Good morning everyone. Thank you for joining us for today's FY26 results presentation.

I'm joined by Garrick Rollason, our CFO, as well as our Investor Relations team. I'd like to acknowledge the Gadigal people of the Eora Nation, traditional custodians of the land on which I'm speaking.

First Nations people have taken care of our lands and waterways for the past 60,000 years. We acknowledge and pay our respects to their elders past and present.

I'll start today's presentation with a safety share on slide 4. APA is [unclear] technology platforms in our remote sites allows our people to get on with the critical work they perform every day in both a safe and efficient way, which we are incredibly proud of.

Free cash flow was up 3.2%, also stronger than expectations. We've exceeded our FY26 cost reduction target of $50 million, delivering total enterprise-wide cost reductions of $80 million in the year.

This includes a 20.6% reduction in corporate costs. The annualized savings we've delivered is approximately $100 million.

Some of the cost savings [unclear] is that our growth outlook is compelling and is supported by favorable market [unclear] with the capacity to fund growth, grow distributions, and maintain credit metrics. Our FY27 to 29 [unclear] pipeline has increased from $3 billion to $3.5 billion.

[unclear] FY27, having announced today FY27 underlying EBITDA guidance of between $2.26 billion and $2.34 billion. The midpoint of this range would represent a 5.4% increase on FY26, which would be another excellent result.

[unclear] today distribution guidance of 59 cents per security for the year ahead. [unclear] over the past 12 months and for their continued uplift in our focus on customer experience and service delivery.

We continue to improve gender representation, increasing our representation of women to 34% [unclear] and First Nations supplier engagement within a dynamic energy market. This is all in the pursuit of providing opportunities for our people, strengthening our communities, creating value for our customers, and capturing value for you, our security holders.

Our organic growth pipeline for FY27 to FY29 is now $3.5 billion, as outlined on slide 10. The bulk of this is made up of projects [unclear] expansion, the South West Pipeline expansion, to increase the capacity of the East Coast Grid by around 30%.

This builds on the 25% increase in north-to-south capacity that we've already delivered to increase north-to-south capacity for winter 2029, as our previous expansions along this corridor have done. The AER's recent decision to approve APA's South West Pipeline expansion is further evidence that the demand for expansion is there.

Moving now to slide 12. [unclear] East Coast Gas Grid and underwrite the extension of Australia's Gladstone LNG export facilities beyond the 2030s.

It, as it's known, Darwin to Beetaloo Pipeline, which would bring additional gas from the Beetaloo up to Darwin alongside APA's [unclear] Amadeus Pipeline. Moving to slide 13, GPG capacity is essential to ensure Australia's energy system is cost-effective and reliable as we transition from baseload coal to intermittent renewables.

While batteries continue to play an important role to firm renewables, unlike GPG, batteries are unable to provide system strength to deal with the inertia of multiple intermittent renewable systems. In December 2025, APA was pleased to announce a partnership with CS Energy in Queensland to develop the 400 megawatt Brigalow Peaking Power Plant.

We're in the process of finalizing that agreement, and we're making great progress with delivery, including civil and bulk earthworks, turbine procurement, and awarding major construction contracts. The project will connect into APA's Roma Brisbane Pipeline via a new lateral transport and storage pipeline, which is also being delivered by APA.

Moving to slide 14. We've progressed our development pipeline for remote contracted power generation in multiple locations.

We're pleased to announce today an agreement with Evolution Mining to develop the Saibai solar and battery project in Mount Isa. The $259 million project will deliver low-cost, low-emissions energy to support Evolution's Ernest Henry operations and be firmed by APA's Diamantina Power Station.

Saibai is a great example of how we've leveraged the skills and experience of the Pilbara energy team to bring this important project to life in Mount Isa. Our Pilbara business continues to perform strongly.

We're progressing with planning and approvals for our strategic sites in the region, including the Newman Renewable Energy Hub, to support our customers who are committed to the decarbonization of their operations. I'll now hand you to Garrick to take you through detail of our financial results.

Thanks Adam, and good morning everyone. FY26 represents a strong, clean result as we continue to execute on our growth strategy.

I'm particularly pleased we're able to deliver cost reductions ahead of our target, and also growth in free cash flow. I'll start with our headline financials on slide 16.

We have delivered strong growth in underlying EBITDA, up 8.3% for the year, as the benefits of inflation-linked tariffs, earnings from new assets, and cost reductions were realized. Underlying EBITDA margin increased by 370 basis points to 77.9%.

Free cash flow was up broadly in line with inflation through the benefits of higher earnings and cost reductions, partially offset by increased funding costs to support growth and cash tax payments. We delivered cost reductions ahead of our target.

Moving to slide 17, where I'll step through drivers of our 8.3% uplift in underlying EBITDA. The combination of inflation-linked tariff escalation and contributions from new assets increased earnings by $136 million.

We delivered new earnings from the Kurri Kurri Lateral and Atlas to Reedy Creek pipelines, as well as a full-year contribution from the Port Hedland solar and battery, alongside inflation-linked tariff escalations across the portfolio. Pleasingly, we also delivered enduring, enterprise-wide cost reductions of $80 million, exceeding our target of $50 million, and including a 21% reduction in corporate costs.

I'll have more to say on this on a subsequent slide. Offsetting these improvements was the expected loss of earnings from the sale of the non-core networks and GDI businesses, as we simplified the business to focus on our core strategy.

We also saw lower earnings from VTS due to milder winter conditions this year, but this was partially offset by strong performance from our contracted power generation assets. Slide 18 summarizes the drivers of free cash flow, which was up 3.2% to just over $1.1 billion.

Consistent with our previous statements, the uplift in underlying EBITDA was partially offset by higher interest and cash tax paid. Higher interest costs reflect increases in net debt to fund growth and a marginally higher average cost of debt.

Higher cash tax reflects the continuation of tax installment payments, which commenced in the second half of last year. The change in working capital recorded in our first half, and primarily related to one-off timing impacts arising from the divested networks business, unwound in the second half of the year.

