Good afternoon, everybody. Welcome to TotalEnergies Sustainability and Climate Workshop. It's a full afternoon dedicated to sustainability. I hope that you got time to download our sustainability and climate report, which is very rich in terms of information. And today, the idea is really to illustrate the report. We have a program which was set up, which is a new format again, which was set up to illustrate the report through various sequences. We'll have a first sequence, very quick one, where Patrick Pouyanné will come back on our transition strategy. And then we'll have three sequences, one on climate, with different speakers, Aurélien Hamelle, who is our new director for sustainability and climate, who will be talking about our climate ambition.
And then we'll have Arnaud Le Foll about Scope 1 and 2, Jean-Marc Durand and Christophe Sassolas. Then we'll have so you will see that we have plenty of time for questions. So the idea this afternoon is really to give time for Q&A. So, of course, we'll have sessions, full day sessions, where you will be able to ask any questions you have. We'll have the Q&A on the climate workshop, a break, 15 minutes for the people who are connected, so you will be able to to have a break as well, online, and then we'll resume after 15 minutes. And then we'll have two other sessions, the people workshop with Namita and Pierre, followed by a Q&A.
And then another one, which will be dedicated to Africa, with Mike Sangster and Jean-Philippe Torres, also followed by a Q&A. So plenty of time for questions, Q&A. Let's start the afternoon with what is the routine at TotalEnergies when we are starting a meeting in the afternoon, which is a sustainability moment. So I'm asking Jean-Philippe to come on stage. Please, Jean-Philippe.
Good afternoon, everyone. I'm Jean-Philippe Torres. I'm Senior Vice President in charge of Africa in the marketing and services branch. So for this sustainability moment, I would like to talk about safety, because actually, safety is key in the sustainability of our business. And more precisely, I would like to talk about road safety, because road safety is definitely a major risk for TotalEnergies. Just for you to understand, I will give you two figures. In the marketing and services branch, every day, almost every day, we work with 10,000 trucks, and these trucks drive 450 million kms a year. So you imagine the risk we have on the road every day.
This is why I wanted to show you one figure, or a series of figures, which is the evolution of the number of severe road accidents we had in the company and with our contractors, between 2015 and 2023. As you can see on the graph you have in front of you, this number was almost 70 in 2015, and it was 11 last year. Obviously, it's not by chance.
It's the result of many, many programs implemented at the company level, including the one which is written here, the Safe Driver program, which includes, obviously, drivers training, which includes technical specification for our trucks, including cameras, onboard computers connected to the affiliates, including now anti-fatigue cameras. And all this allowed us to improve, as you can see, our figures and the safety of our operations. And these programs were for us, for the staff of the company, but also for the contractors. And it pays off. And this is maybe the reason, or most likely the reason, why TotalEnergies was, last year, the first private company to receive a three-star in the Fédération Internationale de l'Automobile Road Safety Index.
So this is what I wanted to tell you. Obviously, these results are good, but it's not the end of the story. 11 accidents is definitely too high. We have to work again, again, and again with all our stakeholders, to continue to improve the road safety of our operations. Thank you very much, and now I leave the floor to Patrick Pouyanné.
Good afternoon. By the way, this engagement with the FIA was, in fact, driven by the TotalEnergies Foundation, which have accompanied the Fédération Internationale de l'Automobile many programs to promote safety on the roads in Africa, in particular, where we are involved. Good afternoon, everybody. Just, I want just to set the scene in a few slides because we will, of course, as Renaud told you, the purpose of this afternoon is for you to illustrate the sustainability and climate report for different business cases, which will be presented to you. I just wanted, because, of course, this results is.
... to set the scene of the transition strategy we are putting in action, you will recognize the slide. We don't change the strategy. It's a consistent strategy since 2020, and I just wanted to remind you the framework in which the company is working. So we have some macro trends. We know that, in fact, when we look to macro trends, the growing energy demand, demand of energy continue to grow, and in fact, it grows by an average over 20 years by 1.8%. If we look, in fact, more carefully the last 10 years, it's 1.2%, and plus 1.2% per year is in fact in line with the growing population. So today, you have a sort of demand of energy. Why?
Because we have a growing population on the planet, and of course, in the emerging countries, there is an aspiration to higher living standards, which require more energy. Even if, of course, we have also to counterbalance with growing balance demand, some energy efficiency gains. But we know that it's one of the challenges. It's why in the COP28 consensus, or I don't know what you call it, the Dubai agreement, there was a call for doubling efficiency, energy efficiency. I must tell you, I think it's probably one of the most challenging call, because when we observe the long trends on energy efficiencies, we are more around one point, 1.5% per year, and we know that we should ... To go to 3%, it's clearly one of the strong challenge.
