DOCSLIB.ORG

API Gravity Level Between 19 to 22 ‒ Sulfur (Wt%) 2.8 - 3.5% ‒ TAN (Total Acid Number) of Mg KOH/G 0.93

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
API Gravity Level Between 19 to 22 ‒ Sulfur (Wt%) 2.8 - 3.5% ‒ TAN (Total Acid Number) of Mg KOH/G 0.93 #KPMGIgnite Join the conversation Why it’s time to take the bear by the horns Christine Colbert Welcome Christine Colbert Senior Manager, Risk Consulting, Financial Risk Management © 2016 KPMG LLP, a Canadian limited liability partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity. All rights reserved. The KPMG name and logo are registered trademarks or trademarks of KPMG International. Agenda – History of WCS – World crude oil pricing – WCS pricing – Trading opportunities – Hedging opportunities – Developing a strategy – Conclusion © 2016 KPMG LLP, a Canadian limited liability partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity. All rights reserved. The KPMG name and logo are registered trademarks or trademarks of KPMG International. History of WCS Crude oil pricing Western Canadian Select (WCS) Western Texas Intermediate (WTI) Brent • Price is quoted at Hardisty, • Price is quoted at Cushing, • Price is quoted at Sullom Alberta Oklahoma Voe, UK • Trades on the Chicago • Trades on the New York • Trades on the Mercantile Exchange (CME) Mercantile Exchange Intercontinental Exchange as a differential to WTI (NYMEX) (ICE) • Benchmark crude oil in the • Benchmark crude oil for the • Leading global price Canadian market North American market benchmark for Atlantic basin • The differential is also • Also known as Texas Light crude oils referred to as the Heavy Oil Sweet • Used to price two thirds of Discount the world’s internationally traded crude oil supplies © 2016 KPMG LLP, a Canadian limited liability partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity. All rights reserved. The KPMG name and logo are registered trademarks or trademarks of KPMG International. History of WCS Western Canadian Select background Western Canadian Select (WCS) was launched in December 2004 as a new heavy oil stream by EnCana (now Cenovus), Canadian Natural Resources Limited, Petro-Canada (now Suncor) and Talisman Energy Inc. WCS is a heavy blended crude oil. It's composition consists of: 1. Heavy conventional and unconventional oil streams 2. Bitumen 3. Sweet synthetic crude oil 4. Condensate diluents The blending of WCS occurs at the Husky terminal in Hardisty, Alberta The blended WCS must adhere to the following specifications: ‒ API Gravity Level between 19 to 22 ‒ Sulfur (Wt%) 2.8 - 3.5% ‒ TAN (Total Acid number) of Mg KOH/g 0.93 © 2016 KPMG LLP, a Canadian limited liability partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity. All rights reserved. The KPMG name and logo are registered trademarks or trademarks of KPMG International. API Sulphur Transport TAN What drives the differential? Gravity Content Cost API Gravity ‒ American Petroleum Institute (API) Gravity is the measure of how heavy or light a petroleum liquid is compared to water ‒ The API Gravity is quantified in degrees; where a higher value defines a lighter liquid ‒ An API Gravity of over 10º describes the liquid as light enough to float on water ‒ A higher API Gravity is more desirable because it requires less effort to process and transport © 2016 KPMG LLP, a Canadian limited liability partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity. All rights reserved. The KPMG name and logo are registered trademarks or trademarks of KPMG International. API Sulphur Transport TAN What drives the differential? Gravity Content Cost Sulphur content ‒ Sulfur content is another measure to the quality of crude oil ‒ The sulfur level is measured in weight percentage (Wt%) WTI (0.24%) Brent (0.37%) ‒ A sulfur level of greater than 0.5% is specified as “sour” and contains more impurities Sweet ‒ Sweet crude is more desirable because there are less processing costs to refine and remove impurities 0.50% Sour WCS (3.43%) © 2016 KPMG LLP, a Canadian limited liability partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity. All rights reserved. The KPMG name and logo are registered trademarks or trademarks of KPMG International. API Sulphur Transport TAN What drives the differential? Gravity Content Cost Total Acid Number (TAN) ‒ TAN refers to the total acid number and provides an identification of how acidic the crude oil is Brent (0.07) ‒ A TAN value of greater than 1.0 is considered “high-TAN” WTI (0.11) ‒ The higher the TAN value, the riskier it is to process; as it can cause corrosion to refinery Low-TAN equipment (TAN levels below 0.5 are believed to not pose any corrosion risk for refiners) ‒ High-TAN crudes are discounted because