Beyond this, we expect to see free cash flow growing broadly in line with inflation as earnings continue to increase and tax normalizes. Now moving to slide 19 and an overview of capex.

We continue to invest in projects to support long-term growth, strengthen our foundations, and maintain safe and reliable asset operations. We invested in growth capital expenditure through early works on the East Coast Gas Grid expansion, the Surat Plateau and Brigalow pipelines, and the Brigalow Peaking Power Plant.

As Adam said previously, we've increased our organic growth capex pipeline from $3 billion to approximately $3.5 billion over the next 3 years. All of this capital expenditure is consistent with our Capital Allocation Framework, which is outlined in the appendix, and is targeted to achieve returns over our hurdle rate of at least 150 basis points above our post-tax WACC.

Foundational capex was lower than guidance, primarily due to timing of projects, which sees some expenditure move into FY27. Overall, our total spend on foundational capex remains unchanged.

Stay-in-business capex was in line with guidance, and moving forward we're expecting it to grow in line with inflation. I'll cover funding on the next slide.

We have existing balance sheet capacity to fund our $3.5 billion organic growth pipeline over FY27 to FY29. This organic growth pipeline includes in-flight and identified growth projects across gas transmission and storage, GPG, remote grid, and other on-grid contracted power generation projects.

Adam showed a breakdown of the $3.5 billion on a previous slide. This strong balance sheet position, combined with active capital management and predictable, capacity-based, inflation-linked revenues, leaves us well positioned to deliver on our $3.5 billion of organic growth opportunities.

Next, I'll cover our strong progress on our cost reduction target on slide 21. The key message is we have delivered ahead of our target on our enterprise-wide cost reductions.

We have delivered cost reductions of $80 million in FY26, exceeding our target of $50 million. We achieved this by leveraging the foundational investments made into the business over the past 3 years.

We also focused on simplifying the business through the divestment of the non-core networks and GDI businesses, which saw 725 employees transferred to the new owner. Combined, these asset sales generated cash proceeds of $101 million in FY26 and were value accretive for security holders.

We now have the business set up to drive ongoing, enduring, sustainable cost improvements. We're expecting an annualized run rate $100 million in savings in FY27, inclusive of the $80 million delivered in FY26.

My final slide addresses our guidance for FY27. Today, we are providing FY27 underlying EBITDA guidance of between $2.26 billion and $2.34 billion.

Key drivers of the growth in earnings include inflation-linked tariff escalations and contributions from new assets, including the Surat Plateau pipeline and Basslink's conversion to a regulated asset. Cost reduction initiatives are expected to contribute an incremental $20 million in FY27, representing an annualized FY27 run rate of $100 million, as we continue to drive sustainable cost and efficiency improvements.

The midpoint of guidance represents a 5.4% growth year on year. With that, I'll hand back to Adam.

Thank you, Garrick. Moving to slide 24.

In summary, we have delivered another very strong result for FY26. We've delivered strong financial outcomes, our growth outlook continues to strengthen, and we have a strong balance sheet with the capacity to fund growth and distributions.

The guidance we've provided today for FY27 is further evidence of our strong momentum, which takes us to our investment thesis on slide 25. We're well placed to capitalize on emerging opportunities within a $100 billion-plus addressable market.

Our $3.5 billion organic growth pipeline for FY27 to 29 is focused on opportunities that will create value for our security holders, and we can fund this growth from our existing balance sheet. We have a strong business model with inflation-linked revenues and high margins.

Our distribution yield remains attractive, and our outlook remains strong. I'd like to say thank you to the entire APA team, who have all contributed to today's fantastic results and to our exciting future.

Thank you for your time. Let's now move to Q&A.

Good morning, Adam, Garrick, broader team. Congratulations on stronger EBITDA margins year on year, that particularly stood out.

Given APA has flagged that it will build this East Coast Grid expansion without firm underwriting and we're needing to build confidence that despite all the changes in the domestic market we're seeing currently that there's no contracting pressures, in the results today there's just a number of key assets on the East Coast in particular that've delivered either flat or declining EBITDA in real terms year on year. Slide 29 shows that within energy infrastructure, I think East Coast total EBITDA excluding the WGP and the new Kurri Kurri asset was flat.

Tariffs might be adjusting higher with CPI, but when volumes being recontracted, they just don't appear to be delivering nominal EBITDA growth. I think we saw that in terms of the Moomba Sydney, the Victorian Transmission System, the Roma Brisbane Pipeline, and the Carpentaria Pipeline.

Just question is can you please respond to what we're seeing there and just the key drivers of those outcomes?

Thanks, Tom. Look, firstly to your opening comments, incredibly proud of the result today and the momentum is strong and the outlook is really positive.

I think we've done a lot of the hard yards over a number of years now and we've positioned the business really well. I think the margin that you mentioned is something we're particularly proud of.

As Garrick said, the cost reductions that we've put in place are structural costs. We didn't take any shortcuts.

They are structural, they are permanent, and we think we've got the business in a really strong space. As it relates to the East Coast Gas Grid, and I may get some questions on this after, but it is important that we continue to see real strength in demand along the East Coast corridor.

I think the South West Pipeline decision by the AER to invest in that project is again just another point of evidence that the demand in the southern markets continues to strengthen. Intraday demand is very strong and will continue to be, and we need to continue to bring supply from those northern markets.

As we've done with stages 1 and 2 with previous compression, and 3 will be no different with compression and the blue interlink, we're very confident the demand is there. We don't underwrite those small components of a network by individual contracts, as you know.

It's all about demand and supply, and the demand is very strong. I have to say that with the National Gas Review becoming clearer, we've seen a really really positive uptick in inquiries, and the conversations have been very very productive.

We've got a lot of confidence in that regard. I'll hand it over to Garrick to take you through some of the detail on certain assets.

Thanks, Adam. Thanks, Tom, for the question and also the recognition of the great outcome from an underlying EBITDA margin perspective.

