This data-file tabulates the costs of carbon offsets that are being offered to consumers and commercial customers, by 17 companies. Offered carbon offset costs are surprisingly low.
Are they real? The file also tabulates 1,600 carbon offset projects which are assured by agencies such as the ‘Verified Carbon Standard’, Gold Standard and Green-E. This helps lend credibility to the companies in the data-file.
However, we estimate only c10-20% of the projects directly offset CO2 through planting new forests, another c15-30% are spent on forest conservation, and the remaining 50-70% are broader (i.e., charitable donations to finance renewable energy projects).
This data-file quantifies the CO2 intensity of oil sands production: disaggregating averge emission factors for both mining operations and SAGD. Emissions are estimated for running trucks, bitumen extraction, steam-flooding, upgrading, methane leaks, flaring, et al; based on real-world data.
A CO2 curvecan also be derived from the data, ranking c2.5Mbpd of production across Alberta, in order to compare different facilities and different operators. Steam-oil-ratios explain c60% of the variance in SAGD assets’ emissions.
Energy transition is maturing as an investment theme. ‘Obvious’ portfolio tilts are beginning to look over-crowded. Non-obvious ones are looking over-looked. This note outlines the ‘top ten’ themes that excite us most in 2020, among commodities, drivers of the energy transition, market perceptions and corporate strategies.
CO2 and methane intensities are tabulated for 300 distinct company positions across 9 distinct basins in this data-file. Using the data, we can aggregate the total CO2 in (kg/boe) and methane leakage rates (as a percent of natural gas production) across the US’s different basins.
Covered basins include the Permian, Bakken, Eagle Ford, Marcellus/Utica, Alaska, GoM, Powder River, San Juan, Anadarko basin and DJ basin (chart above).
It is possible to rank the best companies in each basin, using the granular data, to identify industry leaders and laggards (chart below).
Heliogen has set a new record for concentrated solar power in November 2019, generating >1,000C temperatures from an array of c370 hexagonal mirrors, which are precisely controlled using computer vision. This is almost 2x traditional CSP plants which achieve c560C temperatures.
We have reviewed 21 patents from Heliogen’s predecessor company, eSolar, in order to understand its IP. Not only can it control heliostats more precisely than prior companies, but this allows the heliostats to be down-sized, conferring material cost-savings.
This data-file summarizes the technology, the patents, the costs (in c/kWh and $/mcfe) and the opportunity to decarbonise industrial heat and power generation.
This data-file tabulates the methane emissionsfrom downstream gas distribution across 160 US gas networks, which cover 1.1M miles of mains, 61M metered customers and >90% of the country’s retail gas demand.
Downstream US methane leakagesaverage 0.2% by volume, explaining 5.7kg/boe of emissions. Two thirds of these leaks can be attributed to gas mains. Leakages are correlated with the share of sales to smaller customers. And state-owned utilities appear to have 2x higher leakage rates the public companies.
US gas utilities’ performance is screened to assess c80 distinct companies, including: Altagas, Atmos, Centerpoint, CMS, Dominion, DTE, Duke, Edison, National Grid, PG&E, Sempra, Southern Co, Spire, UGI, WEC & Xcel.
This data-file screens the methods available to monitor for methane emissions. Notes and metrics are tabulated for Method 21, Optical Gas Imaging, fixed sensors, ground labs, aircrafts, drones and satellites; including advances at the cutting edge of each method.
Emerging screening methods, such as drones and trucks are also scored, based on results from an excellent recent technical trial. The best drones can detect almost all methane leaks >90% faster than traditional methods.
Companies developing next-generation methane-mitigationtechnologies are screened, including 10 public companies and 33 private companies. This peer group filed 150 patents in 2018-19. 8 companies seem particularly exciting to us.
Operators are also screened, across the dozen largest Energy Majors, to estimate their methane leaks and broader methane intensity across the supply chain.
Of the largest 15 shale E&Ps, the proportion with ESG slides in their quarterly presentations has exploded by 4.5x in the trailing twelve months, from 13% in 3Q18 to 60% in 3Q19.
The progress is tracked in this short data-file, which counts the number of ESG slides published, by company, by quarter; as the industry articulates its carbon credentials in order to help attract capital.
Gas gathering and gas processingare 50% less CO2 intensive than oil refining. Nevertheless, these processes emitted 18kg of CO2e per boe in 2018, hence the gas industry must strive to improve.
Methane matters most, explaining 7kg/boe of the gas industry’s CO2-equivalents, via leaks and fugitive emissions (and this is with 1 kg of methane translated into 25 kg of CO2e). Hence US methane intensity ran at c0.5% in 2018.
The numbers vary widelyby geography and by operator, and are quantified in this data-file, after analysing 850 facilities’ EPA disclosures. Very detailed and comparable disclosures are broken out for US gas gathering, to screen for leaders and laggards.
Covered companiesinclude Antero, BP, Denbury, DCP, DTE, Equinor, Equitrans, Energy Transfer Partners, Enlink, Enterprise Product Partners, EOG, ExxonMobil, Kinder Morgan, Oneok, Pioneer, Shell, Targa, Williams.
Which refiners are least CO2 intensive, and which refiners are most CO2 intensive? This spreadsheet answers the question, by aggregating data from 130 US refineries, based on EPA regulatory disclosures.
The full databasecontains a granular breakdown, facility-by-facility, showing each refinery, its owner, its capacity, throughput, utilisation rate and CO2 emissions across six categories: combustion, refining, hydrogen, CoGen, methane emissions and NOx (chart below).