there are a limited number of refineries with the specification to process it WCS (0.93) 1.0 High-TAN High-TAN © 2016 KPMG LLP, a Canadian limited liability partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity. All rights reserved. The KPMG name and logo are registered trademarks or trademarks of KPMG International. API Sulphur Transport TAN What drives the differential? Gravity Content Cost Transport cost ‒ Transporting crude oil can be performed via pipeline, railroad and tanker ‒ Tanker is less costly but is the slowest mode of transportation ‒ Rail is most expensive and is less efficient compared to pipeline, but has greater access ‒ Pipeline is the most efficient means of transportation but is limited by capacity available ‒ Alberta is considered landlocked and has greater difficulty in transporting its crude oil to refiners and global markets ‒ To remain competitive in the market, WCS is discounted to account for the transportation costs to move its volume SOURCE: CAPP, KEYSTONE XL REGULATORY FILINGS (COURTESY TRANSCANADA & CRUDECOALITION.ORG) © 2016 KPMG LLP, a Canadian limited liability partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity. All rights reserved. The KPMG name and logo are registered trademarks or trademarks of KPMG International. World crude oil pricing World crude oil pricing Crude Oil Price Index Comparison WTI vs. Brent 160 Brent 140 WTI 120 100 80 60 USD BBL / USD 40 20 0 Source: Independent Statistics & Analysis U.S Energy Information Administration © 2016 KPMG LLP, a Canadian limited liability partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity. All rights reserved. The KPMG name and logo are registered trademarks or trademarks of KPMG International. World crude oil pricing Crude Oil Price Index Comparison WTI vs. Brent 160 Brent 140 WTI 120 100 80 60 USD BBL / USD 40 20 0 Source: Independent Statistics & Analysis U.S Energy Information Administration © 2016 KPMG LLP, a Canadian limited liability partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity. All rights reserved. The KPMG name and logo are registered trademarks or trademarks of KPMG International. World crude oil pricing Crude Oil Price Index Comparison WTI vs. Brent 160 Brent 140 WTI 120 100 80 60 USD BBL / USD 40 20 0 Source: Independent Statistics & Analysis U.S Energy Information Administration © 2016 KPMG LLP, a Canadian limited liability partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity. All rights reserved. The KPMG name and logo are registered trademarks or trademarks of KPMG International. WCS pricing WCS pricing Average monthly prices for Brent, WTI and WCS ‒ WCS - Most liquid benchmark for heavy oil in Western Canada ‒ Stable differential from increased demand from refineries and reduced output from traditional suppliers 140 120 Brent WTI 100 2009 WCS 80 60 $USD/BBL 40 20 0 Jan-2009 Jan-2010 Jan-2011 Jan-2012 Jan-2013 Jan-2014 Jan-2015 Jan-2016 Source: The Government of Alberta, Economic Dashboard © 2016 KPMG LLP, a Canadian limited liability partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity. All rights reserved. The KPMG name and logo are registered trademarks or trademarks of KPMG International. WCS pricing Average monthly prices for Brent, WTI and WCS ‒ WCS differential increased and had increased volatility ‒ Transportation constraints from service disruptions led to decreased shipments to US mid-continent refineries 140 120 Brent WTI 100 WCS $USD/BBL 80 60 40 2010 -2011 20 0 Jan-2009 Jan-2010 Jan-2011 Jan-2012 Jan-2013 Jan-2014 Jan-2015 Jan-2016 Source: The Government of Alberta, Economic Dashboard © 2016 KPMG LLP, a Canadian limited liability partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity. All rights reserved. The KPMG name and logo are registered trademarks or trademarks of KPMG International. WCS pricing Average monthly prices for Brent, WTI and WCS ‒ WCS differential continues to grow due to capacity constraints, increased production of Canadian heavy oil and maintenance at refineries 140 120 Brent WTI 100 WCS $USD/BBL 80 60 40 2013 20 0 Jan-2009 Jan-2010 Jan-2011 Jan-2012 Jan-2013 Jan-2014 Jan-2015 Jan-2016 Source: The Government of Alberta, Economic Dashboard © 2016 KPMG LLP, a Canadian limited liability partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity. All rights reserved.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Unconventional Gas and Oil in North America Page 1 of 24