It's something we are proud of over the last couple of years. I'll touch on a couple of the assets you mentioned, and it's probably worth just a reminder that in FY25 for the Moomba to Sydney Pipeline, we did benefit from a one-off insurance proceeds of $13 million on MSP.

Once you normalize that, we've actually seen a stronger performance in Moomba to Sydney in the year. As you say, VTS was probably the one asset that did perform weaker than we had expected through the course of the year.

That was predominantly driven by two things: firstly, the milder winter; and secondly, also a very stable electricity market, particularly with high coal availability. I suppose the benefit from an APA perspective is that we operate a portfolio of really strong operating assets.

When you look across the board, at times you do have market events which drives positive earnings outcomes. It was probably a year where we didn't see many of those, assets performed generally in line with our expectations, probably with the exception of VTS.

That's clear, Garrick and Adam. Just a second question then.

The growth potential in the Northern Territory is really interesting, but if upstream success in the Beetaloo is a bit of a binary outcome, can you comment on the scale potential of other sources of medium-term EBITDA in the event that Beetaloo doesn't deliver the biggest upstream onshore development in Australia since Queensland CSG? You've called out opportunities here to support remote power and data centers and gas-fired power gen.

Just keen to understand the scale of those particularly and whether or not there is enough capacity if Beetaloo doesn't come through to deliver around $500 million of EBITDA growth over the next 5 years.

Thanks. I think first to say is that when you look at and you take the AEMO 2026 GSOO, 2C 2P reserves and resources, there is a significant amount of existing capacity to support the East Coast absent Beetaloo.

We feel very confident that Beetaloo is continuing to progress really well. You're right, there is a need to be able to continue along that trajectory, see that continuing over the next call it 12 months and then bring that to life.

We think Beetaloo is going to be fantastic for the domestic market, it's going to be critically important for Australia's LNG export market, which is why the demand for that basin to perform well, is there. You look at the Surat, it's got plenty of capacity in the market, and you've got other new basins like the Taroom Trough, which are being explored as well.

We don't have any concerns about gas supply coming over time. We've always operated in a market for decades where you need to continue to bring gas supply to meet demand, and we don't see that slowing down.

Thanks, folks.

Good morning, Adam and Garrick, and congratulations on another strong result. Firstly, following the divestment of Networks and GDI, are there any other non-core assets across the portfolio that could free up further balance sheet capacity?

Oh, thanks, Euan. Look, firstly really pleased with the way that we've delivered a fantastic outcome for APA security holders, and also just the way that we transitioned the people from the Networks and GDI operations across to the new owner.

We're incredibly proud of doing that in a very measured and very respectful way, and that's been positive, a real win-win for everyone. That's the first point.

That suite of assets were clearly non-core to us, and we were very deliberate in simplifying our business as part of the initiatives that we undertook during the year, including the cost reduction initiatives. That made obvious sense.

When you look at the rest of the portfolio, we typically develop works, and the East Coast Gas Grid that we've just been speaking about is an example of that, work that we're doing in the Pilbara. The announcement just today with Saibai in Mount Isa, it's all about creating a starting position and then building out network working with our customers and creating more value over time.

We will continue to look at assets and look at our portfolio over time. It's certainly one of the levers we have to be able to fund growth beyond the $3.5 billion organic growth pipeline.

That pipeline is fully funded and shored up, but beyond that obviously that's a potential lever for us. Look, we're not in a position at the moment to divest anything, but we'll always monitor and do that in a way that if it creates more value for our security holders than in the hands of somebody else, and there's limited strategic upside, we'll consider it.

Thanks, that's clear. You made a few comments just then on the domestic gas reservation policy.

Can you just talk us through the latest on that and maybe remind us of the sensitivities both under a best-case and worst-case scenario on volumes and earnings through the East Coast Network?

Look, firstly, absent a gas reservation policy, the demand for gas will continue to be there and supply naturally always meet demand. What we always advocate for though is a market dynamic where there is a high level of certainty to enable the producers to contract with the demand centers, which ultimately are our customers, and it just creates a more structured environment for the energy market to trade.

We have certainly seen with the announcement sometime ago with the National Gas Review that the producers and the customers were, if you put yourself in their shoes, sitting back and waiting to see how that would play out. With the federal government's announcements recently about the frameworks in terms of how they see this progressing, and again they've provided notification that they're looking to complete this by the end of the year, it seems to be heading in the right direction.

For us, the most important thing is making sure it does provide that level of certainty. The one thing that we have been focused on is ensuring there aren't any opportunities to effectively be able to move the goalposts in the future.

One of those has been around ministerial interference. We are concerned by that.

I think the market has spoken up heavily about that, and what we have seen government do in a positive light is listen as they've been talking with the various stakeholders over the recent months. We feel like it's heading in the right direction, and we're seeing that with the positive uplift in the interactions we're having with our customers.

That's clear. Thanks, Adam.

If I can just quickly sneak one more in maybe for Garrick. You guys have obviously done a great job on the cost over FY26 and to FY27.

Are there any costs that need to come back into the business probably in FY28 and beyond as you position it for the next phase of growth, or should we continue to think about annual savings on a longer-term basis?

Thanks. It's a great question, and as you say, a fantastic outcome from across the business to deliver the $80 million in savings and full year $100 million in FY27.

Probably the one thing we did call out on page 22 was that we are continuing to make a larger investment in our growth operating expenditure, or our growth expenditure in total. That means that naturally some will flow through to our opex.

We'd probably see about a $10 million increase in growth operating expenditure in FY27, and that's partially offset some of the savings we would have seen through the course of FY27. In terms of broader savings, look, we continually looking at opportunities to become more efficient on the cost side of things, and we continue to develop, particularly around AI, data, process and systems, a way in which we can deliver our outcomes for customers more efficiently.

We will continue to do that, and we'll certainly update the market if and when there's further cost outs that we're ready to announce.

Thanks, guys. Congrats again.

Thanks.