When we look on the same side, what happened on the supply side, you can see that, in fact, on this slide, the primary energy demand was 1.8% . As I told you, when you look to the oil demand, it's 1.2%, by the way, on 20 years. So in fact, population, energy on the last 10 years and oil demand is growing more or less in parallel. Of course, we are investing a lot, every bit more and more in renewable energy, but when you look because of the increase of demand in 2022, these are the, the to just renewable energies, we are covering 40% of the increase of the demand for energy, and not yet fully.
That's why, in fact, COP28, there was a second fundamental call, which was tripling renewables. Because when you-- if we manage to tripling renewable capacity, then at 1.2%, you will cover the increase of the, the yearly increase of the demand would be covered by low-carbon energy, in fact. And then, of course, we'll have to, to do more if we want to, be able to change the, the base of the pattern today, which is 80% fossil fuels. But it's just to underline, that's why we, we supported, we supported the, the, the Dubai, consensus. But the two fundamental scores were effectively well, I would say, framed: doubling energy efficiency, tripling renewables. And as you know, the oil and gas industry, production on this side has a natural decline of -4% per year.
So that means that as and tripling renewable is not yet done, as we don't convert yet the annual demand increase, if we do not invest in new oil and gas fields, then there will be a gap, a sort of supply crunch, which will be translated in higher prices, which, as we have observed in the last two years, customers are not fully ready to support. So in this framework, the strategy of TotalEnergies and the transition strategy we have decided for the company is to have, in fact, to work on two pillars. What we continue, of course, to support the energy of today, and the energy of today, for us, it's oil and gas, just because I explained to you.
And so that's the first pillar of the strategy, to contribute to, in fact, bring to customers the energy they need today, as long as we do not manage to change to go to a decarbonized system. But we also, and the second pillar, invest in contributing to build the what I call the system B, with a low-carbon energy system, which will be, which is required if we want to make to meet the Net Zero target by 2050. So on both sides, on oil and gas, we are focusing on what we call low cost, low emission barrels. We will, as the presentation will explain to you what it means.
And we are mostly focusing, in fact, when we look to oil and gas, also to on gas, LNG, because gas is partly contributing to the transition in two ways. One way is that, as renewable energy are intermittent, when you want to produce a firm power on the electricity side, you need to combine your renewables to cover the intermittency with flexible assets. It could be batteries, but gas-fired power plants are, in fact, clearly also this type of flexible assets to deliver clean, firm power to the customer. The second reason is that if you manage to transition coal-fired power plant to gas-fired power plant, the emissions are lower. Of course, gas, you immediately add the question of methane, and we will come back on it. That's why, by the way, we have strong, very stringent targets on methane emissions in the company.
As you know, this reminds you that this company has been there for 100 years. We'll celebrate the anniversary on 28 March , next week. And so this strategy is designed to continue to find a way to go through over 100 years. Just, when we say that we have the ambition to be a net-zero company in 2050, together with society, this is a vision of what could be the company, in fact, in 2050, if we want to reach this net zero. And in fact, we put in this slide on the one on the left side, you have what the IEA Net Zero scenario-...
energy mix described, it's 59-60% energy, electricity, 25% bioenergy, and you still have, but only 15-16% of fossil fuel. So when we try to set what could be done for the company, obviously, if we want to be net zero, the electricity and renewables need to become the major part of the company. That's why we are embarking in this strategy for another reason. It is the growing energy in the 21st century, because its decarbonization will go and with fundamentally electrification. And so we also imagine to produce some low-carbon molecules, either biofuels, hydrogen, or, I would say e-fuels, which is a symbol of CO2, circular CO2, it's e-fuels. And then to keep part of the hydrocarbons, but we put something around 25%.
It's a vision, and the question for us is how to get there. In terms of emissions, why we think it could be net zero? Such a company would have probably a. That's a target, it's a challenge, but would have a, we think, 10 million tons of Scope 1 and 2, and so we can find a way to compensate through natural carbon sinks, 10 million tons by that time, and would have a Scope 3 around 100 million tons. And there again, that's a challenge, but we should offer to other industries the capacity to for negative carbon sinks. So that's a vision. Between today and 2050, there is a lot of work to be done.