    Unconventional gas and oil in North America This publication aims to provide insight into the impacts of the North American 'shale revolution' on US energy markets and global energy flows. The main economic, environmental and climate impacts are highlighted. Although the North American experience can serve as a model for shale gas and tight oil development elsewhere, the document does not explicitly address the potential of other regions. Manuscript completed in June 2014. Disclaimer and copyright This publication does not necessarily represent the views of the author or the European Parliament. Reproduction and translation of this document for non-commercial purposes are authorised, provided the source is acknowledged and the publisher is given prior notice and sent a copy. © European Union, 2014. Photo credits: © Trueffelpix / Fotolia (cover page), © bilderzwerg / Fotolia (figure 2) [email protected] http://www.eprs.ep.parl.union.eu (intranet) http://www.europarl.europa.eu/thinktank (internet) http://epthinktank.eu (blog) Unconventional gas and oil in North America Page 1 of 24 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The 'shale revolution' Over the past decade, the United States and Canada have experienced spectacular growth in the production of unconventional fossil fuels, notably shale gas and tight oil, thanks to technological innovations such as horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing (fracking). Economic impacts This new supply of energy has led to falling gas prices and a reduction of energy imports. Low gas prices have benefitted households and industry, especially steel production, fertilisers, plastics and basic petrochemicals. The production of tight oil is costly, so that a high oil price is required to make it economically viable.
    [Show full text]
  • Statoil-2015-Statutory-Report.Pdf
    2015 Statutory report in accordance with Norwegian authority requirements © Statoil 2016 STATOIL ASA BOX 8500 NO-4035 STAVANGER NORWAY TELEPHONE: +47 51 99 00 00 www.statoil.com Cover photo: Øyvind Hagen Statutory report 2015 Board of directors report ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 3 The Statoil share ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 4 Our business ..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 4 Group profit and loss analysis .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 6 Cash flows ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Athabasca Oil Corporation Takes Further Actions in Response to The
    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE ‐ April 2, 2020 Athabasca Oil Corporation Takes Further Actions in Response to the Current Environment CALGARY – Athabasca Oil Corporation (TSX: ATH) (“Athabasca” or the “Company”) is taking further immediate actions in response to the significant decline in global oil prices to bolster balance sheet strength and corporate resiliency. Shut‐in of Hangingstone Asset Due to the significant decline in oil prices combined with the economic uncertainty associated to the ongoing COVID crisis, Athabasca has decided to suspend the Hangingstone SAGD operation. This suspension was initiated on April 2, 2020 and will involve shutting in the well pairs, halting steam injection to the reservoir, and taking measures to preserve the processing facility and pipelines in a safe manner so that it could be re‐started at a future date when the economy has recovered. The Hangingstone asset has an operating break‐even of approximately US$37.50 Western Canadian Select and this action is expected to significantly improve corporate resiliency in the current environment. As part of this action, Athabasca is reducing its corporate staff count by 15%. Hangingstone was Athabasca’s first operated oil sands project that began construction in 2013 and was commissioned in 2015. The Company would like to thank all staff that have worked hard over the years to bring this asset on stream. It is unfortunate that made‐in‐Alberta assets like Hangingstone cannot continue operations under current prices. Revised 2020 Guidance Annual corporate guidance is 30,000 – 31,500 boe/d and reflects a ~2,500 boe/d reduction related to the shut‐in.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S.-Canada Cross- Border Petroleum Trade
    U.S.-Canada Cross- Border Petroleum Trade: An Assessment of Energy Security and Economic Benefits March 2021 Submitted to: American Petroleum Institute 200 Massachusetts Ave NW Suite 1100, Washington, DC 20001 Submitted by: Kevin DeCorla-Souza ICF Resources L.L.C. 9300 Lee Hwy Fairfax, VA 22031 U.S.-Canada Cross-Border Petroleum Trade: An Assessment of Energy Security and Economic Benefits This report was commissioned by the American Petroleum Institute (API) 2 U.S.-Canada Cross-Border Petroleum Trade: An Assessment of Energy Security and Economic Benefits Table of Contents I. Executive Summary ...................................................................................................... 