, you know, from an end demand standpoint, you probably have as good of visibility and as you've had in some time. Are there company specific initiatives that are helping to support the margins? Is it just, hey, we're demand is really good in a lot of these high margin segments for us, and that's, it's more of a cyclical uplift than it is a kind of a Cummins specific factor?
Maybe I can start, and then you can add in about what we're doing on like transformational work. I would say we did have a breakthrough in about the third quarter where we kind of stepped up in margins, and a lot of it had to do with pricing lag because these are long lead time markets. You're right. We have visibility into demand, but the order boards are filled. We're taking orders well into 2024 now, as our competitors, but the pricing lagged a bit, and that caught up in the third quarter. Most of the step-up we saw in the latter part of last year and going into this year is on pricing. We're continuing to get more value there.
At the same time, we're doing some good work on trying to drive further margin improvement for that business. Maybe you can talk, John.
Yeah, that's exactly right. I think the answer is both to your question. There's a bit of cyclicality mix and dynamics with pricing that Chris just alluded to, and then a quite concerted effort in flight as we speak to make sure that we're driving, I'd say, non-cyclical and sustained margin improvement in that business. You know, Jennifer Bush now runs that segment, who ran the distribution segment over the last several years and was in charge of helping us to drive a similar kind of sustained margin improvement profile through that business. That is a very specific effort to not just ride the cyclical waves, but to make sure we can drive profitability improvement.
An important market for you, data centers have become more and more important over the years. I feel like every six months, you know, that someone's calling the top for the data center market.
Oh, yeah.
Semiconductor companies have been warning for two years, and yet it seems like the business for you just continues to hum along. It's more global, so maybe just spend a minute on that.
Yeah. It's, it's become a really large piece of our business in our power generation. It's, you know, approaching $1 billion in revenues across its life cycle. It's, right, I think we've been calling the top for like four or five years. Like, oh, it's gotta drop out. What is happening is, it continues to just move around geographically, and I think they continue to make the investments even in like with the, you know, we've all seen what's happened in the tech sector with job reductions and so forth. They're still spending the capital. They're gonna need that long term. I think the data center market continues to be robust. It's looking strong for 2023 and into 2024 already, we're starting to see that.
China, which was down a little bit last year on the data center side, we're hopeful will start to bounce back as we get further into this year.
Yeah.
Mining, you know, is very customer specific and BelAZ and growing. I think at one point was the largest customer...
Wonderful, yeah.
In the mining business. Again, the world has changed quite a bit there. Is that impacting the outlook for you for mining this year? Is more of a customer thing than.
Yeah, it is, 'cause we, you know, we gave the guidance of essentially mining flat this year, but that took out about a quarter of sales into Russia, which is a big piece of the business with BelAZ being Belarus-based. That has dropped off for a very long foreseeable future. I think what we're seeing strength elsewhere in the world, so making it up. I think you're still seeing strength across commodities, even though they moderated some, have continued to drive strong mining volumes, both in first fit as well as rebuilds. Rebuild demand is really high in the mining space because these are engines oftentimes used for 20 years. They might rebuild them 4 times-
Yeah.
in the segment. I think that we're seeing continued strength. It's hard to see how the gap of the loss is being filled, we're seeing it being filled by some other OEMs. It's not. You can't quite specifically track it.
Mm-hmm.
We're seeing, you know, they're not making the sales out as well.
Yeah.
They don't have engines for their trucks.
A lot of those rebuild decisions, are they in part to... We have this kind of bridge until we get to what the new world looks like from a BEV standpoint, but I don't wanna commit to a 20-year asset if I think that Cummins is gonna be out with a zero emission product in, you know, 3 years. Is that some of that driving the decision or?
No, I think the rebuilds are just. I think they continue 'cause they just have a lot of life. They don't wanna get the utilization out of that capital. I don't think there's been any shift, and Jeff, you can jump in if you've seen it, anything different of them really thinking in depth about deploying the zero emissions in that space yet.
Mm-hmm.
They're trying it out. We're working, you know, in fuel cells with certain customers or battery electric seems like a hard technology to fit given the weight demands. I think that's more in the testing phase, but it isn't slowing down their capital investment in the internal combustion powered.
Got it. Got it. Maybe on distribution, you know, that if you look back over time, kind of a mid to high single digits, and then it just, you know, gapped up two years ago. It seems like it's kind of maybe leveling off a bit even on pretty good revenue growth that you're projecting. Is it some of that of a tech spending related in terms of, you know, you did all this integration work, but maybe there was behind the scenes more investment that needed to occur that couldn't when you had all these different, kinda operating units. Is that?
Yeah, I think.
part of it or?
