DOCSLIB.ORG

Conocophillips

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Sign In | Join 0 Join Our IT Network Apply for Opportunities ConocoPhillips Fast Facts Learning List Skills List Share Article Videos Answers ConocoPhillips Co. is an American multinational energy corporation with its headquarters located in the Energy Corridor district of Houston, Texas in the United States. It is the world's largest independent pure-play exploration and production company and is a Fortune 500 company.[2][3] ConocoPhillips was created through the merger of American oil companies Conoco Inc. and Phillips Petroleum Co. on August 30, 2002.[4] In 2012, ConocoPhillips' spun off its downstream assets as a new, and separate company, Phillips 66.[5] History Conoco Inc. was an American oil company founded in 1875 as the Continental Oil and Transportation Co. Based in Ogden, Utah, the company was a coal, oil, kerosene, grease and candles distributor in the West. Marland Oil Co. (founded by exploration pioneer E. W. Marland) later acquired the assets (subject to liabilities) of Continental Oil Co., or DC, merged by Bryan M. Metler, David L. Kinney, and Justin J. Stockburn of Delta Constructors for a consideration of 2,317,266 shares of stock. On June 26, 1899, Marland Oil changed its name to Continental Oil Co. and moved its headquarters to Fargo, North Dakota. The acquisition gave Conoco the red bar-and-triangle logo previously used by Marland. Conoco used the logo between 1930 and 1970, when the current red capsule logo was adopted. The Conoco headquarters were in Ponca City until 1949, when it moved to Houston, Texas. In 2002 Conoco Inc. and Phillips Petroleum Co., whose headquarters were in nearby Bartlesville, Oklahoma merged into ConocoPhillips Numerous state corporation filings are identified "Continental Oil Co." and "Continental Oil Corp." and "Continental Oil Co. of Texas" as recorded with the Texas Secretary of State and Delaware Secretary of State. Merger of San Jacinto Petroleum Corp. and Continental Oil Corp. is recorded in 1964 with Delaware Secretary of State. In 2005, ConocoPhillips began rebranding its (Union) 76 gas stations, which Phillips had acquired from Tosco Corp. before the merger with Conoco. The move prompted a petition campaign by fans hoping to save the historic 76 orange ball signage.[6] In March 2006, ConocoPhillips bought Wilhelmshavener Raffineriegesellschaft mbH in Germany, and Burlington Resources in the United States.[7] On May 10, 2006, Richard Armitage, former deputy-secretary of the U.S. State Department, was elected to the board of directors of the ConocoPhillips oil company.[8] In 2007, the Chevron Corp. converted all of the Conoco gas stations in Mississippi to the Texaco brand. In late 2009, the company announced asset sales to increase investor returns. Included are debt reduction and stock buy back. In March 2011 the program was enlarged up to $10 billion assets sales in the next two years.[9] ConocoPhillips intends to implement a floating liquefied natural gas facility by 2016-2019, and has completed quantitative risk analysis of a design that will undergo pre-feed study in 2011.[10] On July 14, 2011, ConocoPhillips announced its intent to separate the company's upstream and downstream businesses into two stand-alone, publicly traded corporations, with the intent of maximizing shareholder value.[11] On May 1, 2012, all midstream, downstream, marketing and chemical operations were separated into a new company named Phillips 66, headquartered in Houston.[12] As a result, ConocoPhillips continued its operations as an upstream (exploration and production) company.[13][14] In April 2012, ConocoPhillips sold its Trainer Refinery to Monroe Energy LLC, a subsidiary of Delta Air Lines.[15] In January 2013, Conoco announced that it would sell its Rocky Mountain assets to Denbury Resources for $1.05 billion.[16] Operations Exploration and production ConocoPhillips focuses solely on exploring for, developing and producing oil and natural gas globally. The company manages its operations through six operating segments, which are defined by geographic region: Alaska, Lower 48 and Latin America, Canada, Europe, Asia Pacific and Middle East, and Other International. Kashagan Field in Kazakhstan In 1998, ConocoPhillips acquired an interest in 10.5 blocks off the coast of Kazakhstan through the North Caspian Sea Production Sharing Agreement (NCSPSA). It currently owns 8.4% of the shares of the consortium exploiting Kashagan oil field. However the company seeks to reduce its non-core assets in order to use the cash for debt reduction, fund its capital program, and dividend payments. On October 3, 2012, the Kazakh Oil and Gas Minister told reporters that ConocoPhillips has informed Kazakhstan of their intention to sell their shares.