4 II. Introduction ................................................................................................................... 6 III. Overview of U.S.-Canada Petroleum Trade ................................................................. 7 U.S.-Canada Petroleum Trade Volumes Have Surged ........................................................... 7 Petroleum Is a Major Component of Total U.S.-Canada Bilateral Trade ................................. 8 IV. North American Oil Production and Refining Markets Integration ...........................10 U.S.-Canada Oil Trade Reduces North American Dependence on Overseas Crude Oil Imports ..................................................................................................................................10 Cross-Border Pipelines Facilitate U.S.-Canada Oil Market Integration...................................14
    [Show full text]
  • Canadian Crude Oil and Natural Gas Production and Supply Costs Outlook (2016 – 2036)
    Study No. 159 September 2016 CANADIAN CANADIAN CRUDE OIL AND NATURAL GAS ENERGY PRODUCTION AND SUPPLY COSTS OUTLOOK RESEARCH INSTITUTE (2016 – 2036) Canadian Energy Research Institute | Relevant • Independent • Objective CANADIAN CRUDE OIL AND NATURAL GAS PRODUCTION AND SUPPLY COSTS OUTLOOK (2016 – 2036) Canadian Crude Oil and Natural Gas Production and Supply Costs Outlook (2016 – 2036) Authors: Laura Johnson Paul Kralovic* Andrei Romaniuk ISBN 1-927037-43-0 Copyright © Canadian Energy Research Institute, 2016 Sections of this study may be reproduced in magazines and newspapers with acknowledgement to the Canadian Energy Research Institute September 2016 Printed in Canada Front photo courtesy of istockphoto.com Acknowledgements: The authors of this report would like to extend their thanks and sincere gratitude to all CERI staff involved in the production and editing of the material, including but not limited to Allan Fogwill, Dinara Millington and Megan Murphy. *Paul Kralovic is Director, Frontline Economics Inc. ABOUT THE CANADIAN ENERGY RESEARCH INSTITUTE The Canadian Energy Research Institute is an independent, not-for-profit research establishment created through a partnership of industry, academia, and government in 1975. Our mission is to provide relevant, independent, objective economic research in energy and environmental issues to benefit business, government, academia and the public. We strive to build bridges between scholarship and policy, combining the insights of scientific research, economic analysis, and practical experience. For more information about CERI, visit www.ceri.ca CANADIAN ENERGY RESEARCH INSTITUTE 150, 3512 – 33 Street NW Calgary, Alberta T2L 2A6 Email: [email protected] Phone: 403-282-1231 Canadian Crude Oil and Natural Gas Production and Supply Costs Outlook iii (2016 – 2036) Table of Contents LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Unconventional Oil Resources Exploitation: a Review
    Acta Montanistica Slovaca Volume 21 (2016), number 3, 247-257 Unconventional oil resources exploitation: A review Šárka Vilamová 1, Marian Piecha 2 and Zden ěk Pavelek 3 Unconventional crude oil sources are geographically extensive and include the tar sands of the Province of Alberta in Canada, the heavy oil belt of the Orinoco region of Venezuela and the oil shales of the United States, Brazil, India and Malagasy. High production costs and low oil prices have hitherto inhibited the inclusion of unconventional oil resources in the world oil resource figures. In the last decade, developing production technologies, coupled with the higher market value of oil, convert large quantities of unconventional oil into an effective resource. From the aspect of quantity and technological and economic recoverability are actually the most important tar sands. Tar sands can be recovered via surface mining or in-situ collection techniques. This is an up-stream part of exploitation process. Again, this is more expensive than lifting conventional petroleum, but for example, Canada's Athabasca (Alberta) Tar Sands is one example of unconventional reserve that can be economically recoverable with the largest surface mining machinery on the waste landscape with important local but also global environmental impacts. The similar technology of up-stream process concerns oil shales. The downstream part process of solid unconventional oil is an energetically difficult process of separation and refining with important increasing of additive carbon production and increasing of final product costs. In the region of Central Europe is estimated the mean volume of 168 million barrels of technically recoverable oil and natural gas liquids situated in Ordovician and Silurian age shales in the Polish- Ukrainian Foredeep basin of Poland.