Hi everyone, and congratulations on the result, particularly the strong free cash flow growth coming through. This question just around your updated and expanded 3-year organic growth outlook.

Thanks for the details by the way around the composition of that growth on slide 10. As Adam, when you put that in a chart without a y-axis, we all get our virtual rulers out and try and infer what we can from it.

I might be misreading it, but the size of the Brigalow Peaking Power Plant bar is around 6 times that of the Saibai Creek solar and battery project above it, and you've said Saibai Creek is around $259 million. Using that as a benchmark, you end up with a Brigalow number of around $1.5 to $1.6 billion, APA share.

I'm just wondering if I'm reading that correctly or if I'm maybe reading too much into that. Thank you.

Thanks for the question. Look, I'll be really clear about the composition of that 3.5.

Look, I might just head off one of the questions I'm sure we'll get, which is why did it go from 3 to 3.5. At a macro level, we just continue to see demand for infrastructure continuing to increase and accelerate, and I called that out before in terms of the broader opportunities we've got in the longer term.

We feel very comfortable that there is a significant amount of growth for us there. We've been, as I'm sure you appreciate, very very disciplined over the last few years in making sure that we are choosing projects that exceed our hurdle rates and our other financial commitments, and we've been doing that and incredibly proud of that.

If I just go through the makeup of the 3.5, it effectively includes the Brigalow Pipeline, which we've announced previously to the market, call it $150 million. The Brigalow gas peaking power plant, we haven't been precise on what that number is because we haven't reached FID, but what we have said is that it is around about $1 billion for that project.

Again, there's a big caveat on that because it's subject to final negotiations and obviously that has been progressing as we've been working through finalization of construction contracts and other civil works. East Coast Gas Grid stage 3A was $260 million, East Coast Gas Grid expansion 3B about $800 million.

As you said, today we announced Saibai $260 million and South West Pipeline $213 million. One of the things that we're really pleased with just generally if you take a step back, if you think about where we were say 3 years ago, we had a $1.4 billion pipeline, which to be fair, there was work going on in the background and there was evidence there behind the scenes, but hadn't really reached FID on any of those projects.

That's now increased by 150% over the last 3 years, and we've got a $3.5 billion pipeline that I've been able to tell you, 80-90% of what's involved. We're feeling very positive about that, and it's all fully funded.

That's clear. Thanks for that, Adam.

Just on Brigalow, as you said, you're awarding major construction contracts at the moment. Sounds like you're pretty close to a final investment decision there.

Can you just walk through what needs to occur between now and FID? You've got a comment about targeting operations from FY28, but is there a risk here that it could slip further if you don't achieve FID in the next few months?

Thank you.

Thanks for the question. The way that we work through these big projects with our customers is you enter into early works or in this case a joint development agreement where you effectively set the parameters and you agree terms, major commercial terms, to be able to move forward, and you've got a strong level of commitment and conviction that you will see it through to FID.

That's exactly what we did with Brigalow. We committed to a joint development agreement so that we could work in lockstep with our customer with CS Energy to be able to procure turbines, to progress site works, civil works, bridges, platforms, bulk moving, all those sorts of things, and at the same time work through the various contracts for construction delivery as well.

As you can appreciate, that always takes time. Importantly, you do it in a way where your commitment is strong and you're working in partnership.

We're incredibly pleased with the Queensland government's approach to partnering with the private sector. It's been part of the Queensland Energy Roadmap, and I think what we've announced today in Saibai is another excellent example of how the private sector can deliver on what the Queensland government is setting out to achieve.

Bringing it back to Brigalow, we continue to work through that with our customer, and we'd like to get to FID very very shortly.

All right, thanks, Adam.

Hi, congratulations, Adam, Garrick, on a solid result today. My question relates to the Beetaloo, and congratulations on completing the Sturt Plateau Pipeline Phase 1 Pipeline.

You've mentioned that compression could take that pipeline from 42 terajoules a day up to 100 terajoules a day. What's needed to commit to that?

Can you give us a broad idea on cost?

Thanks, Gordon. We've always been an organization that knows the role that we play in bringing certain upstream basins to life, and Beetaloo is no different.

We all know that Beetaloo, one of its great strengths is that it is in a location where we can be very sensitive to community requirements and work with traditional owners and government to be able to bring that to life. One of the challenges with it being so remote is that it needs significant infrastructure to make it all real, and we know that we've got an important role to play there.

It's a bit like what I just said before on projects like with Brigalow and working in lockstep with your customer. One of the things that we do is obviously with a strong risk lens, but we're willing to with enough evidence back ourselves and back our customers to continue to move, and we're really really proud of the Sturt Plateau Pipeline to be able to enable our customers to commercialize that, to be able to support Darwin and Darwin customers with gas to avoid the need to flare and do those sorts of things to bring it to life.

Stage 2 is really just about expanding that and enabling more production as there's more wells being drilled to be able to bring that to life. You do get to a certain point, as you know better than anyone, Gordon, where you've got scale that's required, and that's why we're doing a lot of work, and we have been for a number of years, to bring things such as the North East Pipeline to life, and going north from the Beetaloo to Darwin as well, and making sure that we deliver our customers with options.

Equally, infrastructure is a funny thing. They take a long time, and then all of a sudden once the projects become real, it's like how quickly can we deliver this.

We think we've got the balance right, and well results continue to be really good. We'll keep backing it until they're not.

We don't think that's the case. We think the outlook is very very strong, and multiple players, big players, I think are confirming the attractiveness and willingness to back the basin.

Again, just on the Beetaloo, I was very interested in comments that I picked up in Adelaide from the INPEX CEO on the INPEX Train 3 where he said he could see Beetaloo supporting a future potential development for an INPEX Train 3 expansion. When you're talking about the indicative pipeline to Darwin, is that kind of thinking, would it possibly include volumes for INPEX LNG or even Darwin LNG expansion?

Is that the kind of thinking that you'd have if you build this additional pipeline later on, and it's not imminent obviously, but to go up to Darwin, the indicative pipeline to Darwin?