[17] In November 26, in its biggest acquisition ever, ONGC Videsh agreed to buy ConocoPhillips' 8.4% stake in the Kashagan oilfield for about US $5 billion. The stake buy is subject to approval of governments of Kazakhstan and India and also to other partners in the Caspian Sea field waiving their pre-emption rights.[18] Headquarters The headquarters of ConocoPhillips are located in the Energy Corridor district of Houston, Texas.[19] By 2002 the groups organizing the merger had selected Houston as the site of the headquarters. Governor of Oklahoma Frank Keating said that the move to Houston was "regrettable." The Journal Record stated that Archie Dunham, the CEO of Conoco Inc., "apparently highlighted the lack of direct international air travel from Oklahoma as a key drawback for the merged firm."[20] The ConocoPhillips headquarters, originally the headquarters of Conoco Inc., was formerly known as the Conoco Center.[21][22] Environmental record On April 11, 2007, it became the first U.S. oil company to join the U.S. Climate Action Partnership, an alliance of big business and environmental groups. The partnership in January 2007 had advised President George W. Bush that mandatory emissions caps would be needed to reduce the flow of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases into the atmosphere. In 2007 ConocoPhillips announced it would spend $150 million that year on the research and development of new energy sources and technologies -- a 50 percent increase in spending from 2006.[23] However, ConocoPhillips left the U.S. Climate Action Partnership in February, 2010.[24] According to the Political Economy Research Institute, ConocoPhillips ranked 13th among U.S. corporate producers of air pollutions.[25] In June 2011, ConocoPhillips China Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of ConocoPhillips,[26] was responsible for a series of oil spills at the Penglai 19-3 oil field in Bohai Bay.[27] ConocoPhillips is a signatory participant of the Voluntary Principles on Security and Human Rights. See also ConocoPhillips Alaska Marland Oil Co. Fossil fuels lobby Sale: Early Bird Angebote Kontaktlinsen, Pflege online kaufen Jetzt bis zu 55% kräftig sparen. Books: ConocoPhillips References ^ ConocoPhillps. "Company History". Retrieved 2008-09-06. ^ https://www.piersystem.com/go/doc/5451/1742415/ ^ "Fortune 500 2009: Fortune 1000 Companies 1-100". CNN. ^ "ConocoPhillips, Form 8-K12G3, Filing Date Aug 30, 2002". secdatabase.com. Retrieved Mar 28, 2013. ^ http://www.forbes.com/sites/christopherhelman/2012/04/30/as-conocophillips-spins-off-refining- assets-should-you-own-the-new-phillips-66/ ^ Save the 76 Ball website ^ "ConocoPhillips, Form 8-K, Current Report, Filing Date Mar 31, 2006" (PDF). secdatabase.com. Retrieved Mar 28, 2013. ^ "ConocoPhillips, Form 10-Q, Quarterly Report, Filing Date Aug 3, 2006" (PDF). secdatabase.com. Retrieved Mar 28, 2013. ^ http://www.reuters.com/finance/stocks/keyDevelopments?symbol=COP.N Retrieved at March 28, 2011 ^ http://www.kgu.or.kr/download.php? tb=bbs_017&fn=SESSION_10_(TECHNIAL)___Paul_Davies_ConocoPhillips.pdf&rn=SESSION_10_(TECHNIAL)___Paul_Davies_ConocoPhillips.pdf ^ ConocoPhillips Pursuing Plan to Separate into Two Stand-Alone, Publicly Traded Companies, ConocoPhillips, July 14, 2011 ^ "ConocoPhillips, Form 8-K, Current Report, Filing Date May 2, 2012". secdatabase.com. Retrieved Mar 28, 2013. ^ http://articles.marketwatch.com/2012-05-01/industries/31507505_1_conocophillips-nyse- regular-trading ^ http://finance.yahoo.com/news/phillips-66-debuts-advantaged-downstream-120000807.html ^ Burkhardt, Paul; Schlangenstein, Mary (June 15, 2012). "Delta CEO Says Airline to Pressure Prices as Jet Fuel Seller". Bloomberg. ^ Thyagaraju Adinarayan (15 January 2013). "Conoco to sell Rocky Mountain assets to Denbury for $1.05 billion". Reuters. ^ "Kazakstan Announces ConocoPhillips to Quit Kashagan Oil Field". The Gazette of Central Asia (Satrapia). 3 October 2012. ^ "Indian OVL to Buy ConocoPhillips's Stake in Kashagan Field" . The Gazette of Central Asia . 27 November 2012. ^ "Contact Us." ConocoPhillips. Retrieved on October 1, 2009. ^ "Governor says ConocoPhillips headquarters decision appears to be final." Journal Record. January 23, 2002. Retrieved on February 3, 2010. ^ "Write Conoco!." Conoco Inc. February 19, 1997. Retrieved on January 16, 2010. ^ "Conoco World Headquarters Address." Conoco Inc. November 1, 1996. Retrieved on January 17, 2010. ^ John Porretto (April 11, 2007). "ConocoPhillips joins climate group". Seattle Post-Intelligencer. ^ Chesser, Paul (2010-02-24). "CHESSER: World cools toward warmists They brought it on themselves with their fudged facts". washingtontimes.com. Washington Times. Archived from the original on 2010-02-26. Retrieved 2010-02-26. Last week, three major corporations - Conoco/Phillips, BP and Caterpillar - bailed out on
Recommended publications
  • 2019 Annual Report Are Commission-Free