    [Show full text]
  • Trends in U.S. Oil and Natural Gas Upstream Costs
    Trends in U.S. Oil and Natural Gas Upstream Costs March 2016 Independent Statistics & Analysis U.S. Department of Energy www.eia.gov Washington, DC 20585 This report was prepared by the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), the statistical and analytical agency within the U.S. Department of Energy. By law, EIA’s data, analyses, and forecasts are independent of approval by any other officer or employee of the United States Government. The views in this report therefore should not be construed as representing those of the Department of Energy or other federal agencies. U.S. Energy Information Administration | Trends in U.S. Oil and Natural Gas Upstream Costs i March 2016 Contents Summary .................................................................................................................................................. 1 Onshore costs .......................................................................................................................................... 2 Offshore costs .......................................................................................................................................... 5 Approach .................................................................................................................................................. 6 Appendix ‐ IHS Oil and Gas Upstream Cost Study (Commission by EIA) ................................................. 7 I. Introduction……………..………………….……………………….…………………..……………………….. IHS‐3 II. Summary of Results and Conclusions – Onshore Basins/Plays…..………………..…….…
    [Show full text]
  • Chicap-Crude-List-7-15-2020.Pdf
    Chicap Crude List Commodity Gravity Sulfur Pour Point RVP Viscosity (cST) at listed temperature in Fahrenheit Crude Oil Name Identifier Type Origin °API @60°F mass% °F psi 40°F 50°F 68°F 86°F 104°F Bakken BAK sw USA 42.5 0.080 -71 10.21 4.1 3.6 2.9 2.5 2.0 Grand Mesa Light GML sw USA 48.7 0.060 5 10.67 2.9 2.7 2.2 1.9 1.6 Grand Mesa Sweet@Cushing GMS sw USA 40.2 0.206 32 8.26 7.2 6.0 4.6 3.6 3.0 Mississippi Lime MSL sw USA 34.3 0.519 -11 6.27 16.1 13.2 9.6 7.2 6 Niobrara @Cushing Pony PL NIB sw USA 37.5 0.402 27 8.11 11.1 8.8 6.7 5.1 4.0 Niobrara @Saddlehorn SSC sw USA 43.2 0.144 -38 9.55 5.3 4.5 3.5 2.8 2.3 Permian Sour Blend PRM sw USA 41.9 0.281 -6 8.03 5.1 4.4 3.5 2.8 2.3 Saddlehorn Intermediate SHM sw USA 42.5 0.137 21 10.67 5.6 4.9 3.8 3.1 2.6 Saddlehorn Light SHL sw USA 48.4 0.058 -33 10.54 2.8 2.5 2.1 1.8 1.6 SCOOP SCP sw USA 54.4 0.015 -71 10.77 2.0 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.2 STACK STK sw USA 41.9 0.079 -22 9.71 7.1 6.4 4.9 4.0 3.2 Stack Light STL sw USA 47.4 0.022 5 8.17 3.6 3.3 2.7 2.3 2.0 US High Sweet @Clearbrook UHC sw USA 42.1 0.120 -71 9.78 4.7 4.1 3.2 2.6 2.2 West Oklahoma Sweet WOS sw USA 49.0 0.025 -38 7.84 3.1 2.8 2.3 1.9 1.7 Whitecliffs Condensate WCC sw USA 48.5 0.141 -71 8.82 2.5 2.5 2.1 1.9 1.6 WTI @Cushing - Domestic Sweet DSW sw USA 41.2 0.400 -38 7.69 6.7 5.7 4.4 3.5 2.8 WTI - Midland WTM sw USA 43.6 0.163 -11 7.13 5.3 4.5 3.4 2.7 2.3 WTS (West Texas Sour) C so USA 32.9 1.64 -23 5.67 18.0 14.3 9.9 7.2 5.5 Access Western Blend AWB H Canada 21.6 3.79 -46 6.67 672 457 248 145 91.0 Albian Heavy Synthetic AHS H Canada 20.0
    [Show full text]
  • Oil and Gas Technologies Supplemental Information
