SKOLKOVO (RUSSIA): DECARBONIZATION OF OIL & GAS: INTERNATIONAL EXPERIENCE AND RUSSIAN PRIORITIES. IN RUSSIAN.
Digital Report - immediate delivery to your email.
Date of Publishing: March 2021
No. of Pages: 142
Language: English
Oil and gas companies are coming under increasing pressure from regulators, investors, and clients to reduce the carbon footprints of their products. Developing a decarbonization strategy is an integral, multistage process, unique to each individual company and dependent on is asset structure, production technologies, investment portfolios, and regional regulations. In terms of specific initiatives addressing decaronization methods, from which companies can compose the optimal set for themselves: 1. Operational methods (Operational efficiency improvement; Recycling, reuse, and the utilization od secondary energy sources; Energy efficiency; Relationships with suppliers and subcontractors); 2. Effective monetization of methane and APG; 3. Shifting to low carbon energy sources; 4. Corporate Strategy methods (Optimized portfolios; Trading and offsetting carbon credits).
___________________________________________________________________________________________
Contents:
- Foreword
- Executive Summary
- Introduction
- GHG Emissions in the oil and gas industry
- The decarbanization goals, strategies, and method of leading international oil and gas companies.
- Economics of decarbanization in oil and gas sector.
- Conditions for decarbonization in Russia and decarbonization priorities of the Russian oil and gas companies.
- Conclusions and recommendations.
Figure 1: GHG emissions in 2017 by industry.
Figure 2: GHG emissions from oil and gas sector and oil and gas production growth.
Figure 3: Growth in unconventional oil and gas production.
Figure 4: GHG emission levels for different types of oil produced.
Figure 5: Oil and gas industry's GHG emissions structure in 2017.
Figure 6: GHG emissions by supply chain.
Figure 7: GHG emissions in refining.
Figure 8: GHG emission scopes.
Figure 9: Accounting for climate within the business strategies of companies within different sectors.
Figure 10: GHG intensity during production for leading international oil and gas companies.
Figure 11: Change in per unit of GHG emissions during production.
Figure 12: Methods of decarbonization of the oil and gas industry.
Figure 13: Methodos for the decarbonization of the oil and gas industry within the 4R framework.
Figure 14: Breakdown of global demand for CO2, 2015.
Figure 15: Adding 'recycle' to the circular carbon economy.
Figure 16: Estimate of BECCS use potential through 2100.
Figure 17: APG flaring volumes worldwide.
Figure 18: APG flaring volumes by countries.
Figure 19: Global methane emissions by countries.
Figure 20: Sources of methane (CH4) emissions.
Figure 21: OGCI initiative on methane emission reduction.
Figure 22: Number of tankers in the oil and gas industry by type of fuel.
Figure 23: Potential 200-2030 CapEX for oil and gas projects that fit within different IEA scenarios by resource type.
Figure 24: Top 10 companies with inorganic growth in resources and top 10 companies with inorganic reduction in resources.
Figure 25: Proportion of leading oil and gas companies' investments in low-carbon technologies.
Figure 26: Corporate venture capital investments of oil and gas corporations from 2008 to 2017.
Figure 27: Average weighted carbon price.
Figure 28: Transacted voluntary carbon offset volumes and average prices by project type, 2019.
Figure 29: Mechanisms of mandatory and voluntary markets.
Figure 30: Overview of carbon dioxide capture technologies.
Figure 31: Different carbon dioxide handling technologies and their readiness for industrial implementation.
Figure 32: Direct air capture of carbon dioxide.
Figure 33: Closing the carbon cycle.
Figure 34: Comparison of oil production cost breakdowns (pre-tax).
Figure 35: CO2 direct emissions from primary chemical manufacturing facilities in 2015.
Figure 36: Contribution of different factors to reducing direct greenhouse gas emissions in primary chemical manufacturing by 2050.
Figure 37: Areas of CO2 emission reduction by petrochemical sector enterprises.
Figure 38-39: Global plastic handling flows in 2018.
Figure 40: Demand for primary raw materials in PE, PP and PET manufacturing and their recycling in 2010/2035.
Figure 41: Energy intensity of manufacturing primary chemicals under the sustainable development scenario, 2015-2030.
Figure 42: Matrix of several decarbonization technologies in oil and gas sector.
Figure 43: The role of key technologies in the reduction of average GHG emissions intensity of oil and gas production in the IEA Sustainable Development Scenario in 2018 - 2030.
Figure 44: Main technological options for GHG emissions reduction along the value chain of the oil and gas sector.
Figure 45: Share of international credits and loans in the debt capital of individual Russian oil and gas companies.
Figure 46: Breakdown of oil and gas industry GHG emissions in the RF in 2018.
Figure 47: Operation of GAZPROM GTD and gas consumption for GTS processing needs.
Figure 48: Estimations of methane emissions in Russia.
Figure 49: APG production, combustion, and utilization in Russia.
Figure 50: Geographic distribution of average values of the Russian forest carbon balance.
Figure 51: Dynamics of carbon losses in Russia due to cutting ad fires.
Table 1: GHG emissions of the leading international oil and gas companies by scope.
Table 2: Climate targets of leading international oil ad gas companies.
Table 3: Typical operating excellence management systems elements.
Table 6: Price for different bunkering fuels in 2020.
Table 7: Price per kW of tanker capacity in 2019.
Table 8: Share of carbon allowances purchased by oil and gas companies on EU ETS market in the total volume if regulated GHG emissions.
Table 9: Comparative forecast of CO2 pricing.
Table 10: Global carbon stocks in vegetation and sold carbon pools to the depth.
Table 11: Summary of types of forest carbon finance, 2009 and 2009 - 2016 cumulative.
Table 12: Transacted voluntary carbon offset volume, value and weighted average price by project category, 2019.
Table 13: Sample projects (Shell, ConocoPhilips, Repsol, LUKOIL, Saudi Aramco, Equinor).
Table 14: CO2 capture technologies.
Table 15: SWOT analysis of CCUS.
Table 16: Examples and features of CCUS projects implemented by oil and gas companies.
Table 17: Carbon capture, transportation, utilization and storage costs.
Table 18: Polymer product recycling share.
Table 19: Evaluation of costs and volume of GHG emissions reduction by technological method.
Table 20: Current status of the main elements o the GHG emission regulation system.
Table 21: Russian oil and gas companies' long-term targets for reducing GHG emissions (as of January 2021).
___________________________________________________________________________________________