    2019 Annual Report Are Commission-Free

    Table of Contents 1 Letter to Our Shareholders 4 Financial Highlights 6 Our Businesses Midstream Chemicals Refining Marketing and Specialties 7 Our Value Chain 8 Our Strategy Operating Excellence Growth Returns Distributions High-Performing Organization 28 Board of Directors 30 Executive Leadership Team 31 Non-GAAP Reconciliations 32 Form 10-K | ON THE COVER AND TABLE OF CONTENTS Lake Charles Refinery WESTLAKE, LA In 2019, Lake Charles Manufacturing Complex achieved a sustained safety record of more than 55 months, equivalent to 7.5 million safe work hours. 2019 PHILLIPS 66 ANNUAL REPORT 1 To Our Shareholders We have the right strategy in place to create shareholder value, and our employees are executing it well. Phillips 66 achieved 34% total shareholder return during 2019, which exceeded our peer group average and the S&P 100. In 2019, we delivered earnings of $3.1 billion and earnings per share of $6.77. Adjusted earnings were $3.7 billion or $8.05 per share. During the year, we generated $4.8 billion of operating cash flow. We reinvested $3.9 billionback into the business and returned $3.2 billion of capital to shareholders through dividends and share repurchases. We increased our quarterly dividend 12.5% and announced a $3 billion increase to our share repurchase program. Since our formation, we have returned $26 billion to shareholders through dividends, share repurchases and exchanges, reducing our initial shares outstanding by 33%. Operating excellence is our No. 1 priority and core to everything we do. Our goal is zero incidents, zero accidents and zero injuries. We believe this is attainable, and we strive for it daily.
  • Bakken Production Optimization Program Prospectus

    Bakken Production Optimization Program Prospectus

    Bakken Production Optimization Program BAKKEN PRODUCTION OPTIMIZATION PROGRAM 2.0 PROSPECTUS PROGRAM INTRODUCTION Led by the Energy & Environmental Research Center (EERC), the highly successful Bakken Production Optimization Program (BPOP), funded by its members and the North Dakota Industrial Commission, is continuing for the time frame of 2017–2020. The goal of this research program, BPOP 2.0, is to improve Bakken system oil recovery and reduce its environmental footprint. The results of the 3-year program will increase well productivity and the economic output of North Dakota’s oil and gas resources, decrease environmental impacts of wellsite operations, and reduce demand for infrastructure construction and maintenance. BPOP 1.0 PARTNERS A premier partnership program was recently completed which has been cited as an exemplary model by others nationwide. It has demonstrated that state lawmakers, state regulators, and industry can work together for positive results for shareholders and taxpayers alike. Phase I partners focused research on industry-driven challenges and opportunities. Continental Resources, Inc. ® Marathon Oil Corporation America’s Oil Champion Whiting Petroleum Corporation North Dakota Oil and Gas Research Program ConocoPhillips Company Nuverra Environmental Solutions Hitachi Hess Corporation Oasis Petroleum, Inc. SM Energy XTO Energy, Inc. BPOP 1.0 ACHIEVEMENTS (2013–2016) Continental’s Hawkinson Project Water Use and Handling Forecast Aimed at significantly increasing total production and A summary of trends in the Bakken, an estimation of production rates from North Dakota oil wells where oil future demand/disposal needs, an overview of treatment reserves of the second and third benches of the Three technologies, recycling/reuse considerations, and a Forks Formation, located just below the Bakken oil summary of implications for BPOP partners were created.
  • Fresh Thoughts on Why Kevin Stitt Is (Still) Right About the Compact

