Dan Eggers (Credit Suisse): What cost inflations are you thinking about for 2008, 2009 in the slower customer growth environment?

Moray Dewhurst: We do not have anything new. I would go back to the charts that we shared with you in the October release. At this stage they are the best guide we have. We are going to be thinking carefully about whether we need to adjust the revenue outlook and if so what the ripple impact will be on some of the operating areas. we have not been through that yet so I can not give you any new information beyond what we shared in October.

Dan Eggers (Credit Suisse): In 2009 if the tax credits are not in the PTC’s, are there markets where you can still build because the contracts will compensate you without the tax credits?

Moray Dewhurst: We do not think that is a likely scenario but if it were to play out, it would much depend upon the circumstance at the time and what I mean by that is if everybody thinks that there is just a temporary and the PTCs are then going to come back, then I think we will see a sharp drop off in new wind development and it will come back when the PTCs come back. On the other hand, if people perceive that there will never be any more PTCs we would expect to see continued wind development albeit at a somewhat lower rate than in the presence of PTC support. As long as you have the state level renewable portfolio standards you create the demand pull but that would then come at a cost and pricing consequence.

John Kiani (Deutsche Bank): Can you give your thoughts on separation or some strategic transactions with your wind business or the differential partnership transactions?

Moray Dewhurst: At the moment it is tending to reinforce some of the factors that we talked about before and in particular as we have noted we see the extent that there is a disconnect. It seems to be mostly on the long term outlook for wind. One of the concerns is that in doing a partial IPO you end up in a sense selling some of that long term short. In that sense the differential partnership structure is preferable because they allow us to preserve essentially close to 100% of that long term upside.

John Kiani (Deutsche Bank): Is there anything that is meaningfully different in 2008 or 2009 from a hedging perspective since you last updated?

Moray Dewhurst: We did not include any updates; there have not been any material changes in the last quarter. We were heavily hedged as of the end of third quarter for 2008. Essentially close to fully hedged.

John Kiani (Deutsche Bank): How those differential partnership transactions would affect what you were looking at before on those hedging slides?

Moray Dewhurst: In 2009 we are still higher than we would typically expect to be at the equivalent point a year. We have added in the fourth quarter to the 2009 numbers but not materially. As for how the differential partnership structures affect that, since these were done on a series of PBA projects, they are all essentially represented in the contracted segment. To the extent that sometime in the future we were to do an equivalent structure using some of the hedged projects, I have not thought about how we would present that.

Greg Gordon (Citigroup): You sold 600 MW of the wind portfolio; you have taken a chunk of the business and monetized it. Is that correct?

Moray Dewhurst: No, that is not correct. What we have essentially done in economic terms is sold the vast majority of the first ten years of projects while retaining the upside.

Greg Gordon (Citigroup): What the compensation was for the 600 MW for the first ten years?

Moray Dewhurst: In the two transactions we raised or received $950 million total, of that about $700 was the actual partnership structure and the other $250 million was the additional project leverage put on the residual economic interest. We were able to lever the piece of the partnership interest that we retained by an additional $250 million. Essentially we have pulled close to 94% of the capital for those projects out as ready to be recycled.

Greg Gordon (Citigroup): The EBITDA projection you have given for 2008 that EBITDA excludes the EBITDA from the $600 million that are subject to this transaction. Is that correct?

Moray Dewhurst: Yes, that is correct.

Greg Gordon (Citigroup): On FPNL you have had the ability to have some flex in the amount of deprecation you book and you have also been spending aggressively on Storm Secure. Are those the flexion points you can use to manage your costs going into the 2009 rate case or are there other areas in the operating and capital budget that are more flexible or that you are also using to try to get ahead of the deceleration and usage growth?

Moray Dewhurst: The two factors you mentioned are significant factors that will play into where ever we are for 2009 rate discussions, but between now and then they are relatively limited in flexibility. We are committed to the Storm Secure program. It is driven from the operational level, from the ground up on looking at specific facilities in the order in which we want to harden them so the main thing that we would hope for in the next two years is that we will continue to get more efficient in our deployment of capital and assets in support of Storm Secure. The major areas where we can still hope to sharpen the pencil and push the teams further are outside of those two areas. We have got more uncertainty for the next two years but for better or worse, whatever the then realistic outlook is will form the basis for the rate negotiations or rate proceeding in 2009 that will set the base for 2010 and beyond.

Ashar Kyle (SAC Capital): You mentioned the differential partnerships will be used going forward. Is there more projection for 2008 to sell more of these interests looking forward?

Moray Dewhurst: We have a portfolio of tools to support the capital needs of that business which we will use in any particular time period or any particular circumstance again going to depend upon the situation at the time. At this point I am not anticipating that we will do another one in 2008 but that could change later on. The main thing is that we have now multiple means of supporting the growth and that makes me feel good about the capital requirements of the business. What I like about these particular transactions is that they are clear and rapid recycling of the capital that we deployed and where we add the value is in the development in the early stage of getting the project up and getting it to peak operating conditions so the quicker we can get the capital back out and move on to the next one the better off we are.

Ashar Kyle (SAC Capital): Could you talk about the FPL Energy’s pipeline in respect to solar projects, what is your thinking about developing in the pipeline?

James Robo: It is a strong pipeline. We are hoping to get full approvals for our first project sometime this year and I would benchmark our success on that based on how much we are able to bring through full approval this year and announce for full construction. We will not announce it until it goes COD but we feel good about the pipeline and I feel like this year is going to be a watershed year for us in the solar business.