Polaris Renewable Energy Inc.

Greetings. Welcome to the Polaris Renewable Energy Third Quarter 2025 Conference Call. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. A question and answer session will follow the formal presentation. If anyone should require operator assistance during the conference, please press star zero on your telephone keypad. Please note this conference is being recorded. I will now turn the conference over to your host, Alba Sesteros, CFO at Polaris Renewable Energy. You may begin.

Thanks, Hallie. Good morning, everyone, and welcome to the 2025 Third Quarter Earnings Call for Polaris Renewable Energy, Inc. In addition to our press releases issued earlier today, you can find our financial statements and NDNA on both Cedar Plats and our corporate website at polarisrei.com. Unless noted otherwise, all amounts referred to are denominated in U.S. dollars. I would also like to remind you that comments made during this call may include forward-looking statements within the meaning of applicable Canadian securities legislation regarding the future performance of Polaris Renewable Energy Inc. and its subsidiaries. These statements are current expectations and as such are subject to a number of risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from current expectations. These risks and uncertainties include the factors discussed in the company's annual information forum for the year end of December 31st, 2024. At this time, I will walk through our financial highlights. Overall, Q3 2025 was a steady quarter for Polaris. Results reflected solid operational execution, disciplined cost management, and the second full quarter of contribution from our Puerto Rican wind operations. Together, these factors supported both year-over-year and year-to-day growth in generation, revenue, and also adjusted EBITDA, despite production generally being lower in the third quarter of the year, which coincides with the dry season in those countries where the company has hydroelectric plants, and therefore there is less resource available for energy generation, as is the case of Peru and Ecuador. as well as the rainy or hurricane season, and therefore we have less radiation or wind in those countries where the company operates solar plants, as is the case of Dominican Republic and Panama and our wind farm in Puerto Rico. So starting with operations, third quarter consolidated energy production totaled 181,235 megawatts hour versus 168,639 megawatts hour for the same period last year. Consolidated energy production for the nine months ended September 30th, totaled 613,524 MWh, representing an 8% increase as compared to the same period last year. The strongest performance this quarter was achieved by our hydroelectric projects in Peru, where favorable hydrology during what is typically the dry season and an excellent plant availability led to a 44% increase, both in Q3 2025 and year-to-date, in hydro output for the Peruvian projects. Our hydroelectric facility in Ecuador also had an exceptional quarter, producing 24% more energy in the three months ended September 30th versus the 2024 comparative period, thanks to strong rainfall and an excellent technical performance. In Puerto Rico, the Punta Lima wind farm, acquired in March, added incremental production that did not exist in 2024 and is now fully integrated in our portfolio. In Panama, solar generation in the quarter was 2% higher than in the 2024 comparative period. These increases offset lower output from Nicaragua, where short-term well instability and natural steam field decline earlier in the quarter reduced generation by about 5% for the nine months ended September 30th versus the same comparative period in 2024. Production at our Dominican Republic NOAA one solar facility decreased 1% in the quarter when compared to the same period in 2024. While year-to-date, the production increased 5% versus the 2024 comparative period, reflecting efficiency gains from the new panels installed in 2024, which allow upsetting grid-wide propelments. Overall, our diversified portfolio, spanning geothermal, hydro, solar, and wind across six jurisdictions, continues to provide balance and resilience in the face of localized resource variability. So turning to the financial results, starting with revenue, Revenue was 19 million during the three months ending September 30th, which represents an increase of 8% versus Q3 in 2024. Revenue year to date was 60.9 million versus 56.9 in the 2024 comparative period, reflecting higher generation in Peru and Ecuador, as we have mentioned, and the addition of our project in Puerto Rico, Punta Lima Wind Farm. Adjusted EBITDA, adjusted EBITDA of $12.8 million for the quarter, compared to $12.4 million for the same period last year. And furthermore, for the nine months ended September 30th, the company realized $33.2 million in adjusted EBITDA, compared to $41.4 in the same period last year, reflecting a 4% increase. Operating margins remain strong despite inflationary pressures and the integration of new assets supported by disciplined cost control and lower insurance expenses following our debt repayments. Cash generation, net cash from operating activities remain robust with 29.2 million for the nine months ended September 30th exceeding the same period in 2024 by 3.3 million. The increase mainly reflects the collection in Q3 2025 of the strong Puerto Rican revenues from Q2 which follow a 47-day collection cycle and the shift from quarterly interest payments from regional loans in 2024 to semi-annual bond interest payments in 2025. Net cash used in investing activities for the nine months reflects the initial 15 million payment for the position of Punta Lima Wind Farm, while there was no competitive transaction in 2024. Net cash used in financing activities for the nine months mainly reflects the early debt repayment of four credit facilities to the 120.6 million. Dividend. Finally, we remain committed to delivering shareholder returns. I would like to highlight that we have already announced that we will be paying a quarterly dividend on November 21st of 15 cents per share to shareholders of record on November 10th. With that, I will turn the call over to Mark, who will elaborate on Polaris' third quarter results, as well as on current business matters. Thank you.