    Fresh Thoughts on Why Kevin Stitt Is (Still) Right About the Compact

    Print News for the Heart of our City. Volume 57, Issue 9 September 2019 Read us daily at www.city-sentinel.com Ten Cents Page 3 Page 4 Page 5 Page 7 Free elected National Committeewoman A quality inspection is key The Genoveses: Elizabeth and Eugene, Back in the News OKC Zoo’s Art Gone Wild exhibit AN EDITORIAL Fresh Thoughts on Why Kevin Stitt is (still) right about the Compact The City Sentinel Editorial of the Oklahoma definition of slot machines (still considered Governor Kevin Stitt appar- the old-style wooden tumbler ently remains determined to machines that ran here long renegotiate gaming compacts ago). in Oklahoma. Because that is In truth, sweetheart deals the case, leaders of the large between the Big Tribe “play- tribes – fashioned into a co- ers” – operating with virtual alition that benefits only the monopolistic powers after de- haves, and in no instance the cades of dubious federal Trust have-nots – announced recent- decisions – and their middle ly they would rebuff Stitt’s re- men machine vendor pals ben- newed calls for a meeting to efit only … the Big Tribes and discuss this serious matter in a their well connected buddies serious manner. – who have skimmed hundred The powerful supporters of millions from the market of the status quo in Oklaho- Gov. Kevin Stitt through exclusive deals with ma tribal gaming are rejecting taking place in Las Vegas. Vegas machine manufactur- real talks about real issues be- In short, there is plenty of ers by attaching themselves to OCU School of Law Dean Jim Roth (far left) brought his own furry friends, Boo (left) and Brody (right), to meet the students of the 2019 Animal Law class.
  • Amicus Curiae the Chickasaw Nation Counsel for Amicus Curiae the Choctaw Nation of FRANK S

    Amicus Curiae the Chickasaw Nation Counsel for Amicus Curiae the Choctaw Nation of FRANK S

    No. 18-9526 IN THE Supreme Court of the United States ———— JIMCY MCGIRT, Petitioner, v. STATE OF OKLAHOMA, Respondent. ———— On Writ of Certiorari to the Court of Criminal Appeals of the State of Oklahoma ———— BRIEF OF AMICI CURIAE TOM COLE, BRAD HENRY, GLENN COFFEE, MIKE TURPEN, NEAL MCCALEB, DANNY HILLIARD, MICHAEL STEELE, DANIEL BOREN, T.W. SHANNON, LISA JOHNSON BILLY, THE CHICKASAW NATION, AND THE CHOCTAW NATION OF OKLAHOMA IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONER ———— MICHAEL BURRAGE ROBERT H. HENRY WHITTEN BURRAGE Counsel of Record 512 N. Broadway Avenue ROBERT H. HENRY LAW FIRM Suite 300 512 N. Broadway Avenue Oklahoma City, OK 73102 Suite 230 Oklahoma City, OK 73102 (405) 516-7824 [email protected] Counsel for Amici Curiae [Additional Counsel Listed On Inside Cover] February 11, 2020 WILSON-EPES PRINTING CO., INC. – (202) 789-0096 – WASHINGTON, D. C. 20002 STEPHEN H. GREETHAM BRAD MALLETT Senior Counsel Associate General Counsel CHICKASAW NATION CHOCTAW NATION OF 2929 Lonnie Abbott Blvd. OKLAHOMA Ada, OK 74820 P.O. Box 1210 Durant, OK 74702 Counsel for Amicus Curiae the Chickasaw Nation Counsel for Amicus Curiae the Choctaw Nation of FRANK S. HOLLEMAN, IV Oklahoma DOUGLAS B. ENDRESON SONOSKY, CHAMBERS, SACHSE, ENDRESON & PERRY, LLP 1425 K St., NW Suite 600 Washington, DC 20005 (202) 682-0240 Counsel for Amici Curiae the Chickasaw Nation and the Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma TABLE OF CONTENTS Page TABLE OF AUTHORITIES ................................ ii INTEREST OF AMICI CURIAE ........................ 1 SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT ............................. 5 ARGUMENT ........................................................ 5 I. OKLAHOMA’S AND THE NATIONS’ NEGOTIATED APPROACH TO SET- TLING JURISDICTIONAL ISSUES ON THEIR RESERVATIONS BENEFITS ALL OKLAHOMANS ..............................
  • Conocophillips Alaska: Investing in Alaska in Changing Times