That's a piece, Jeff alluded to it with Jennifer Bush, who's now our Power Systems leader. She led our North America distribution group and did a huge transformation, which allowed us to step up our margins, consolidate our business, and drive that across. We're at a more stable state right now on our margins. We are taking some of the learnings we learned in North America and applying them internationally. There is some upside there, but we're also in a place where, like the pricing is you don't have as much pricing power in distribution itself 'cause it's pass-through pricing. That might flow to our more product businesses and so forth. I think it tends to be more stable margins.
I think within distribution, we can, you can move things around between segments, but most of that flows into the aftermarket side on our product segments.
Yeah. Is that dynamic you mentioned, I mean, is that as you look at some of the public distributors that have different margin structures, is part of the relationship that you have with the different business units, is that kind of obscured a bit relative to looking at again, a public distributor?
Yeah, it is. It is, it's not completely apples and oranges, it is different because we have those different pricing dynamics and how we share the price increases and so forth is gonna be different because they're wholly owned.
Yeah.
The future benefits start to come. You know, what Jenny did a good job of is truly get the integration right across the North American footprint, get the cost structure right, get the. Now the benefit comes from implementing, you know, some of the sales and technology-based solutions that continue to drive efficiency, that take investment to go unlock and things like that. To the extent that there's additional upside, it's gonna come, you know, a little bit longer and it will require some investment to unlock, in addition to, like you said, some of the global pieces to reinforce the same model that we delivered in North America.
On new power, I mean, the IRA in theory, looks to be a big catalyst for hydrogen. It's getting to the actual dollars and the investment's a little tricky because all the grants, et cetera. Do you guys have any, can you size that a little better now just given that some time has passed?
Yeah. I think the IRA was. It had really between that and the Infrastructure Bill, had really everything we wanted in it. I think it does drive a lot of investment in hydrogen. We knew that as we put together our 2030 goals in our analyst day, we knew there was gonna have to be government incentive to help drive this infrastructure investment. The IRA definitely helps that. It just has created more momentum in this, particularly electrolyzer space where people wanna keep building out. It, it does take some time to get that into revenue and get those into use, but it is gaining good, strong momentum. We're continuing to see that. It is a complex proposition to put together the whole investment thing for this infrastructure build-out, IRA is certainly helping incentivize that.
Got it. From a competitive standpoint, I mean, as the cost of money has gone up, you know, some of these things that were financed on kind of a hope and a dream, that becomes a little bit more difficult, especially to the extent some of this revenue potential maybe is a little longer dated. How do you see that playing out just in terms of the competitive space? I mean, it's, there's quite a lot of folks, you know, trying to get a piece of that. How do you see that playing out?
Yeah. There are a lot of folks. You're right. Many of whom are trying to play this game, especially through the lens of kind of the one technology that they believe is gonna be the winner. I guess our view is that, especially next several years where we expect capital to be a little bit more expensive, where I think the realization that this may be a longer path to scale is that there almost has to be some kinda consolidation of those folks to kinda get to, you know, the right economic profile to kinda see it through that journey.
That's what we Kind of expect to see happen, which is, which is also why, like I said, we are quite happy with the set of investments we have made that we think gives us the right breadth of technologies and experience to again, both fund and then position ourselves for the near, medium, and long term. As that happens, we will of course continue to evaluate where there is technology that may be additive, supplemental, you know, as those companies potentially need to find, you know, consolidate or find a new home to enable them to make that journey. This will be an ongoing conversation that we will have to just identify are there ways to move more quickly, move with better agility in a pretty highly dynamic technical space to invest appropriately, so.
If went back a year ago that inflation and supply chain were the big, you know, kind of discussion points, probably still are pretty much today. Where do you guys sit in both maybe just high level from an inflation standpoint as to, you know, are seeing any signs of plateauing there? What where are the things that are giving you more concern as you look into 2023?
Yeah, I think it is definitely plateauing. I think we're seeing that, you know, freight rates have come down. They're starting to flow into contract rates. They're starting to get a little bit of benefit there. Material costs, you know, haven't come down as quickly as we thought. They're not going up dramatically, but they're, you know, while commodities have come down, suppliers are still struggling with labor, still struggling with, you know, throughput. I think you're still seeing, you know, our costs, which are, you know, for the materials still be relatively high, but not going up, which is a positive thing. The other piece of the puzzle is on the labor side also seems to be plateauing out.
Still a little bit of a headwind, but not as much as we were seeing at probably mid-year last year. With the slowdown in the other parts of the economy, I think that does help in terms of labor demand. I think that's moderated somewhat, but it's a little bit of headwind. I think the cost-wise, it's slightly positive for us as going into 2023, and there's probably some more to gain as we continue to move forward. It's also stabilized just from a predictability. Like we are getting more of the, you know, the supply that we need. It's less uncertainty on that side.