Thanks, Alba. I'll just make a few operational comments about where we see sort of rest of the year looking forward. As Alba mentioned, the hydros were stronger than normal in Q3, which is the dry season in those jurisdictions. But we do see that at least October today continuing. So hydros we think will be somewhat stronger than usual in Q4 here as the rainy season has started somewhat earlier than normal. I would say what's going to offset that a little bit is that those, call it rainier conditions, do seem to be also in the solar jurisdictions, DR and Panama. So they're looking maybe a little bit softer, but I would say the net effect of those two things should still be positive in this current quarter. I see San Jacinto, as I mentioned in the last quarter, in the 49 to 51 range. which it did, and then I'm saying 50 megawatts current quarter, plus or minus a little bit, similar. So that, when I run our numbers, that would bring the quarter in around 195 to 200 gigawatt hours would be the current range that we're looking at right now. And just a reminder that, and that is because we have moved the major maintenance at San Jacinto into January of next year instead of December of this year, just based on some availability of Fuji staff. So that will land in Q1 next year. In terms of really the growth and the developments, the big focus remains ASAP. The update on that is that the contract was submitted by ourselves and LUMA to PrEP, which is the Energy Board, a while ago. It was approved by them, and then it went to PREPA. And just to explain, I'll give a little more detail, there's three entities that need to approve it there, which is PrEP, which is the Energy Bureau, then PREPA, which is the contracting agent, and then after that, FOMB, which is the Oversight Management Board. Basically, we had received PREP. We have PREP approval as of this past Monday. And I would highlight that on September 22nd, the governor issued an executive order which was really focused on the energy, call it emergency situation, or it's an acute need for more energy on the island. And in that order, it was really, I would say, directing government entities, whether it's PREPA or even Ministry of Environment to expedite approval processes and permitting processes such that new generation and including storage can get brought on the system quicker than what has traditionally happened in the past. While it did take a bit longer than we expected to get this PrEP approval, we are expecting things to move reasonably quickly from here on out. What does that mean, though, in terms of, like, we would look at likely a Q4 in-service date next year for that? And in terms of the sizing, it has landed on 71.4 megawatts, which was approved, as opposed to 80. And that's really just a technical limitation at the interconnect point. So those metrics, based on what we're seeing from the procurement, and we are, I would say, reasonably far along in the procurement process, it would be gross capex of about 70 million. but we do still anticipate being able to achieve an ITC on that, which would bring the CapEx down to a net CapEx of about 50 million. And at that size of 71.4, you'd be looking at EBITDA around the 13 to 14 million on net CapEx of 50, which is about a three and a half, four times sort of CapEx divided by EBITDA build multiple. So still very... excited about those numbers and hoping to launch the program in this border in the next month. We're also hopeful that this won't be the only storage project in Puerto Rico that we do. We've already been asked by LUMA to formally give our intention to move forward with something called SO2. So we're looking at that. And I would also say given what I mentioned with the executive order, we are talking to several developers on the island or with projects on the island for more traditional solar plus storage projects that have contracts or have been awarded approvals for contracts, but they're looking for sort of larger financial partners or operational companies. And this has really come on the radar screen just in the last, I would say, two to three months. We like these because of what we're looking at on the island as well. They're reasonably chunky. I would say the small ones are $5 million. We're seeing things in the $10 to $20 range. But with very good, I would say, capital ratios, probably not quite as good as the ASAP program I mentioned, but you know, in the, call it five times, which, you know, we're still looking at 20-year U.S. dollar contracts, so that's very good return profiles. So that really is, call it the brownfield focus right now, and I would say that is the focus for the company. I would mention the DR, which we have continued to push on more in the background. It looks like that will get pushed into next year in terms of potential contracting opportunities As the government is now saying they want to look at doing a tender situation instead of bilateral, we would obviously have the ability to participate in that. And I think we'd be in a good shape for that, but we do need to wait likely for next year. So what that means is really pushing the Puerto Rico projects in front of that. BalanceFeed is strong with 99 million in cash. We did repurchase another 27,000 shares in the quarter. In Q3, continue to in Q4 here. So I guess it is somewhat slower in coming with the ASAT project, but we're very confident it is coming. And with these other projects that we're looking at, I do see a situation quite quickly here where we will be using up that spare capacity on the balance sheets that we have, and hopefully that's some. So really, I would say over the next 12, 15 months here, the story would be steady as she goes from an operating perspective, but an expected big pickup in what I would call development and construction activities and news flow. And I would say as we move forward on ASAP and as we move forward with hopefully one or two other projects next year, we will for sure I would say be giving more market updates and press releases as we move forward with these projects. So it would be more sort of call it newsy on the development and construction activities next year. And I think it's important because those would be very material for the company. And then call it financial results on the back of those coming in 2027 and 2028. So with that, we can open it up for questions.

