As the oil and gas sector’s biggest markets are set to shrink over the long term, because of moves to decarbonise the economy, a logical question for leaders in the industry is where to seek revenues in future.
March saw Chevron Singapore Pte Ltd launching a carbon offset programme for its Singaporean Caltex brand. It’s a neat idea. Customers feeling queasy about their vehicle emissions can use their petrol pump loyalty points to offset their greenhouse gas footprints through investments in carbon reduction schemes approved by the Verified Carbon Standard (VCS), an independent verification programme. Offset schemes such as this hold considerable promise for companies that cannot immediately switch to zero-carbon operations.
There is something quite seductive about the potential of biofuels in the energy transition.
Some things are certain in the quest for a low-carbon energy system. Wind and solar will have a major role to play, for example. Hydrogen and carbon capture, utilisation and storage will be key for hard-to-abate sectors. But then there are areas where there is still a question mark. Nuclear energy is one of those.
It’s that time of year when we lay down plans for the next 12 months—and second-guess movements in an ever-changing market.
Much has been written about this year’s 2021 United Nations Climate Change Conference, or COP26. A success or a failure, depends on who you listen to.
For oil and gas leaders, the challenge is how to go from villain to hero without resorting to self-immolation. A case in point: should we increase investment in natural gas when the European Investment Bank thinks “gas is over”?
The release of the IEA’s Roadmap to Net Zero by 2050 report on 20 May is a potential bombshell for the industry.
There has been much talk about natural gas as a transition fuel, but is there any evidence that explorers are now targeting more gas in exploration?
Phone : +44 (0)20 3794 5380
Email : info@westwoodenergy.com