It's a really good question, Gordon, and it's a really important question. Because when you look at the basin, the scale is significant.

We've heard and know that it could be as big as the Permian or Marcellus basins in the US, and could be very significant. People are drilling there and not doing it just to produce small amounts of gas.

It's fantastic that we can support Darwin, in particular in the short term, but they're very much focused on making sure that this thing can scale. When you look at the pipeline, we're running multiple scenarios around the size of the pipe.

Pleasingly, we've got really good corridors where we can run our pipelines along existing corridors. Why is that important?

Because we're familiar with landholders, we've got strong relationships with the communities, we've got access to site, which means that we can accelerate delivery and just generally we're really good at this. We're certainly looking at that.

One of the things when you look at the economics of the project, in and of itself, the pipeline is significant. The economics to be considered and sort of the counterfactual to the higher cost pipeline relative to some of the projects you see, for example, in the US, is that you've got on the East Coast of Australia at Gladstone, you've got 6 trains there, which I've been told is about $6 billion to replace a train these days.

You've got about $36 billion worth of assets there that effectively will go idle from the start of the 2030s to the end of the 2030s. Then up in Darwin, you've got 2 trains, which replacement cost call it $12 billion.

Almost $50 billion worth of assets there that go idle in the 2030s. To build a pipeline and be able to utilize that existing infrastructure and not have to develop new LNG trains is a really interesting economic outcome for our customers, and hence why they're pinning their ears back and very focused on it.

Thank you, Adam.

Good morning. Can I ask about this new Saibai project?

Congrats on that announcement. Should we be thinking kind of typical high single-digit EBITDA yield once it's up and running?

Look,

in fact, if you go back to most of our projects that we've done over time of recent time, we spoke about it in the half results with the investment in the Pilbara. We're delivering low double-digit yields on those projects from an investment.

Look, we don't come out and give you specific numbers for each particular project, but you know that we're targeting project returns in excess of our cost of capital by at least 150 basis points. You can sort of backsolve the yield on projects where in this case you don't necessarily have a ramp up.

Once it's delivered and it's commissioned, it'll have a very small ramp up, but it ramps up very quickly. We're really comfortable with this.

Very importantly though, you don't get any of these projects off the ground if your customer's not generating a lower levelized cost of energy. The thing that we're really proud of is that we're able to deliver our customer with a solution to lower their cost, provide them with a really attractive outcome, and have that firmed by the Diamantina Power Station, which again, I'm sure you've read into it, but we're really excited that we can be developing projects in the region that can further underwrite Diamantina over the longer

term. Thank you.

I was actually going to ask about the role of Diamantina in this project. Is there much more capacity at Thomson and Diamantina, I can't remember what the other one that you own in that region is, to firm similar hybrid projects?

There is, and we all know that Diamantina and those assets surrounding it were over time into the 2040s going to become more of a peaking asset. This really just underwrites those projects for a longer period of time.

We're really pleased with that.

Sorry, Rob, it's Garrick. The other thing I was going to add is it's obviously a great outcome for both Evolution Mining and APA, but installing the battery into Mount Isa is also a great outcome for the people in Mount Isa and the businesses in Mount Isa in terms of just the security of supply.

Great outcome for APA and Evolution, but also a great outcome for Mount Isa more generally.

Yes. I see.

Thank you. If I can move to a project that you've put in your growth list, the D2B, the Beetaloo to Darwin Pipeline.

Wonder if it's very early days, would it provide some kind of dimensions on that pipe to allow us to size it?

Look, dimensions are things that we again, as we mentioned before, and Gordon from INPEX, who have got trains up there that obviously this would be able to backfill those trains in the 2030s, this could be a large pipe. We are internally and working with our customers looking at a range of scenarios.

It would be a large diameter pipe. It's about 600 kilometers to get there.

We've really importantly got the existing Amadeus Pipeline, which provides one route where again, as I mentioned, we could use that corridor and be able to work with our existing landholders and stakeholders to bring that product up north to Darwin. There are a couple of other routes that we're looking at as well.

Early days, but we are motoring ahead with planning and approvals and all the various pre-work that goes on behind the scenes, because again, if we really think about it and Beetaloo meets the potential that we're all hoping for, then it could be big, and we want to be ready for it.

Okay. Then for your NEET project, that sounds like you're continuing to do a lot of work on that.

Can you maybe comment, yeah, on the alternate route being proposed by another company and why yours is better?

Oh, look, there's like any pipeline, transmission line, energy infrastructure, you've got multiple routes to be able to bring that to life. The advantage that we've got by taking the gas from the Beetaloo down south to the South West Pipeline and then moving across east to Gladstone is that, firstly, it enables that gas to be delivered most efficiently to the East Coast Gas Grid for domestic supply.

I think that really plays into the hands of the domestic gas reservation requirements. The alternative is to take that pipe from the Beetaloo effectively directly into Gladstone.

Then how do you get the gas from Gladstone down to the East Coast market? There are different ways you can deliver that.

Bringing it down south as well also utilize the existing infrastructure, because again it goes back to the LNG trains. From an LNG export perspective, there's a lot of capacity that will be available not only at the trains, but with that pipeline capacity with the WGP, which we own and expires in 2035, for example.

The short answer is that it just provides you with a very efficient way to bring domestic gas to market and utilize existing infrastructure to take that gas out to the LNG export facilities.

Cool. My next question is about slide 22, and I'm channeling Nick's question about measuring things.

If I assume on slide 22, this is your EBITDA bridge year on year, that the green cost initiative is kind of $20 million, kind of suggests that your new asset contribution is kind of 50 or $60 million. I can kind of get $20 million Basslink and maybe, I don't know, 5 or $6 million for SPP.

Can you maybe just, I guess, confirm that the AI has measured that correctly and give us a steer on what else might be

Hi Rob. I think the AI rulers are not working all that well today.

We see new assets contributing about $40 million of incremental EBITDA. As you say, majority of that will come through the change to regulated asset for Basslink.