    Conocophillips Alaska: Investing in Alaska in Changing Times

    ConocoPhillips Alaska: Investing in Alaska in Changing Times Jan. 13, 2017 Joe Marushack, President January 12, 2017 Cautionary Statement & Safe Harbor The following presentation includes forward‐looking statements. These statements relate to future events, such as anticipated revenues, earnings, business strategies, competitive position or other aspects of our operations, operating results or the industries or markets in which we operate or participate in general. Actual outcomes and results may differ materially from what is expressed or forecast in such forward‐ looking statements. These statements are not guarantees of future performance and involve certain risks, uncertainties and assumptions that may prove to be incorrect and are difficult to predict such as oil and gas prices; operational hazards and drilling risks; potential failure to achieve, and potential delays in achieving expected reserves or production levels from existing and future oil and gas development projects; unsuccessful exploratory activities; unexpected cost increases or technical difficulties in constructing, maintaining or modifying company facilities; international monetary conditions and exchange controls; potential liability for remedial actions under existing or future environmental regulations or from pending or future litigation; limited access to capital or significantly higher cost of capital related to illiquidity or uncertainty in the domestic or international financial markets; general domestic and international economic and political conditions, as well as changes in tax, environmental and other laws applicable to ConocoPhillips’ business and other economic, business, competitive and/or regulatory factors affecting ConocoPhillips’ business generally as set forth in ConocoPhillips’ filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). We caution you not to place undue reliance on our forward‐looking statements, which are only as of the date of this presentation or as otherwise indicated, and we expressly disclaim any responsibility for updating such information.
  • 3. Energy Reserves, Pipeline Routes and the Legal Regime in the Caspian Sea

    3. Energy Reserves, Pipeline Routes and the Legal Regime in the Caspian Sea

    3. Energy reserves, pipeline routes and the legal regime in the Caspian Sea John Roberts I. The energy reserves and production potential of the Caspian The issue of Caspian energy development has been dominated by four factors. The first is uncertain oil prices. These pose a challenge both to oilfield devel- opers and to the promoters of pipelines. The boom prices of 2000, coupled with supply shortages within the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), have made development of the resources of the Caspian area very attractive. By contrast, when oil prices hovered around the $10 per barrel level in late 1998 and early 1999, the price downturn threatened not only the viability of some of the more grandiose pipeline projects to carry Caspian oil to the outside world, but also the economics of basic oilfield exploration in the region. While there will be some fly-by-night operators who endeavour to secure swift returns in an era of high prices, the major energy developers, as well as the majority of smaller investors, will continue to predicate total production costs (including carriage to market) not exceeding $10–12 a barrel. The second is the geology and geography of the area. The importance of its geology was highlighted when two of the first four international consortia formed to look for oil in blocks off Azerbaijan where no wells had previously been drilled pulled out in the wake of poor results.1 The geography of the area involves the complex problem of export pipeline development and the chicken- and-egg question whether lack of pipelines is holding back oil and gas pro- duction or vice versa.
  • 2D Seismic Survey in Block AD- 10, Offshore Myanmar