If we come on this decade, which on fit we are fully committed, and, for me, we the transition strategy we put in place, we must demonstrate we are able in the, the this decade to really, put it into action, and in particular, to build, to add to our portfolio a strong and profitable electricity arm business, this low-carbon business. So you can see that we translated, we have the ambition to, to produce more, in particular, produce more because the electricity part in, within TotalEnergies in 2023 is still, is still small, and we produced last year 20 terawatt-hour per year. So we want to go above 100 terawatt-hour per year. So if we represent 20% of the production, we, in fact, on the oil production, it's stable.
We decided that we should not go find looking for growth in oil production, in order to be able, if the demand begin to decline, to just to let the natural decline, in fact, take effect. And we have the gas, again, where on, on the contrary, we consider that investing in gas will support our ambition in integrated power and will also support our customers in many, emerging countries who are, in fact, buying gas in order to switch from coal to gas like the U.S. have done. So that's a vision, that which we translated from production to energy cells.
On this slide, this is, for me, the right index, the right KPI we follow carefully at the board level and myself, which is what is the carbon content of all the energy products that the company sell to its customers? Which means that this strategy, transition strategy must be translated in less carbon in our sales. And we have this index of 2015, one other. We set ourself an ambitious target when I compare to some of my peers, -25%. I remind you that last year it was we increased it, when we improved it from -20% to -25%. We are on the way. We have reported today, for 2023, -13%, -13 point something, by the way. And we are here, we are on the good track.
Of course, you can see that it's 1% per year until 25, and then it's 2% per year. Because of course, there is an acceleration, I would say. We are building, we are investing in a lot of, farm wind, renewable farms and assets, so this will come to fruition from more and more looking. By the way, this carbon intensity index, the board has decided to introduce it, you will see that, in the as a KPI for the performance shares, which will be attributed to the company. In the company, we were using Scope 1 and 2 into variable pay and k- performance shares.
We decided to keep scope one and two for the variable pay, but to introduce this carbon intensity index in the performance shares, which is, by the way, again, do we deliver fundamentally the transition strategy in terms of energy products we sell to customers? Aurélien will come back on it. Just, the framework, the CapEx, there is no change. Again, it's fundamentally, a discipline, sustainable capital investment. For the five-year plan, we said that we can invest $16 billion-$18 billion per year, 1/3 on these, low-carbon energies, fundamentally in integrated power, but also in some low-carbon molecules, SAF, which we are requiring during this decade, less capital, in fact, than building the, I would say, integrated power business. We are investing the rest, so two-third in oil and gas.
In fact, new projects, too, is around 30%. The rest is maintenance, because we have to maintain our assets, which are requiring quite a lot of CapEx. You can see on this slide that, too, we reported the taxonomy figures, which, by the way, I can just say that some people think it's complex. In our case, we just... The taxonomy just reflects exactly, in fact, the investment framework. You can see that we have CapEx eligible and aligned around 34%. So that's a transition. Another figure we mention on this slide, which is interesting for you, you know, when we invest in renewables, of course, we invest, we put in our CapEx investments, the equity. But, you know, we have, in fact, a policy to keep 50% of our assets, to have partners.
We prefer to diversify our assets, and in fact, we are also do it through leverage. We are using leverage to finance this CapEx. When we try to, and to make the calculation, which is of much, in fact, in global investments, do we support for equity in renewables and low-carbon CapEx? It's more $20 billion per year. So the third, the 33% that TotalEnergies is investing allow 30-20 billion per dollar per year of different projects, mainly, again, in the renewable power to to be to be developed... and so my team told me that with all this figure, there is a good case to be in- to be included in SFDR Article 8 funds, but that's your your job, this one.
The last slide I want to use, we have because we are here, we have opened the question about how do you share value creation within TotalEnergies? So we already show this slide, but, we took the example of 2023. Last year, we generated $67 billion in, of, I would say, added value. We put 1/4 , 25% in investment in the company, $17 billion. 1/4 in fact, 1/8 in dividend, 1/8 in buyback, coming back to shareholders. The salaries and social charges represent $10 billion. And taxes, because, in fact, the big stakeholder of TotalEnergies are the states around the planet. We paid 25, almost $25 billion in taxes to different states in the world.