Relative to the performance in '26, we expect about a $33 million incremental earnings from Basslink, and then as you say, the balance come from Sturt Plateau Pipeline.

Cool. That makes sense.

Final question for me if you'll indulge. Can you just perhaps give us give us some color on on how you've resculpted the foundation capex?

I think you, for want of a better word, underspent in FY26, but then you've kind of pushed out the 120 just a little bit. I presume there's no total spend increase, but can you just give more more color on the drivers of that?

You're absolutely right, Rob. It's timing, we're able to push the timing of some of that spend from '26 into '27.

The sum of it's exactly the same as what we've said previously, and as we set out on slide 19, we expect that between $100 to $120 million per annum in '27-'28 to moderate down to $80 million in '29, and would expect it to further moderate man.

The reason for the kind of push and the delay?

Predominantly because we're able to around certain spend, particularly around the timing of some of the emissions reduction related, because we were actually outperforming in other areas. I just go back to corporate finance: if you don't have to spend it and you're making the emissions elsewhere, then that's obviously the logical approach to take.

Rob, one of the things we're incredibly proud of is the fact that we didn't surrender any carbon credits during the year to be able to achieve our outcomes. That's been a big contributor, and really proud of the work that our team have done to drive not only a reduction in emissions on our assets, but just to improve the efficiency of our assets in the work that they're doing.

We always look at how we can best utilize how we're deploying capital and how we're utilizing our people's time, and if we can delay, we will delay.

Great. Thanks so much.

Good morning, guys. Just looking at your comment about data centers, trying to sort of give us a bit more color about that strategy.

Data centers are increasingly being required to be market-facing. I'm just sort of intrigued where you see your competitive difference against the AGLs, the Origins, the Iberdrolas out there who are providing those sort of services as well.

Sure. Like our existing business, it's a big market and multiple players, and we're not the only kid in town.

We've got firstly a very significant market that we see, not only for data centers, but for GPG, for example, to support our power generation customers, and we feel very convinced that our remote grid strategy will continue to play out. When you think about our remote strategy and use Saibai, which we announced today, as an example, that is a behind-the-meter solution.

We are able to bring renewable power generation to market with a battery and firmed by an existing facility. I have to say, to do that as a package rolls off the tongue, but it is very very very very complicated, and we've got a real skill set and capability in being able to bring that together and do it efficiently and effectively over the long term for our customers.

We've got multiple sites that are very attractive for behind-the-meter solutions, again to be used for power generation to support our power generation customers, or it can be used for data centers. We've worked really hard on things such as our procurement strategies around being the preferred supplier for OEM manufacturers such as Siemens, GE, and Solar Turbines.

We announced very recently one with Siemens Energy, which we're incredibly proud of and positions us well to be able to move at speed. Look, we think we've got a lot of strong capability.

That's not to say the others don't have similar capabilities as well, but we think the market's big enough that the opportunity is attractive. Just

going back to your multiple sites comment, I'm just a bit sort of confused. A data center, you're talking about you've actually located a piece of land next to an already approved data center, or a potential data center customer, or they're just separate from the data centers themselves?

No, no, no. If you take, for example, the federal government's position around data centers, particularly for the hyperscalers, and the AEMC has confirmed this, around the need to bring your own power.

They've been very clear about what that means: it needs to be renewables-led, needs to support the grid, and it needs to be firmed with batteries and gas-fired power generation. That's what we do.

That's clearly what we do. We think we're incredibly well positioned to do that.

We operate, if you take our pipeline business, with more than 15,000 kilometers of pipelines all over Australia in remote regions closer to the cities. No, we're not trying to suggest that we're just going to come and build something and connect you into the grid.

We are saying that we've got a lot of land where you've got the supply of gas and the supply of electricity traversing, and yeah, that may be attractive for a data center.

You're actually trying to get the data centers to locate on your land?

That is a potential opportunity, yes.

Okay. Just a simple question, and maybe I've got it wrong.

You alluded to this rural business went up sort of $5 million, and in one of the slides you sort of said the Port Hedland side went up $14 million. Just sort of wondering why the inland business went backwards about $10 million.

Maybe I've misinterpreted the numbers.

Ian, it's Garrick here. I'll take the response there.

Your interpretation is correct. Fundamentally, the only real difference period on period was we had at the Newman Power Station some safeguard mechanism credit revenue in FY25 that we knew wouldn't be recurring in FY26.

We're actually above the safeguard mechanism target for '26. Going forward, the impact on '26 will be recoverable from customers, but it wasn't in '26.

That's entirely consistent with our modeling and our business case when we acquired the asset. There was no surprise there, so that effectively was a one-off, call it negative, in '26 relative to what we saw in '25.

That's

great. Then on the Saibai solar farm battery, when you opened Dugald Creek, the performance of Diamantina went suboptimal because of the way it interacted with the solar farm.

Are you going to be able to capture the value of that improved performance of Diamantina with a battery being integrated in, or is that being shared with your customer?

No, the short answer is it's a yes. It's the one lesson learned we took away from the Dugald River Solar Farm was that we should have put a battery there.

Whilst the gas-fired power generator obviously provides great firming solutions, it didn't provide some of the stability that a battery will provide you in those regions, which is why we've got batteries in places like Port Hedland and Newman as well to support our operations there. Look, we're really really happy to be able to work with our customer who needs a battery to be able to support the development of the Saibai Creek Solar Farm.

Obviously that battery, as Garrick said before, will provide stability also for the broader network in Mount Isa.

Okay. Just on the other side on the data centers, are you talking solely aero derivatives, or are you talking reciprocating engines as well?

We are customer-led, Ian, really depends on what the customer needs. We've got experience in both.

We use aeros across multiple sites, we use frame machines across multiple sites. It's really dependent on what the customer needs.

There are scenarios where you can have both machines on a single site depending on what you need, because again, if you take what the federal government's aspiring towards is you need to be able to contribute back into the grid as well. There's multiple ways you could bring that together.

