We reference two energy scenarios from the International Energy Agency鈥�(IEA) 2023 World Energy Outlook that illustrate their concept of future demand and track the Paris Agreement goal of reducing global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to limit the global temperature increase to 2 degrees Celsius while pursuing efforts to limit warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius.
Total energy demand in 2050 stays flat compared to 2022 in the Announced Pledges scenario but declines in the Net Zero Emissions scenario. Demand for natural gas and oil has different outcomes across the IEA scenarios.
Even in the Net Zero Emissions scenario, 2050 oil demand remains at 20 MMBBL per day and natural gas at 15 MMBOED, and despite a reallocation of capital to renewables, significant investment in upstream natural gas and oil is still required. IEA estimates oil investments alone will average $378 billion each year from 2022 to 2050 globally in the Announced Pledges scenario and $210 billion per year from 2022 to 2050 in the Net Zero Emissions scenario. This is a cumulative oil investment total of approximately $11 trillion globally in the Announced Pledges scenario and approximately $6 trillion globally in the Net Zero Emissions scenario for the period 2022 to 2050.
Achieving the IEA’s Announced Pledges scenario (APS; limiting temperature increase to 1.7 degrees Celsius) requires significant progress on several fronts:1
The APS requires achieving all major national emissions reduction targets made by governments around the world, as well as meeting all country-level targets in full for access to energy/electricity. This includes supporting policies that could reduce the need for coal-fired capacity or even halt new coal investment through cost-effective, low-emissions electricity deployment. Even with these changes and requirements, APS will still require flexibility to use existing infrastructure while new options are being developed to replicate natural gas services. Such flexibility requirements in the power sector may be met with low-carbon hydrogen and hydrogen-based fuels. Oil and gas resources will still be needed in the APS but will be consolidated to include a smaller number of low-cost, responsible producers. Changes in the energy system will take time, as energy infrastructure components have long asset lives and require cross-sector, system-wide changes and retrofits to meet new specifications.
Unlike the APS, the IEA Net Zero scenario starts with the end result of achieving 1.5 degrees Celsius and works backward to fit solutions to the final desired outcome. It provides hypothetical data to inform the decisions to be made by policymakers, who have the greatest scope to move the world closer to its climate goals. The assumptions used in this scenario are challenging. For example:
These widely varying factors are the reason scenario planning is important. There is not just one pathway to a low-carbon future — there are numerous ways in which government action and technology development could interact with consumer behavior to bring about a low-carbon future. Performance on climate-related risks and opportunities is driven by planning across a range of widely varying scenarios and having the financial strength and asset flexibility to adapt to different outcomes.
The scenarios we have developed describe possible pathways leading to a particular outcome. Scenarios are hypothetical constructs and are not predictions or forecasts of what we think is going to happen; they are used to illustrate which factors drive future developments. We use scenarios in our strategic planning process to:
Using scenarios enables us to understand a range of risks around potential commodity market prices associated with various GHG emissions reduction scenarios. To assist our capital allocation decisions, we can test our current portfolio of assets and investment opportunities against these future possibilities and identify where strengths and weaknesses may exist.
We use a range of analyses, input and information when developing our strategy. The details of our scenarios give insight into the analysis we use to inform our strategic decision making and reinforces to stakeholders and shareholders that we are both preparing for reductions in operational GHG emissions, which are consistent with the objectives of the Paris Agreement, and developing resilient strategies that reflect the complex and uncertain range of energy futures.
We use four main energy transition scenarios in our global energy model: Pre-Pandemic Trends, Moderate Transition, Accelerated Transition and 1.5 Net Zero. The four scenarios incorporate a wide range of possible outcomes for energy and carbon emissions.
While these scenarios extend to 2050, well beyond our near-term operational planning period, they give insights on trends that could have an implication for near and medium-term decisions and enable choices on the creation or preservation of future options.
Each scenario models the full energy system including coal, oil, natural gas, solar, wind, geothermal and nuclear, as well as their related GHG emissions and pricing policies. Each of these plausible pathways is designed to stretch our thinking about potential rates of new technology adoption, policy development and consumer behavior. 鈥�
The scenarios describe four pathways out of the myriad that are possible, given the uncertainty surrounding the development of future energy markets out to 2050. They do not describe all possible future outcomes and are not used as a reliable indicator of the actual impact of climate change on the Bet365官网 portfolio or business.
In addition to using the four scenarios to analyze potential outcomes, we regularly monitor key signposts as we work to track the pace and direction of the energy transition and identify potential leading indicators of change in the demand for hydrocarbons. In this way we aim to establish not just which scenario we are moving toward, but also to identify emerging disruptive scenarios. This analysis is presented to executive management and the board of directors to assist in strategic decision making. 鈥�
The thoughtful application of scenarios in strategic planning is core to our ability to navigate future uncertainty and is a practical way of conveying this information in a decision-useful manner. The key to scenario planning is the use of a wide-enough range to鈥痗haracterize uncertainty, rather than trying to correctly guess specific future variables or parameters.
Scenario | Key assumptions | Carbon taxes (in 2023 dollars) | Energy demand | Oil and gas demand growth from 2022 |
Pre-Pandemic Trends |
|
|
|
48% |
Moderate Transition |
|
|
|
21% |
Accelerated Transition |
|
|
|
-7% |
1.5 Net Zero2 |
|
|
|
-45% |
Our scenarios have a wide range of assumptions regarding technological advances, government policies (e.g., carbon prices) and consumer behaviors leading to a range of oil and natural gas prices. We take this future price uncertainty into account in our strategy by using a fully burdened cost of supply as our primary criterion for capital allocation. In the we showed of the ~20 billion barrels of resources with a cost of supply at $40 per barrel and below held in our portfolio, resources at the average cost of supply can be produced at $32 per barrel.3 This compares favorably to the expected commodity prices detailed in our own scenarios as well as external scenarios such as the IEA’s Net Zero Emissions scenario.
The scenarios are designed to address transitional risks. A separate scenario process addresses physical climate-related risk using consultant scenarios based on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) modeling.
Our corporate strategy reflects several findings from our scenario analysis process. We have acted to:
1. The Sustainable Development Scenario (SDS), a component of previous IEA scenarios, is not featured in the most recent edition of the World Energy Outlook, as temperature outcomes and sustainable development goals in the SDS are similar to those in the APS.
2. The 1.5 Net Zero scenario is designed to reach net-zero emissions in the energy sector by 2050. The remaining carbon budget of 600 gigatonnes of cumulative CO2 emissions from 2020 to 2050 is in line with a 1.5-degree warming target before 2100 with a slight temperature overshoot around the middle of the century. See IPCC AR6 Synthesis Report (2023).
3. Costs assume a mid-cycle price environment of $60/BBL WTI.