Of course, mainly to producing countries, to be clear, where we have the set. So just to remind you some few figures, which are interesting, I think. Out of these taxes, $25 billion, $16 billion were paid to non-OECD countries. So we are quite a strong stakeholder for many emerging countries which are developing. We have 100,000 suppliers, which are also benefiting of our investments and OpEx. We purchase $30 billion per year, so of course, 100,000 suppliers, when we are acting to, in order to push them to integrate, I would say, sustainability, it's a very large work. The supply chain is a long one.
Over two other figures we wanted to put into the light, I think, is, among our 100,000 employees, we have 65,000 shareholders, so quite a strong commitment. And they own today, they are the largest shareholder in the company, in fact, the employees. They own now 8% of the capital. As you know, since I'm CEO, it's every year that we offer them to buy shares with some discount. And in fact, the reality is that they invest the same amount every year, but it was every two, three years.
So the commitment to the company is strong, and I'm absolutely convinced that when people speak to me about alignment between shareholders and employees, that it is the main tool we have to align the interest by through promoting shareholding by employees. And by the way, it's also a stable group of shareholders, which is fine. We have also highlighted another element, which is individual shareholders. I think, I'm not sure they include the employees. Maybe do they include the employees? Oh, no, no, I don't know. No? So on the top of the employees, we have 14% of our capital is owned by 1.6 million individuals, and in fact, it's growing, and in fact, it grown a lot in France during the COVID. Now, it's growing.
Last year, it was in the U.S., where we had more individuals buying the shares, so probably through different funds, but we have access to no database, and we have... So that's interesting to see, and I, again, of course, when you see the employees, individual shareholders, it's a group of 22%, which generally are, are quite stable in their... Stable, in particular for TotalEnergies, because we serve them a good, growing dividend through cycles. So of course, it's, the loyalty of the company to its shareholders is important. So I've been, just the introduction, and now I think it's, Aurélien who is, taking the floor.
Thank you.
You go to climate, and I will let you do.
Thank you, Patrick. So just one minute for people to set up. Good afternoon, everyone. Thank you, Patrick. I am Aurélien Hamelle. I'm the new president for strategy and sustainability. I have the very difficult task of stepping into Helle Kristoffersen's shoes. And what I'll be showing to you today in the next few slides is how everything that Patrick has just presented, our strategy and our transition, how does it translate actually in terms of greenhouse gas emissions for TotalEnergies? And we'll be looking at that from three angles. What have we achieved in 2023? Where are we going up until 2030? How are we going to get there? And we'll spend some time on that.
And finally, we'll also be looking at where does it put TotalEnergies in the broader energy space, when you look at the overall evolution of the energy sector. So first, what have we achieved? Let's take stock of the achievements in 2023. As we can see, for our direct emissions, Scope 1 and 2 operated activities emissions, they stood at 46 million tons in 2015. Now, in 2023, they reached 35 million tons, which is a steep reduction of 24%, on track to deliver the target of 38 million tons Scope 1 and 2 emissions in 2025, and 25-30 million tons net emissions, and I'll come back to that afterwards, in 2030.
As far as methane is concerned, and again, we'll see some further details afterwards, but as far as methane is concerned, the achievement is also very significant. It's a 47% reduction in 2023 compared to 2020. Well on track to deliver the 2025 target of -50%, actually, possibly a year ahead of plan, and also on track to reach the 80% target of 2030 in our ambition to aim for zero methane. And again, I'll show a lot more details afterwards.... Now turning to the indirect emissions, really addressing how do we help our clients decarbonize, and what are the relevant metrics to look at that?
You can see here that our Scope 3 emissions, meaning the emissions from the use of the products we sell to our customers, they amounted to 355 million tons in 2023. And you can see the details around the oil Scope 3 emissions in 2023, down to 227 million tons. Again, we maintain the targets to have less than 400 million tons Scope 3 emissions from the use of the products we sell to our customers in 2025 and 2030. And something that's very important to remember in this respect, is that while we do that, we sell more energy to the clients.
So it's actually more energy, but the same emissions, which is very important, and this takes us to, I think, the most relevant indicator of our efforts in this respect with our clients. It's the life cycle carbon intensity index that you have here. We have reduced, as Patrick told you, the intensity of the energy mix we sell to our clients by 13% in 2023, and we have the targets to reach -15% in 2025 and -25% in 2030, and Patrick has just commented that before. So this is where we stand overall. And, and now let's look at the details. And what we'll do is, we'll be looking at the various levers that we have, you know, on all of these fronts, okay? Scope 1 and 2, Scope 3, life cycle, carbon intensity.
