Page 41 - 83

Exhibit 2

i.e. upstream or downstream of its operations - in- (up to a fifth of the full investments)
cluding for instance the use of company products
(i.e. all gasoline/diesel... sold daily!).
It is worthwhile noting that Scope3 represents 75% One goal, different levers

of O&G emissions, roughly 3 times Scope 1&2. For
the large IOCs & Majors (who have already worked Looking at the areas of intervention, we expect
on their portfolio carbon intensity, on emission con- most of the share of abatement of Scope1&2 emis-
trol in production or simply have “lighter” reservoir/ sions to come from:
fields) this number grows to 85+%: Scope3 is 6
times Scope1&2. It has therefore to be well identi- 1. Setting-up of operational levers to directly cut
fied and targeted. the amount of emissions from running assets,
within the current operating model: improve Energy
The emissions’ size tells only a part of the story: Efficiency of key equipment (motors, pumps) or re-
the spending necessary to tackle them is even duce direct emissions (e.g. from methane fugitives,
more impactful, and a deep dive into the topic venting, flaring).
helps us to understand the magnitude of the re- These initiatives are frequently underestimated, but
quired effort. allow lower capex and lower opex together with an
“up-front” cut of actual emissions;
The spending necessary to
tackle the emissions is even 2. Managing emission footprint of own assets, by
replacing fossil source in power / heat generation
“more impactful - a deep assets with renewable sources;
dive into the topic helps us to 3. Reducing the CO2 emissions switching to ‘blue’
understand the magnitude of or ‘green’ hydrogen and deploying Carbon- captu-
the required effort re to capture process-related CO .
2
Even after all this, there will still be residual emis-
sions, deeply embedded in the O&G business. The-
A theoretical exercise run by BCG (see Exhibit 2) refore, O&G need to change the equation through
to analyze how to “zero” Scope1&2 shows it would 1. Portfolio Transition: changing the production
require close to 3 TRILLION€ Capex within 2050 footprint (e.g. Supplying lower GHG hydro-
– which in other words means something close to carbon, shifting more to gas or to “advanced
1/6 of full O&G industry investments for the next biofuels” while reducing exposure to Oil, diver-
30 years! sifying from fossil oil (and hydrocarbon) busi-
With Capex plans being challenged in current ness)
pressured commodity & demand context (with 2. Offsetting: promote carbon reduction initiati-
cut at least at 20%), the role of emission-redu- ves outside of own operations: Nature Based
cing capex would become even more relevant solutions or sink solutions, like forestation, soil

Impiantistica Italiana - Settembre-Ottobre 2020 39 39