    Quadrennial Technology Review 2015 Chapter 7: Advancing Systems and Technologies to Produce Cleaner Fuels Supplemental Information Oil and Gas Technologies Subsurface Science, Technology, and Engineering U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Quadrennial Technology Review 2015 Oil and Gas Technologies Chapter 7: Advancing Systems and Technologies to Produce Cleaner Fuels Oil and Gas in the Energy Economy of the United States Fossil fuel resources account for 82% of total U.S. primary energy use because they are abundant, have a relatively low cost of production, and have a high energy density—enabling easy transport and storage. The infrastructure built over decades to supply fossil fuels is the world’s largest enterprise with the largest market capitalization. Of fossil fuels, oil and natural gas make up 63% of energy usage.1 Across the energy economy, the source and mix of fuels used across these sectors is changing, particularly the rapid increase in natural gas production from unconventional resources for electricity generation and the rapid increase in domestic production of shale oil. While oil and gas fuels are essential for the United States’ and the global economy, they also pose challenges: Economic: They must be delivered to users and the markets at competitive prices that encourage economic growth. High fuel prices and/or price volatility can impede this progress. Security: They must be available to the nation in a reliable, continuous way that supports national security and economic needs. Disruption of international fuel supply lines presents a serious geopolitical risk. Environment: They must be supplied and used in ways that have minimal environmental impacts on local, national, and global ecosystems and enables their sustainability.
    [Show full text]
  • 2018 ANNUAL INFORMATION FORM Suncor Energy Inc
    11FEB201917213713 ANNUAL INFORMATION FORM Dated February 28, 2019 Suncor Energy Inc. 19FEB201920364295 ANNUAL INFORMATION FORM DATED FEBRUARY 28, 2019 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 Advisories 2 Glossary of Terms and Abbreviations 2 Common Industry Terms 4 Common Abbreviations 4 Conversion Table 5 Corporate Structure 5 Name, Address and Incorporation 5 Intercorporate Relationships 6 General Development of the Business 6 Overview 7 Three-Year History 10 Narrative Description of Suncor’s Businesses 10 Oil Sands 15 Exploration and Production 19 Refining and Marketing 23 Other Suncor Businesses 24 Suncor Employees 24 Ethics, Social and Environmental Policies 26 Statement of Reserves Data and Other Oil and Gas Information 28 Oil and Gas Reserves Tables and Notes 33 Future Net Revenues Tables and Notes 39 Additional Information Relating to Reserves Data 51 Industry Conditions 58 Risk Factors 68 Dividends 69 Description of Capital Structure 71 Market for Securities 72 Directors and Executive Officers 78 Audit Committee Information 80 Legal Proceedings and Regulatory Actions 80 Interests of Management and Others in Material Transactions 80 Transfer Agent and Registrar 80 Material Contracts 80 Interests of Experts 81 Disclosure Pursuant to the Requirements of the NYSE 81 Additional Information 82 Advisory – Forward-Looking Information and Non-GAAP Financial Measures Schedules A-1 SCHEDULE ‘‘A’’ – AUDIT COMMITTEE MANDATE B-1 SCHEDULE ‘‘B’’ – SUNCOR ENERGY INC. POLICY AND PROCEDURES FOR PRE-APPROVAL OF AUDIT AND NON-AUDIT SERVICES C-1 SCHEDULE ‘‘C’’ – FORM 51-101F2 REPORT ON RESERVES DATA BY INDEPENDENT QUALIFIED RESERVES EVALUATOR OR AUDITOR D-1 SCHEDULE ‘‘D’’ – FORM 51-101F2 REPORT ON RESERVES DATA BY INDEPENDENT QUALIFIED RESERVES EVALUATOR OR AUDITOR E-1 SCHEDULE ‘‘E’’ – FORM 51-101F3 REPORT OF MANAGEMENT AND DIRECTORS ON RESERVES DATA AND OTHER INFORMATION ADVISORIES In this Annual Information Form (AIF), references to ‘‘Suncor’’ each year in the two-year period ended December 31, 2018.