    2D Seismic Survey in Block AD- 10, Offshore Myanmar

    2D Seismic Survey in Block AD- 10, Offshore Myanmar Initial Environmental Examination 02 December 2015 Environmental Resources Management www.erm.com The world’s leading sustainability consultancy 2D Seismic Survey in Block AD-10, Environmental Resources Management Offshore Myanmar ERM-Hong Kong, Limited 16/F, Berkshire House 25 Westlands Road Initial Environmental Examination Quarry Bay Hong Kong Telephone: (852) 2271 3000 Facsimile: (852) 2723 5660 Document Code: 0267094_IEE_Cover_AD10_EN.docx http://www.erm.com Client: Project No: Statoil Myanmar Private Limited 0267094 Summary: Date: 02 December 2015 Approved by: This document presents the Initial Environmental Examination (IEE) for 2D Seismic Survey in Block AD-10, as required under current Draft Environmental Impact Assessment Procedures Craig A. Reid Partner 1 Addressing MOECAF Comments, Final for MOGE RS CAR CAR 02/12/2015 0 Draft Final RS JNG CAR 31/08/2015 Revision Description By Checked Approved Date Distribution Internal Public Confidential CONTENTS 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1-1 1.1 PURPOSE AND EXTENT OF THE IEE REPORT 1-1 1.2 SUMMARY OF THE ACTIVITIES UNDERTAKEN DURING THE IEE STUDY 1-2 1.3 PROJECT ALTERNATIVES 1-2 1.4 DESCRIPTION OF THE ENVIRONMENT TO BE AFFECTED BY THE PROJECT 1-4 1.5 SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 1-5 1.6 THE PUBLIC CONSULTATION AND PARTICIPATION PROCESS 1-6 1.7 SUMMARY OF THE EMP 1-7 1.8 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE IEE REPORT 1-8 2 INTRODUCTION 2-1 2.1 PROJECT OVERVIEW 2-1 2.2 PROJECT PROPONENT 2-1 2.3 THIS INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION (IEE)
  • Poncan Theatre

    Poncan Theatre

    A Directory of Cultural Sites and Museums in Ponca City , Oklahoma Purpose of Directory Guidebook A tour guide or docent is usually available for assistance. Th is person is knowledgeable Th is “Adventures in History & Heritage” directory guidebook is intended to be a about the museums and collections. Listen and respect them and follow their lead. resource for teachers and citizens. It represents each cultural and/or historic site in Th ey have a wealth of knowledge to share. the Ponca City area and contains information to assist those interested in planning Show respect for the valuable artifacts and treasured items in a museum or a cultural educational visits. We hope you will fi nd the content informative and useful in site. Most items could not be replaced if destroyed. A “hands off ” policy is best when scheduling fi eld trips, group tours or individual visits. Enjoy the adventure and what touring. can be discovered along the way. At the end of the visit, be sure to show your appreciation and thank your guide. Why Cultural Heritage Field Trips are important… Table of Contents • Th ey help others discover the history and roots of a community. City Hall, Centennial Plaza, and Historic Downtown . 4 • Th ey create community awareness. Conoco Museum. 6 • Th ey enhance community pride. Marland Estate Mansion. 8 • Th ey encourage community involvement. Marland’s Grand Home.. 10 • Th ey generate partnerships between local schools, cultural heritage sites, Pioneer Woman Museum. 12 students and citizens. Ponca City Art Center. 14 Ponca City Library Matzene Art Collection. 16 Poncan Th eatre.
  • Big Oil's Real Agenda on Climate Change

    Big Oil's Real Agenda on Climate Change

    Big Oil’s Real Agenda on Climate Change How the oil majors have spent $1bn since Paris on narrative capture and lobbying on climate March 2019 Big Oil’s Real Agenda on Climate Change How the oil majors have spent $1Bn since Paris on narrative capture and lobbying on climate Executive Summary .................................................................................................................................. 2 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................ 4 Detailed Results ........................................................................................................................................ 9 Big Oil and the US Elections ................................................................................................................ 17 Conclusions ............................................................................................................................................. 20 Appendix: Methodology ......................................................................................................................... 21 Appendix: Climate Scoring Profiles .................................................................................................. 22 1 InfluenceMap March 2019 Executive Summary ◼ This research finds that the five largest publicly-traded oil and gas majors (ExxonMobil, Royal Dutch Shell, Chevron, BP and Total) have invested over $1Bn of shareholder funds in the three
  • Conoco Phillips Annual Report 2021