On that, there are a couple of aero derivatives being auctioned off at the moment because of a failed company. Would you buy those speculatively, or is it one that you have to be supported by a customer?

No, for second-hand equipment, we would be very

They're brand new. They've never been used.

They get specified I shouldn't say second-hand as in used, but the way they are specified it's not like just throwing you a set of keys to the new car and go driving. You've got to potentially completely reconfigure the equipment.

No, we typically buy our equipment working in collaboration with our partner where we know that we've got confidence that we've got line of sight of how we will deploy those assets.

Final question. You talked about in the past potentially trying to extend the Wallumbilla to Gladstone Pipeline.

Just interested how the progress of that might be going. Oh,

WGP conversations will happen at a time when projects like the Beetaloo and the Taroom Trough become confirmed. Really, as the whole reason why WGP was structured to be expiring in 2035 is because that was to meet the timetable of when the gas flows for Gladstone were meant to expire as well.

We've spoken quite openly about the dream, the panacea for us is that not only are we able to bring a new basin like the Beetaloo to life, and we're also working with our customers in the Taroom Trough, but if they get to the point where they're willing to contract for those new infrastructure assets to support those basins, then that would be the natural time when you'd be trying to enter into negotiations with extending that contract. Again, it's up to the customer to do that.

We can dream as much as we like, but ultimately our customers are going to want to do that with us. Obviously we've had conversations leading up to whenever that may be to show our intent, and we're certainly there for our customers if and when they need us.

Thanks.

Good morning all. Thanks for the presentation.

Just one question from me. I think most of the key questions have been asked.

With the organic capex pipeline now around $3.5 billion, and you're spanning a wider mix of infrastructure, how do you think about the optimal breadth of capital deployment? I guess, how are you viewing capacity to execute just given the increase in the growth pipeline and the volume of stuff you have potentially?

It's a good question, Cameron. I think it's important when we look at the opportunities before us.

Again, we really do want to be customer-led. We're not going to go out and speculatively try to develop and hope that the customer will come.

On that basis, we'll continue to work with our customers, and we've been very focused on the key markets, and we've been very transparent around the key projects that we want to work on. You can see that projects like the Beetaloo could be very significant.

We obviously want to ensure internally we've got the right capability to be able to develop and deliver and operate those projects, and we've done a lot of work over the last few years to build our capability in that space. We mentioned earlier around the work that we've done with the OEMs in being able to get strategic supply arrangements in place, and also making sure that we've got, for example, a suite of contractors that we can partner with to be able to bring these projects to life.

Balance sheet, we're always confident if you deliver projects where you're disciplined, you allocate capital to projects that deliver strong returns, the capital will be there. We've got lots of options, and Garrick, it's probably just worthwhile just reminding everyone the funding options we look towards.

Certainly. Thanks for the question, Cameron.

It's obviously a great position for us to be in with an announced $3.5 billion fully funded growth capex. Fundamentally, we look to our Capital Allocation Framework, which is in the appendix to the presentation, and we look at where there's opportunities to deploy capital that are value accretive to our security holders.

That's fundamentally how we look at it, and we've talked about the target returns we have for all of our projects. When it comes to funding, we're obviously in a really strong position from balance sheet currently, but we have a range of funding levers that we can pull that includes more hybrid issuances, working with partners, structured equity, and the like, that will enable us to facilitate more growth.

It's a great position to be in from an infrastructure business perspective.

Great, thanks all. I'll pass it on there.

thank you. Thank you for the opportunity.

Just a couple of quick ones. Maybe following Ian's questions on the data center side.

I guess just keen to sort of explore that a little bit, Adam. Are you guys saying that, if you look at the US, some of your big sort of energy peers, what they're doing is they're building these gas-fired sort of power in a grid on site and backed up with renewables, and that's sort of feeding into the data center?

Are you guys looking to do that, or just sort of build these potential behind-the-meter solutions in regional locations where there is connectivity with the grid?

That's the short answer, Suraj, is that in that scenario you partner with a data center developer and a customer to be able to partner with them on a site to be able to provide that behind-the-meter solution. It obviously, if you take it from an Australian perspective, and I think globally it's heading in this direction, that there needs to be a significant renewable energy component there, and then it needs to be firmed, you need a battery typically on site and you'll need GPG for when the sun doesn't shine, the wind doesn't blow, but also to provide system strength not only to the site, but to be able to provide system strength back into the grid.

When governments and AEMC are talking about providing firming and system strength, that's exactly what they mean, because of the spinning reserves that a gas-fired power generator will provide. I will be clear, we're not out there trying to build sheds, we're not in the business of building the data center.

I don't think we have misled anyone to believe that that's what we're focused on. Certainly, similar to what you've seen, for example, in the US, we think we've got great capability to do that.

Again, we will be very disciplined and very focused on ensuring that we deploy capital in a way that creates value. The way that we've diversified our business, and whilst our strategy is somewhat diverse, it is actually within a very narrow framework around gas pipelines and storage and power generation.

Just to round that out, I just keep coming back to Saibai. It's a very good example, albeit in this case it's for a mining customer in Mount Isa, but it's the same model.

It's the exact same model of bringing renewable power generation with a battery and firmed by gas. Again, we do that all around the country, and we think we've got good competitive advantages in that space.

Thank you. Just to clarify, Adam, this power, would it be plugged into the grid or is it just sort of off-grid like Saibai?

Oh,

look, what the government is saying is that it needs to strengthen the grid. They've been quite clear that the expectation is that you can be behind the meter, I guess your, for want of a better term, your primary focus is to power the data center on site, but you also need to be connected into the grid so that if the grid needs stability or strengthening, you can provide your power back into the grid.

Got it. I think the other sort of big question that we're debating internally and probably in the industry as well is, given all of this data center energy requirements, is there scope or call to stay longer in the system, and what does that mean for your business and some of these opportunities?

It's an interesting discussion, and sort of the argument or the counterfactual is that if you need to keep coal going for longer because of the demand that's being put on the energy market because of growth in data centers, ipso facto, means that you should need more gas-fired power generation to be able to support the new developments. Again, I think AEMO has suggested that with their latest GSOO, particularly around intraday volatility that you see.