Actually, once I'm done with with a lot of figures, I'm sorry about that, actually, we'll show you some concrete examples of what it is that we do actually in our projects and operations, and this is what Arnaud and Jean-Marc then will be presenting for E&P and Refining and Chemicals. Scope 1 and 2 emissions from our operated activities. Let's look at what we've achieved. We've walked some of the path already. That's 2015 to 2030 that you have here, and you can see, as I've mentioned, that we've reduced these emissions by 24%. What's interesting, too, is to look at the details of that, that you have that on the right-hand side of the slide.
Actually, these 24% overall, Scope 1 and 2 operated emissions, they're 36% reduction for our oil and gas upstream activities, and 32% reduction for our refining and chemicals operated activities. So that's a very steep reduction, actually. And now let's, let's look at some of the levers that we have to achieve that, that we've used already and that we'll be using up until 2030. One, one I need to mention is around CCGT that you see here, because actually this one is an increase in our emissions, and this goes back to what Patrick was saying.
We need to build a clean, firm power mix that we can deliver to our client, and to have clean, firm power, you need to have renewables, and we'll look at that afterwards and how much they contribute to the meaningful decarbonization of our clients' emissions. But we also need to have flexible capacity to make sure that's firm, that's 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. So that's what it is really about. And then you have all of the other levers. You can see that they're... You know, the effort, in a way, is evenly split between all of them, and I'll comment some of them, and then, again, we'll have examples with Arnaud and Jean-Marc afterwards. There's portfolio management. We've done that in the past few years. We'll keep doing that.
There's energy efficiency, you know, consuming less energy in our operated activities. There is flaring and methane, which is a very significant part of the efforts we are undertaking with the industry, actually. And this one is very important. It's about ending routine flaring, that we have a policy to have that achieved by 2030. It's about fighting methane leaks, detecting them, repairing them, and it's about putting an end to venting, and you'll have examples of that afterwards. It's also about using clean hydrogen.
You may recall that last year, last September, we launched, we launched a call for tenders to procure 500,000 tons of green hydrogen in our European refineries in 2030, and this will be a strong driver to decarbonize our operations, and this is what—this is one of the actions, actually, that is presented here under this, this, third green lever. And one last word that's important, too, that will get us to the 25-30 million tons net emissions range. It's about nature-based solutions that are shown here. That's the last green bar that you have on the right-hand side. What we are doing is we are investing in nature-based, you know, solutions, carbon sinks. We've done that for several years.
We'll keep doing that, and we are building a tally of certified carbon credits that we will start using as from 2030 onwards, okay? And this is going to be very important, so we're doing that consistently. It's an evenly split effort, you know, in the course of the decade, and this is what we'll achieve, you know, this last bar here. So this is what I wanted to mention around our operated Scope 1 and 2 emissions. Now, let's look at the intensity in terms of Scope 1 and 2 emissions. And this one is presented in terms of, you know, our equity perimeter, and that's important because it shows the intensity of CO2 in kilograms that goes into the atmosphere per barrel of oil that is being produced per barrel that is being produced.
What you can see, it has decreased already from 20 kilograms per barrel in 2020 to 18 kilograms in 2023. This is very important because, you know, this is part of the low-cost, low-emissions criteria that we use. That's the low-emissions part. This is one of the criteria we look at in making investment decisions in new projects, so that any new project must bring a contribution to lowering the average of the portfolio in this respect. Okay, this, this is a significant driver in terms of lowering the intensity of our portfolio, and you can see that throughout time, by the end of the decade, this is trending towards 13 kilograms CO2 per barrel of oil equivalent.
So that's a very significant decline, and that positions TotalEnergies very well actually, when you look at the industry average in this respect. Now, I've mentioned methane already. Everybody knows that, but I think it's always important to recall why is fighting methane emissions so important? Methane is a short-lived greenhouse gas in the atmosphere. It stays for around 12 years in the atmosphere, so way shorter lifespan than CO2. However, it's a very potent greenhouse gas. It has a heating effect compared to CO2, which is 30x that of CO2 when compared actually in the course of 100 years. It's 80 times that in the course of 20 years, I think.
So methane is key in our industry because, you know, the oil and gas industry is one of the significant sources of methane emissions around the globe, and because we have concrete levers to deal with it. That's why it is key, short term, medium term, actually, to deal with methane emissions. So what have we achieved? You can see here that, you know, when you look at 2020 as a baseline, we have reduced significantly already our methane emissions. I've mentioned 47% reduction in our operated activities. We have been awarded, for the third year in a row, the gold standard in the Oil and Gas Methane Partnership, which is about, you know, detecting, reporting, and dealing with methane emissions. And what we're doing this year in 2024 is we are actually extending our target.