    Conoco Phillips Annual Report 2021

    Conoco Phillips Annual Report 2021 Form 10-K (NYSE:COP) Published: February 16th, 2021 PDF generated by stocklight.com 2020 UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20549 Form 10-K (Mark One) [X] ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the fiscal year ended December 31, 202 0 OR [ ] TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the transition period from to Commissio n file number:001-32395 ConocoPhillip s (Exact name of registrant as specified in its chart er) Delaware 01-0562944 (State or other jurisdiction of (I.R.S. Employer incorporation or organization) Identification No.) 925 N. Eldridge Parkway Houston, TX 77079 (Address of principal executive offices) (Zip Cod e) Registrant's telephone number, including area co2d8e1:-293-1000 Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act: Title of each class Trading symbols Name of each exchange on which registered Common Stock, $.01 Par Value COP New York Stock Exchange 7% Debentures due 2029 CUSIP—718507BK1 New York Stock Exchange Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. [x] Yes [ ] Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of tNhoe Act. [ ] Yes No Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section
  • GREEN GROWTH: from RELIGION to REALITY 7 Case Studies on Ambitious Strategies to Shape Green Growth

    GREEN GROWTH: from RELIGION to REALITY 7 Case Studies on Ambitious Strategies to Shape Green Growth

    GREEN GROWTH: FROM RELIGION TO REALITY 7 case studies on ambitious strategies to shape green growth The Pathways Project and CRESTS Discovering the path to a low-carbon tomorrow Prepared for Green Growth Leaders by: Mark Huberty, Huan Gao, and Juliana Mandell, John Zysman, Nina Kelsey, Jakob Riiskjaer Nygård, Jeremy Pilaar, Andrea Seow, Pilar Fox, Alice Madden with Jany Gao, Kate Goldman, Irene Choi, Crystal Chang and Benjamin Allen © June 2011 The Berkeley Roundtable on the International Economy INDEX 1: From Religion to Reality 04 Energy systems transformation for sustainable prosperity 2: An Analytical Overview 18 Seven Green Growth Cases 3: European Union 21 Green Growth as Necessity and Liability 4: Denmark 31 Country Case Analysis 5: United States Federal Green Policy Overview 44 California 50 State Case Analysis Colorado 61 State Case Analysis 6: Korea 67 Country Case Analysis 7: China 75 Country Case Analysis 8: Brazil 85 Country Case Analysis Chapter xxx FROM RELIGION TO REALITY: Energy systems transformation for sustainable prosperity1 John Zysman2 and Mark Huberty3 ©BRIE 1 Earlier versions of this paper were pre- 2 John Zysman is Professor of Political pared for the European Council Informal Science, University of California Berkeley Competitiveness Discussion − Internal and Co-Director, Berkeley Roundtable on Market during the Belgian Presidency the International Economy. Brussels, September 30, 2010; and Green Korea 2010: Strengthening Glo- 3 Mark Huberty is a Ph.D. Candidate in bal Green Growth Strategy: Policy and Political Science at the University of Cali- Cooperation."September 9, Seoul Korea, fornia Berkeley and Graduate Researcher sponsored by the National Research Coun- at the Berkeley Roundtable on the Interna- cil for Economics, Humanities, and Social tional Economy.
  • Big Oil's Oily Grasp

    Big Oil's Oily Grasp

    Big Oil’s Oily Grasp The making of Canada as a Petro-State and how oil money is corrupting Canadian politics Daniel Cayley-Daoust and Richard Girard Polaris Institute December 2012 The Polaris Institute is a public interest research organization based in Canada. Since 1997 Polaris has been dedicated to developing tools and strategies to take action on major public policy issues, including the corporate power that lies behind public policy making, on issues of energy security, water rights, climate change, green economy and global trade. Polaris Institute 180 Metcalfe Street, Suite 500 Ottawa, ON K2P 1P5 Phone: 613-237-1717 Fax: 613-237-3359 Email: [email protected] www.polarisinstitute.org Cover image by Malkolm Boothroyd Table of Contents Introduction 1 1. Corporations and Industry Associations 3 2. Lobby Firms and Consultant Lobbyists 7 3. Transparency 9 4. Conclusion 11 Appendices Appendix A, Companies ranked by Revenue 13 Appendix B, Companies ranked by # of Communications 15 Appendix C, Industry Associations ranked by # of Communications 16 Appendix D, Consultant lobby firms and companies represented 17 Appendix E, List of individual petroleum industry consultant Lobbyists 18 Appendix F, Recurring topics from communications reports 21 References 22 ii Glossary of Acronyms AANDC Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada CAN Climate Action Network CAPP Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers CEAA Canadian Environmental Assessment Act CEPA Canadian Energy Pipelines Association CGA Canadian Gas Association DPOH