Energy & Utilities
Nordic 260 response rate: Energy & Utilities Overall: 43%(12 of 28)
Key Industries within the sector: Energy Equipment & Services (5 of 13); Oil, Gas & Consumable Fuels (5 of 12); Electric Utilities (2 of 2)
Responders DNO International DOF
Fortum Hafslund Lundin Petroleum Neste Oil Petroleum Geo-Services Prosafe
Seadrill Management Solstad Offshore Statoil Teekay Petrojarl
Largest non-respondents include: Aker Solutions, Fred Olsen Energy, Alliance Oil Company
Fig 24: Emissions disclosure (million metric tons CO2e)
(75% disclosed) Scope 3
(92% disclosed) Scope 2
(100% disclosed) Scope 1
Opportunities reported • Competitive edge in the event of tougher carbon taxation and regulation thanks to low dependence on fossil fuels.
• Increased demand for renewable energy and infrastructure such as smart grids. Reputational benefits for firms with low-carbon offerings.
• Increased capacity in renewables owing to higher temperatures, precipitation and wind.
• New fields for oil and gas exploration in the Arctic Sea.
Risks reported • Uncertainty surrounding future climate change regulation.
• Higher costs and reduced demand due to emissions taxation or cap-and- trade schemes.
• Vulnerability of distribution networks to damage from extreme weather events.
• Shifts in political or consumer sentiment away from particular energy sources, such as fossil fuels or nuclear.
Key actions • Refurbishment of existing plants and measures to optimise efficiency in furnaces and refineries.
• Investment in renewable energy production.
• Reduced gas flaring. • Improved design and fuel efficiency of vessels.
0 10 20 30 40 50 ‘Looking into the future,
we believe that CO2 will gradually become costly elsewhere in the world as well. That is why
we calculate in a CO2 price when we decide to go forward with new investments regardless of the current carbon regime at the location of the project. We believe this makes our portfolio more robust when climate policies tighten further down the road.’
Statoil
Performance indicators Average disclosure score Verification rate Scope 1 Verification rate Scope 2
Share with emissions reduction targets Change in emissions during 2010
Nordic 260 Energy & Utilities 64
61
47% 38% 67%
+0.9%
42% 33% 42%
-4.1%
43
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62