We had a target in place already, whereby the methane intensity of our gas production should be below 0.1% come 2030. This year we are extending that to oil and gas operations. So by 2030, our oil and gas operations must have a methane intensity that's below 0.1%, as shown here. So this is... these are the efforts that we do as a company in our operations. Now, because methane is so important, and because it can play a significant part in the short-term fight against climate change, we are playing a part in moving the needle for the industry. And how do we do that? Patrick has mentioned COP28 and, and some of the achievements of COP28.
One of the great achievements is the OGDC that was announced during COP28, the Oil and Gas Decarbonization Charter, where international oil companies, namely TotalEnergies, national oil companies, have joined together with common targets, namely around methane emissions. And this is one of the significant achievements, frankly, from last December, from Dubai. And what we're doing, too, in this respect, is we are making our drone technology called AUSEA available. I'm sure you've already heard of that. It's a drone technology that detects and helps afterwards deal with repair methane leaks. We are making that technology available to 5 national oil companies for their own operations. So it's not only about our operations, it's about, you know, NOC operations, so that they can start dealing with their own methane emissions.
So we want to play a positive part in the industry in dealing with these, methane emissions. And finally, we are supporting the, Global Flaring and Methane Reduction Fund, by the World Bank. So, again, this is about TotalEnergies' operations, and this is about what we can do in the industry at large. Now, turning to, indirect emissions that I mentioned already, before. As you can see here, what we are aiming to do, in helping our clients decarbonize really, is through Scope 3 and lifecycle carbon intensity. Because there's one thing to be kept in mind, you know, our Scope 3, as we call them, the Category 11 emissions, meaning emissions from the use of the products we sell, they are the Scope 1 emissions of our clients.
So the way to look at that is to look at, okay, how can we help our clients, you know, lower their own Scope 1 emissions? That's what it is about. That's what we must aim to do, okay? Otherwise, we're just missing the point. And this is mainly what Christophe Sassolas will illustrate in terms of our actions with our large customers afterwards. So how do we do that? Well, first, we are making our sales mix evolve significantly, and you can see here a projection of what our sales mix will be in 2030, based on the investment strategy we are deploying now, where oil will be accounting for 30% of the energy sales by then. Gas and LNG will be 50%, and renewables, electricity, and low-carbon molecules will be around 20%.
So that's a significant evolution from today and even more than that from, from before. You can see what it will mean in terms of Scope 3 emissions from the use of the products that you have here. It is below 400 million tons emissions, as you can see. And, and you have now on the right-hand side, the levers, you know, that, that are going to be used actually to reduce the lifecycle carbon intensity. Just to get back on that one, because that's, that's the relevant metrics to see how we help our clients reduce their Scope 1 emissions. This one is about the emissions generated by the overall energy we sell to our clients, compared to the overall volume of energy we sell them.
When you look at that, you can see that there are several levers to achieve the 25% target reduction from 2015 to 2030. The big one, obviously, it's the big green bar in the middle. That's, that's selling electricity, clean electricity, to our clients, low-carbon electricity to our clients, which is achieving more or less, you know, half of, of the way, basically. And, and back to the point on flexible gas assets, this is because we have, you know, clean firm power, that we can deliver that to our clients, that they will buy that, and that we can achieve this decarbonization. That's a significant part, but other levers play a part, too.
namely, actually, the efforts we undertake in relation to our Scope 1 and 2 emissions that I've mentioned earlier, because they're part of the lifecycle carbon intensity of the energy mix we sell. And there's the shift to gas, too, because gas emits less CO2 than the other fossil fuels, low-carbon molecules and CCS as a service. So all of these levers play a part in bringing us down to a 25% reduction of the carbon intensity of the products we sell to our customers.
Finally, one thing that's very important is that while this has an impact on TotalEnergies' Scope 3 emissions, as I've mentioned earlier, actually, what's also important to look at is that these emissions that go in our Scope 3, you know, as shown here, they enable otherwise reductions in emissions, and this is what we nickname here, Scope 4. These are the enabled emissions assessments that we've made. When you look at 2030, we assess that our sale of gas, which is a very good substitute to coal in power generation, which emits way less CO2, half as much. And the same is true, obviously, for renewables.