Again, that's why we feel very confident about the level of growth. It's not for us, it's not about is there enough growth out there.

It's 14 gigawatts of GPG needs to be developed. The remote grid decarbonization journey you're very familiar with, and the demands from data centers could be anything.

What we know is that the grid is already constrained. There is some capacity obviously available, but that's being soaked up very very quickly by the data center projects that are in flight.

The question is what happens next. I think that's where GPG, renewable power generation, the whole Saibai example, could become a potential growth leg for us and the industry more broadly.

Understood. Thank you.

Good day, gents. Thanks for your presentations.

Just following up on that data center conversation there, Adam, I seem to remember that you had a site in Melbourne for a potential GPG project. Is that still there, and is that something that could be a potential for a data center colocation in the future?

Thanks, Nathan. Look, we've got I think it's about 12 sites that we had earmarked 2 or 3 years ago for GPG, power generation sites around the country.

As I've said, those sites can be used for multiple different customers. You can think of a data center as a different customer base.

It's the same product, it's just a different customer base. Yes, we do have one in Victoria, but we've got ones in New South Wales, Queensland, Western Australia.

We've got them spread all around the country. It's not that we're out there trying to develop all 12, don't get me wrong.

The point being that we've got, I think, some pretty attractive sites, and obviously we've got a skill set which we think is second to none, and we've also got strategic partnerships with some of the key long-lead items as well. Look, it's obviously a topic of interest, and it goes back to the question that Suraj had before and the observation around just broader general load on the energy market.

We see that as a positive thing for our existing assets. I know it's easy to get caught up on the growth side, but we think it also helps underwrite our existing assets for a long period of time.

We've always been strongly of the view, and the data supports that, that these assets are going to be in demand and in fact needed well beyond the 2050s. Having more load coming from a market such as the data center market, I think just further underwrites that and underlines the importance of our assets.

It's an interesting space and talk of the town, no doubt, but it is obviously a potential growth market.

Yep, absolutely. Second question is, if I look at the work in progress account within PPE, that note 11, looks like there was what, close to $1.6 billion of capex that got commissioned over the last 2 financial years.

You've said FY26 had $70 million of new asset EBITDA contribution, and then you're just going to be getting just sort of 6 to $7 million I suppose it is coming through in FY27. Is that the full earnings power of the growth capex which was in that $1.6 billion, and how much of that 1.6 was actually, I suppose, growth capex?

Thanks, Nathan, for the question. CWIP obviously, what goes through there is not just growth capex, there's also SIB and foundational capex that goes through that.

You need to be aware of that. When I look at the balance at '25, which I think was about $1 billion, the balance at '26, which is about 800, call it $850-odd million, we've seen Port Hedland solar and BESS move from CWIP into PP&E, some spending on MSP do the same, and then projects that we've started, things such as Surat Plateau Pipeline, which I think still sits at balance sheet date within CWIP, some of the work around the East Coast Gas Grid, and some of the Brigalow Pipeline work as well.

That's the kind of details around movements period on period. I think fundamentally your question is, are we getting the returns that we seek on the assets that we've brought into operation and recognize the revenues over the last couple of years?

We're really happy that we are hitting our target return hurdles that we've talked about a number of times across the assets that we're constructing now and the assets that we brought online as well. Some of them there's obviously South West Pipeline is a regulated asset, that gets a regulated return.

We've talked in the past around the returns on Kurri Kurri Lateral Pipeline that reflected the time which the deal was done. Certainly the big projects, growth projects, that have come to life and are coming through both our balance sheet and our P&L now and into the future are hitting and exceeding those target hurdle rates.

Okay. Just to confirm though, in that $1.6 billion, how much of it was growth capex?

I don't actually have that to hand, but let me pull it out and I'll come back to you.

Okay. Then, Adam, the $3.5 billion growth capex pipeline across FY27 to 29, how should we be thinking about the ramp up in earnings related to that spend?

When should we be expecting that it will sort of hit full tilt on the earnings contribution from that spend?

Look, let me try and help you out directionally. We've obviously had Kurri Kurri Lateral, Port Hedland solar and battery, and Atlas to Reedy Creek come through in this year, which is all very positive.

The Sturt Plateau Pipeline, $66 million project, that'll feed through most of 2027, and it's not so much a ramp up because it's an asset for a particular customer, it picks up quickly. Brigalow Pipeline, we've said that that will be available towards the end of 2027.

Brigalow, the asset, will be in 2028. You'd imagine if the pipeline's '27 and asset's '28, they're going to be reasonably close together, but a bit of water to go under the bridge there.

East Coast Gas Grid projects, we all know take a couple of years to ramp up. You're trying to bring that product to meet demand, but it's just does take a couple of years to ramp up.

I think you've got enough evidence behind you with what you saw on stages 1 and 2 to give you an indication of how that played out. Again, the demand's there and you've got some pretty big assets coming out, in particular in 2028 in Victoria, so that could ramp up reasonably quickly.

Saibai will be a quick ramp up, and we've said today that'll be mid-2028. Then the South West Pipeline becomes a regulated asset, effectively you're at 100% straight away, and that's mid-2029.

Okay. Great.

Thank you.

Great. Thank you so much, and really appreciate the questions from today.

I think it's helpful to be able to bring a great result to life and the opportunities I think have been well covered today, it's been a great dialogue. I just want to leave you again with the key takeaways from today's result.

We have delivered another strong financial result, and the outlook we think continues to show strength, and yeah, we're really encouraged by that. We have a great portfolio of assets, and our outlook from a growth perspective is compelling, and I think we've been through that a lot today to evidence that for you.

Importantly, the balance sheet is also incredibly strong, and it provides us the funding capacity we need to be able to deliver. Again, we think we're in a good space, and as always, we appreciate your support.

Thank you for your time, and enjoy the rest of the reporting season.