Certainly. At this time, we will be conducting a question and answer session. If you would like to ask a question, please press star 1 on your telephone keypad. A confirmation tone will indicate your line is in the question queue. You may press star 2 if you would like to remove your question from the queue. For participants using speaker equipment, it may be necessary to pick up your handset before pressing the star keys. One moment, please, while we poll for questions. Your first question for today is from Beltej Sidhu with National Bank of Canada.

Hey, good morning, guys. Morning. My name is Elba. It's great to see the progress with SO1, but could you just remind us of the comparability of SO1 and SO2 as as it pertains to the attractiveness for Polaris with the infrastructure you may have to leverage with the implication of SO1 that would be in place?

So the technical difference on the island is just SO1 was only for people that have a current operating interconnect agreement in place. In other words, you had to have some generation facility with an interconnect facility. SO2 is really open to either the same group, which is some people that have an interconnect, or anybody that just has a new development. So if you have any project without an interconnect, you could then participate. So it's really the same terms for us. The only difference is we need to up our transformer capacity, but on a, call it a, $60, $70 million project, that's only a $2 or $3 million CapEx item for us. So essentially the same type of economics.

And the transmission capacity would be there, that's it, that you would have, right?

Yeah, the transmission capacity on the sort of downstream on the line is about 130, 140 megawatts, and we're sort of, the first one's really 35.7 times 2, that's a 71. So we have we have a fair amount of, you know, we could probably triple it from here.

Great, great. And then it might be too early, but is there any impact to pricing that we could see relative on SL2 versus SL1?

Well, interestingly, I think pricing might be higher because the way that they do things on the island, typically for traditional solar, let's say, is that any interconnect costs and system upgrades that are needed for a new project, rather than the transmission company or the distribution company paying for that and charging it to the rate base, the developer actually has to finance that. And so it comes into the cost of the PPA, let's say. So for SO2 though, the assumption is that there will be participants that don't have an interconnect yet, So they will have to finance and build that. And so compared to SO1 with existing interconnect. So if anything, the price should be somewhat higher. I don't think it would be, well, you know, it could be instead of 16,000 megawatt per month, 18 to 20. We don't know that yet. I don't think they've landed on it, but I think if anything, it would have to be somewhat higher. And the good news is that there is the backdrop of still, you know, I'd say, you know, very competitive lithium battery cost curve that's probably going to continue, right? So still to be determined, I would say at the worst case scenarios, it would be the same type of economics.