The, that, the stabilization is probably even more helpful than the cost side at this point 'cause we know what we can build.
I'll see if there's anyone have a question. Go ahead, Carl.
Hi, Carl.
Thanks. I was wondering if you could touch on maybe some of the initiatives in the medium-duty space with the new power. I know the heavy duty is kind of further out, but medium duty seems a little closer, and you guys have pretty high market share on the ICE side. Curious kinda how that's progressed since the investor day last year and any kind of outlook for this year.
Sure. You wanna take it or I'll start. Yeah. You can add. I mean, I think you're right. If you look across the breadth of the applications we serve, the medium-duty space, you would expect to move more quickly. This was, I think. We continue to make investments across our battery business, across. This is of course part of the rationale for the Meritor acquisition, like I talked about, which is this whole eAxle, and the supplemental Siemens Commercial Vehicles business that we acquired as well, is to have the right kinda integrated package to go work with OEMs. That is the content that will differentiate to the extent that medium-duty trucks is gonna move to battery electric sooner rather than later.
We do a lot of work on the math equations as it relates to market size and adoption rates and content per vehicle and our share relative to all that. That's, as you can imagine, pretty highly dynamic and one we're working. I think, quite not surprisingly, our models don't say we're gonna replicate our engine share in that space as it goes through that transition. We do think there is a viable and an even attractive kind of content story kinda through the decade when it starts to see meaningful adoption towards the back half of this decade in that space. That's something that we look at every three, six months.
The math moves around a little bit, that is kind of informing the investments and the pacing of the investments in a New Power space in a notable way. I don't know if there's anything more specific you wanna talk about. Yeah. I would just say I don't think it's moved faster than we thought. I think it's not probably in the high end of our scenario where we had, I think it was 37% of adoption medium duty by 2030, probably more in the middle right now. I don't think it's trending towards the high end. It's just not moving quickly. Infrastructure's pacing it as well as, you know, just battery prices.
I'll ask the obligatory China question for you. There's some optimism flagged by some of our colleagues in Hong Kong about just what they've seen from a freight rate perspective, and it's leading to a bit more optimism around orders. Obviously, that doesn't get transmitted to Cummins right away. Just what are you hearing from the team post New Year? Then we can touch more, not just a on highway market, but just what you're seeing across the other verticals in which you compete.
Sure. Yeah. I think you're right. There is more optimism. It is compared to complete pessimism last year.
Right.
It is hard to gauge, but it does feel like it's turned a corner. The change in the policy certainly helped, and now the vast majority of the population has already had COVID, so we don't expect further spikes in the near term. It is set up to move, it's just how quickly does it take off? I think that's the wild card. If you listen to some of the OEMs, they like us, are kind of readying their supply base for a rapid bounce back.
Mm-hmm.
You have to just play it by ear. We have a more of a gradual, improvement that we expect this year. There is kind of growing optimism in the space, and it's just how rapidly does consumer confidence come back...
Mm-hmm.
Then you start moving more and more goods, and then it starts taking off. I think we're ready for the rate and pace of when it comes back. We've proven back in 2020 we can come back really fast.
Mm-hmm.
Us and our supply base, and we've been doing that preparation over the last several months. We're ready for it. It's just, the OEMs are telling us build a lot, but we're not quite believe them yet because we haven't seen it come through in the orders. We're still. We haven't seen our February results. We'll see. We'll get a couple months in, we'll have a much better view.
Got it. Got it. Beyond, I don't know if you've quantified this in terms of the, your total China revenues...
Mm-hmm.
Consolidated plus unconsolidated. What doesn't what is not accounted for by the.
Yeah.
On highways?
Yeah. I think, the construction space, excavators in particular, is gonna be down this year, and it's just driven by emissions change. They had emissions change December first.
Yeah.
They always just tail off a little bit. We expect that to be low for the next few quarters. On the Power Systems, the large industrial space actually had a very strong year last year. It was about flat with the prior year. Mining and oil and gas both were up considerably in China, and power generation held pretty well, and that continues to do well. It speaks to the kind of the heavy industry part of China just continued to be strong, regardless of the consumer confidence. Gives us a little bit more optimism on the solid base, the foundation for the, for the economy.
Got it. All right. With less than a minute left, so if we just sum everything up, I mean, the call was just a couple weeks ago, but no dramatic, not dramatic, but are any tweaks around the edges or is it just still pretty much the messaging in line with what you had shared too?
Yeah. I would say it's still the messaging. I think China's maybe a little more optimistic than even a few weeks ago. I think the more we can get into 2023 and see the strong orders, if we can see that, we'll be more and more comfortable with Q4. Right now we're probably sticking with the same guide.
Very good. Thanks, guys.
Thanks. Appreciate it. Thanks, Tim. Thanks.