When you compare the renewables mix with the non-renewables mix, we assess that this would lead to an avoided emissions being enabled in the region of 50 million tons. And that's important to bear in mind because, again, Scope 3 cannot be looked at in isolation because they don't really mean anything in this respect. They have to be looked at from the perspective of: what are the client's emissions and what's happening in the atmosphere globally? That's very important in the way we look at our strategy in this respect. So finally, how does that put TotalEnergies, or where does that put TotalEnergies, you know, looking at the overall energy space?
What we are showing here, on the left-hand side, is where we stand in terms of achievements and targets in our Scope 1 and 2 operated activities, reduction efforts. And as you can see, first, though, what we've done so far does outpace what the overall sector has done at large, because our reduction is steeper, than the actually rather plateaued with some variations, of the sector at large. Now, when you look at the targets we have set, they are, you know, well in line with both the NZE and the APS scenario of the International Energy Agency, as shown on the left-hand side. Now, when you look at the life cycle carbon intensity, of the products we sell to our clients, again, the achievements so far, they do outpace the evolution of the sector at large.
That's the first thing. And then our targets, they are in line with the APS scenario of the International Energy Agency. The APS scenario is a scenario that has an implied temperature rise of 1.7 degrees, which is well below the 2 degrees target of the Paris Agreement. So this is something that shows that the efforts we are doing and the targets we have set, they are meaningful in the overall context of the efforts that have to be undertaken by the energy sector, and actually, they kind of lead the way, if I may say so. So now I'll be turning to Arnaud Le Foll first, who will be presenting some concrete illustrations of what it is that's behind these levers that you've seen in green, blue, and red bars.
I think that's going to put some flesh on the bone.
Thank you, Aurélien. Good afternoon. Arnaud Le Foll, I am in charge of new business, carbon neutrality at TotalEnergies' Exploration and Production, and I will deep dive with you into some concrete examples from the field, from the assets or the projects on how to implement what Aurélien just presented. First example, let's go to Nigeria. I'll be starting with with flaring and venting. Why? Because actually, flaring and venting is behind 80% of our emission emissions operated perimeter, and 25% of our overall greenhouse gas emission for the upstream. So one example here in Nigeria, where we eliminated routine flaring from an asset called OML 100. OML 100 was actually designed in 1993, commissioned in 1993.
You have one central platform, is the picture on the top, and you have three satellites, picture on the bottom. And at that time, this is producing oil. At that time, there was no solution in Nigeria to valorize the gas that was co-produced with the oil. So the design, as it was, was to on the satellite platform, separate the gas and flare it as long as we are producing oil. So what we've done is that last year, during the full field shutdown of OML 100, we reorganized the technical setup. We sent, actually, the gas coming in with the oil to the central platform. We have improved the treatment capacity on the central platform, and now the gas is exported and valorized on the markets through Nigeria LNG.
This helps us to reduce by 330,000 tons of CO2 equivalent, our emissions in a given year. A second example is about venting. Here, again, you see the platform here. It's called Elgin. It's in the North Sea, offshore U.K. It's an important asset in the portfolio. It's producing gas, and as part of the initial design, we had a number of units on Elgin, treatment units, regeneration units, where at the end of the process, you had some quantities, small quantities of gas left, but in low pressure, and there was no way to use that gas and send it into the pipeline to shore. So by design, this gas was vented to the atmosphere.
So here again, what we have done is that in 2021, we worked on a unit we call the glycol unit, and this low-pressure gas was captured and re-routed to the flare, where instead of being vented with the harm that methane is, has a global warming power, it was burnt into CO₂ and decreasing in that case the venting of methane and the warming power of our emissions for 4 kt equivalent per year. Now, the second step, which is coming next year, is twofold. First is to continue to capture the vented emission in other units. Second, we will install what we call the flare gas recovery system. And third, we will improve the compression network on the platform.
And the result of that is that this low-pressure gas I mentioned will be recompressed now and will be sent and valorized on the market, in the U.K., with the gas that we produce. The global effect of those two steps, as you can see, is 5 kt, 5,000 tons of methane emissions that will be there reduced, on Elgin-Franklin in the U.K. The third example is how we design our facilities now, to avoid emissions. Here are examples of LNG plants. The first one on the left, those are the new project in Qatar, NFE and NFS, the largest LNG projects currently in the world.