Very interesting. And then looking forward to hearing those organic updates over the course of next year. And just switching over to, as you noted, the capacity that you have on the balance sheet and the ability to leverage that for organic development. How are you thinking about the inorganic growth and the M&A side. Could you point towards any color that you see on the M&A pipeline and or valuations in the regions in which you operate?

Yeah, and then just to be clear, when I said we're talking to the local developers with brownfield, I wouldn't put that in the M&A bucket, even though it's kind of in between. I would put them still more in the brownfield development side. But in terms of M&A, which I would also just suggest a little bit comes on the back of us actually, I think, putting some runs on the board in terms of ASAP and probably some other development projects, I would say. But multiples, I would say, came down more like six, 12 months ago to, I think, a reasonably attractive level. I think they've kind of leveled off there. So if I had to put super high-level numbers on things. I would just say, let's say you take ASAP at four. Let's say you take four times. I'm talking, this is a bill multiple. Probably these other development projects we're looking at are five, five and a half, same in the DR. I've seen sort of more actual operational with contracts, running assets in the M&A side in the jurisdictions we're in. Anywhere from six and a half, eight times.

That's great, Connor. Perfect. I'll pass the line over. Thank you again, Albon and Mark.

Your next question is from Nick Boychuk with Pormark Securities.

Thanks. Morning, Mark. In Puerto Rico, can you comment a little bit on the competitive dynamics? So you mentioned that there's these local developers with ground field opportunities, how many other players in the space could potentially be having these conversations to develop these? And I guess once you have that conversation, how fast could we then move through permitting construction and getting these things operational?

Yeah, I don't know, obviously, with 100% certainty who else is out there, but it definitely seems like There's the dynamic of you have a few big players on the island with operating assets that wouldn't be interested in the stuff we're looking at. And you have a lot of, I would call it, local developers that don't have the financial capacity. For people in the middle that are looking at, again, projects that once they're up and running have from $5 million to $20 million of EBITDA. you know, uh, we do know of one player that was definitely there and in the game, but they, they are not anymore. So it does seem like it's really opened up for us from that perspective.

Okay. Understood. And would it be a similar dynamic in the Dominican? I appreciate that it's been pushed back a little bit by a year, but could you theoretically also have similar activity in that country?

Yeah, I would, I think interestingly, um,

DR might be a little bit more competitive for us in the mid-range than Puerto Rico. So, you know, the flip of that is, yeah, Puerto Rico does seem to be quite open right now. And I think it's a weird – the Dominican, you actually – a bunch of, call it credit, is available because it's a, quote, unquote, developing country. So you have a whole bunch of lenders that would maybe fund a smaller developer to get a project off the ground. that doesn't exist in Puerto Rico because it's part of the United States. So it's almost more of a capital issue in Puerto Rico as opposed to how many competitors are there? If you understand what I'm trying to get to. Puerto Rico, there's a big issue with getting capital for these small developers to get a $500 million project off the ground, whereas there's a little bit more availability in the DR for that, even though I would say not as if there's a bunch of other competitors that are a similar size to us in that market. It's just that the option of them to maybe get it further along to get construction going, there's a little bit of a better chance in the Dominican, which is a little counterintuitive, but that's what we see.

Okay. And then I appreciate that the return profile is on the M&A. You said it was six and a half to eight times versus the five to five and a half percent that you'd be building ground field. So better returns if you do ground field, but just cognizant of your internal resources, your own abilities internally to develop these things simultaneously in given time, is there a point where you recognize you could leverage more of your balance sheet and acquire something now, add incremental EBITDA, and have a meaningful impact on shareholder value in the near term versus trying to maximize the return profile? How are you thinking about the difference between time to getting these built and maximizing the near-term shareholder value?

