|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
Media Coverage Back to Menu 2005 03 03 LF |
||||||||
|
|
|
2005 02 15
Tuesday, February 15, 2005 He has a blunt message about Kyoto, which comes into force tomorrow, for
conventional oil and gas producers. "It's not a hardship, it's an economic
opportunity," Mr. Lloyd says, adding that oil sands operations face a much
stiffer challenge.
Others have made the argument that reducing greenhouse gases can save money, but
Mr. Lloyd's number-crunching goes much further, with PTAC building a business
case for the oil patch to reduce its emissions by 29 megatonnes.
The essential thrust is this: Spend up to $4-billion in five years to save a
billion every year, with environmental outlays paying for themselves after no
more than four years, and as few as four months. Those expenditures would not
only save money, they'd also meet the cutoff point the industry uses to assess
the profitability of projects that produce oil and gas, meaning that a company
would be better off after meeting its greenhouse gas target than if it had left
the money in the bank.
Most of the savings, $780-million, would come from reducing energy use in the
exploration and production end of the industry, with such expenditures paying
for themselves in less than three years. Reducing fugitive emissions, which are
unplanned but small gas leaks during transport and processing, would save
another $141-million a year -- and those cuts would pay for themselves in just
four to six months, PTAC says.
Reducing leakage from natural gas storage would save $21-million a year, because
the resource could then be sold for a profit. Similarly, reducing the flaring
and venting of natural gas by 25 per cent would not only eliminate three
megatonnes of greenhouse gas emissions, it would save $68-million a year.
PTAC's numbers could even be on the conservative side, because they don't take
into account the most recent runup in natural gas prices.
Also, if the oil patch were truly able to attain 29 megatonnes in reductions,
it's possible that some companies would be in a position to sell emissions
credits.
The industry agrees on some of these points, particularly on the benefits of
reduced flaring and venting.
Pierre Alvarez, president of the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers,
says the recent increase in commodity prices means the economics are now tilting
toward capturing that gas, rather than wasting it.
But he questions PTAC's larger assertion that the industry can turn a profit
from reducing greenhouse gases. Some producers that have recently spent billions
on machinery and equipment would be at a severe disadvantage if they were to
immediately scrap it in favour of a slightly newer version -- in essence, paying
the same bill twice, Mr. Alvarez says. If governments want older equipment
replaced more quickly, he says, they should rejig capital cost allowances to
spur such expenditures. However, even such measures have their limits, Mr.
Alvarez says. "You do hit a point where you reach the limit of technology and
economics."
Mr. Lloyd has no illusions that the oil and gas industry is about to become a
Kyoto enthusiast, saying it has been a struggle to win people in Calgary over to
his point of view. Although investments in emissions-reduction technologies will
turn a profit, it will not be as big as that to be had from exploring for and
producing oil and gas, he says. "They have bigger fish to fry."
And even this self-described environmental pragmatist says five years will be
needed to achieve the targets he lays out -- leaving the industry very little
leeway to meet Kyoto objectives.
Mr. Lloyd says he believes Canada is not likely to meet the letter of Kyoto's
law, but it is necessary to start reducing greenhouse gases, even if the means
and technology to do so may not be entirely clear at the moment.
"If you decide to go to the moon, you'll get there."
Billion-dollar savings
Petroleum Technology Alliance Canada says oil companies could save more than
$1-billion a year by cutting greenhouse gas emissions. Here are the steps to
those savings:
|
|||||||
|
For further information, please contact: |
|
Arlene Merling, PTAC Manager, Operations phone: (403) 218-7702 fax: (403) 920-0054 www.ptac.org |
|||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| © 2000 PTAC | |||||||||