    [Show full text]
  • Consolidated Financial Statements and Auditor's Report
    WorldReginfo - 772dcdb9-06b0-4e41-9a7e-e370402a651f WorldReginfo - 772dcdb9-06b0-4e41-9a7e-e370402a651f WorldReginfo - 772dcdb9-06b0-4e41-9a7e-e370402a651f WorldReginfo - 772dcdb9-06b0-4e41-9a7e-e370402a651f WorldReginfo - 772dcdb9-06b0-4e41-9a7e-e370402a651f WorldReginfo - 772dcdb9-06b0-4e41-9a7e-e370402a651f WorldReginfo - 772dcdb9-06b0-4e41-9a7e-e370402a651f WorldReginfo - 772dcdb9-06b0-4e41-9a7e-e370402a651f WorldReginfo - 772dcdb9-06b0-4e41-9a7e-e370402a651f WorldReginfo - 772dcdb9-06b0-4e41-9a7e-e370402a651f WorldReginfo - 772dcdb9-06b0-4e41-9a7e-e370402a651f WorldReginfo - 772dcdb9-06b0-4e41-9a7e-e370402a651f WorldReginfo - 772dcdb9-06b0-4e41-9a7e-e370402a651f REPSOL Group 2017 Consolidated financial statements Translation of a report originally issued in Spanish. In the event of a discrepancy, the Spanish language version prevails WorldReginfo - 772dcdb9-06b0-4e41-9a7e-e370402a651f Translation of a report originally issued in Spanish. In the event of a discrepancy, the Spanish language version prevails. Repsol, S.A. and investees comprising the Repsol Group Balance sheet at December 31, 2017 and 2016 € Million ASSETS Note 12/31/2017 12/31/2016 Intangible assets: 10 4,584 5,109 a) Goodwill 2,764 3,115 b) Other intangible assets 1,820 1,994 Property, plant and equipment 11 24,600 27,297 Investment property 67 66 Investments accounted for using the equity method 12 9,268 10,176 Non-current financial assets 7 2,038 1,204 Deferred tax assets 23 4,057 4,746 Other non-current assets 7 472 323 NON-CURRENT ASSETS 45,086 48,921 Non-current
    [Show full text]
  • Status of Unconventional Oil and Gas Development in Pennsylvania
    STATUS OF UNCONVENTIONAL OIL AND GAS DEVELOPMENT IN PENNSYLVANIA Pennsylvania is several years into unconventional oil and gas development – the early years of what some are calling a multi-decade shale energy boom. The regulatory environment is shifting, laws are being updated, and media and public attention are high. The issues related to accessing this resource have become politically and emotionally charged, with a significant amount of misinformation in the marketplace. While shale gas development presents a unique economic and energy opportunity for Pennsylvania and its surrounding states, development of these resources also presents substantial challenges for our region in the areas of water resources management, air quality, infrastructure maintenance, housing, and community quality of life, along with other environmental and public health impacts. The Marcellus Shale is the most well-known and actively producing formation in the northeastern United States. It underlies a 95,000-square-mile tract from West Virginia through Pennsylvania and into southern New York and includes sections of Ohio, Virginia, and Maryland. The Marcellus Shale ranges from a depth of zero feet in central Pennsylvania to more than 9,000 feet below the surface in parts of southwestern and northeastern Pennsylvania.1 It ranges in thickness from about 250 feet in eastern Pennsylvania to only a few feet thick in Ohio and is typically about 50 feet thick along the Ohio River.2 As Table 1 demonstrates, the Marcellus Shale is the largest shale gas play in the United States and is conservatively estimated to contain approximately 84.2 trillion cubic feet (Tcf) of technically recoverable natural gas.
    [Show full text]