Good question.

I would say, believe it or not, the senior management time to do, let's just say, real due diligence on operating assets, legal side of things, operational side of things, on the front end. Maybe not the back end. Once the operations are there, I would say streamlining them into yours isn't a huge deal. There's always issues, but it's not a huge deal for us. I would say it's the front end. So to your point, where there's going to be a bottleneck would be more that we are doing, call it the late stage development on ASAP ourselves, right? If we partner with some developers, we're going to be doing, we're going to be heavily involved in that late stage development slash construction procurement, which I think is very similar to the M&A side of things. So it might seem easier, but I'd say it's at the front end where there's a potential bottleneck and we could, but we can for sure do two. It might get a little bit harder at three, but believe it or not, like I think we could do all, like we could for sure do three, like we could do ASAP, we could do a development, a new development in Puerto Rico. Now, also because we're there, it's not as if it's a new jurisdiction for us. So our conversations with the authorities on some of these other projects are right after we've talked about ASAP. So I do think that we can handle that. It would be different as a new jurisdiction. And some of the M&A stuff, I think at the front end, we could do it as well. So I don't think it's necessarily an either or.

Okay. So just to confirm my understanding, you could do ASAP one, develop something else in Puerto Rico, and then one of the other of a DR or M&A type project. So theoretically, three different things on the go at the same time, call it 10 to 15 million bucks in EBITDA for each, and all that could potentially be wrapped up by 2028.

Yeah, I think that the, you know, in our presentation, we sort of show a five-year, let's just say for 2029, that EBITDA is like 100, 100 plus. What we're looking at right now is I think we could, let's just say we're flat in like 12 months operationally, but we will be doing things such that that 28 number, I think can get very close to that. It's a big step up, such that the 28 number is looking very close to that, the 29 number that we have in the presentation.

Okay, that's awesome. Thanks Mark.

Your next question for today is from Theo Jensenbu with Raymond James.

Hey, everyone. Thanks for taking my call today. Yeah, just a quick question. So just on the curtailments at Kanoa 1 and the expected curtailments now at Kanoa 1, the delays at the interconnection for Kanoa 2, I guess, is there, like, how are you engaging with the government to address these? Is there anything that can be done, I guess, by talking to the government there?

Yeah, as I say, fair amount of conversation. Where it just always goes to is that, yes, we need storage. So they very much acknowledge that. And so this is my comment about they're likely, as opposed to doing a bilateral negotiations, which we were looking to do, which was going to be put panels, but also put a reasonable storage capacity there such that you are, you're switching, call it a problem. challenge into at least an opportunity or at least you're, you're, you're, you've had yourself off with the stories. And so they see that and they don't, they acknowledge it. Um, they're just, they're, they want to get the regulation set and they're likely to do a tender next year. And that's really how they're planning on dealing with it.

Gotcha. And then I guess it's safe to say that it doesn't really impact, like, um, uh, I guess how, uh, how you guys think about future development in the Dominican.

Well, I think what it does do is I've probably bumped up the percentage of storage coverage that I think we need from maybe 25% to 40%. But I think that's so – yeah, I think it's a quote-unquote problem now, but I think it will end up morphing into an opportunity when they're ready. And I think that will be next year at some point.

Okay, great. Thanks for cleaning that up. And then I guess just one more for me, and just on the regulatory timeline at Puerto Rico for this ASAP storage program, I understand you expect approvals within the next 60 days. Just in your opinion, is there any possibility of further delays to that, or is it pretty much what we expect?

Yeah, well, I can't say no to that. I mean, I think the – This island is known to have very good projects, but you need to play the patience game. So I think it's possible. But I would say with this September 22nd executive order by the governor, the entities do seem to be very responsive right now. So it's probably as good as we can expect in terms of that timeline for Puerto Rico.

Great. Fair enough. Thanks. All right. Appreciate the time today.

Thank you. Likewise.

We have reached the end of the question and answer session and conference call. You may disconnect your lines at this time. Thank you for your participation.