By design, what we do is that the CO₂ that is co-produced with the gas, it's part of actually the fluid that we produce offshore, will be captured, will be separated, captured, transported, injected, and stored offshore in an aquifer, offshore Qatar. That way, we will avoid what was the past design of those LNG plant, which was to vent this native CO₂. So instead of venting the native CO₂, we will store it back underground. And this is significant, as you can see here, because for a plant of this size, it's overall more than 3 million tons of CO₂ that will not be vented and that will be stored back underground. Second example of what we can do for our next generation of LNG plant is the project of Marsa LNG.
Here, it's about fuel gas, and working on fuel gas in the exploration and production is important. Today, fuel gas accounts for more than 60% of our GHG emissions in the upstream. Here, to work on the fuel gas, what we've done is that we have designed a plan that is fully electrically driven. And what that means is that instead of using gas turbines to generate power or mechanical power, we will use electric engines. Instead of using boilers for heat, we will use electrical heaters, and of course, this will be supplied by green energy produced by a large solar plant that we will build as well, and of which global production of the solar plant will be equivalent to the global need of the LNG plant, and with 100% green power.
So it's 200 Kt of CO₂ equivalent of, fuel gas avoided, and this will make this plant benchmark in terms of carbon intensity among the LNG plants in the world, with less than 3 kg of CO₂ per barrel of oil equivalent intensity. Now, of course, we do that on, our perimeter, but we work as well with our partners, to bring them and make them progress. An example is Petrobras in Brazil. We signed in 2016, a strategic agreement with, with Petrobras, covering, in particular, R&D and technology. And, and so we've worked with them, and our first example, on their new FPSOs, Sepia 2 and Atapu 2, they have incorporated our own design to avoid venting gases from, from the, oil tanks of the FPSO.
This is a design that we had implemented in Angola, in Angola, on, on CLOV, and that now we are implementing everywhere, and we convinced them to use it, on their own, facilities. This will be 9 Kt of methane avoided, together for those 2 FPSO. The second example is that we took this year FID for innovative concept. We call it HiSEP. Here the purpose is that when we produce, the oil, in deep water, instead of bringing all the fluids to the FPSO, we will separate the gas with CO₂ down, on the seabed and reinject it directly into the reservoir. In that way, it's only the oil that is going up to the FPSO, and we can better use the top side and, so better energy efficiency of the process on the FPSO.
The third element, all those FPSOs will be deployed with closed flare, as we have, as we'll be implementing on Elgin, which I presented. The second aspect of collaboration is, of course, our drone AUSEA campaigns. We have done 2,000 flights on our own assets since 2022, and now we are deploying as well with our partners. Last year, we had flights in Qatar, in Brazil, in Azerbaijan, in the Emirates. We have signed agreements with national oil companies, so Petrobras, with SOCAR, with Sonangol, with Nigeria NNPC, with ONGC in India, and we even went to organize a flight on an asset, the Block 3 in Angola, which is not an asset where Total is a partner, TotalEnergies is a partner.
It's an asset of Sonangol, but we offered them our technology, and they use it on their own assets. I will now hand over to Jean-Marc to continue downstream of our activities in refining and chemical.
Yes, thank you very much. Thank you, Arnaud. I'm Jean-Marc Durand. I'm in charge of refining and base chemicals in Europe.
... and I will detail you four initiatives we are on, on refining and chemicals to slash down our CO₂ emissions on our platforms. The first one, it's not something new, it's something we do on a regular basis. Every year, we improve our assets, especially the carbon footprint, by investing in energy-saving projects. But we have decided in the company to go to change gear and to go far faster, and we are deploying in 2023, 2024, a $1 billion investment energy plan. And so for refining and chemicals, this represents $400 million of budget, and 250 projects which are being implemented today.
What does it mean in reality, as concrete examples? That we are, first of all, improving designs. Installing air preheaters or heat exchangers or heat pumps. I have one concrete example, which is, recently, we stopped a part of the Normandy refinery in Normandy, and we changed the arrangement of the columns of the distillation columns. And by doing that, we reduced the energy consumption, and we saved 60,000 tons of CO2 per year. It has restarted, it's successful, and it's a brilliant example. Second thing is, in our process, the heat exchangers, where we recover the heat, tends to foul regularly, so there are deposits of fouling on the heat exchangers.
And so, we are deploying technology, many technologies by inserts or by a system where we inject ultrasonic waves inside the bundle, and by doing so, we reduce the deposit of the fouling on the bundle. And so reducing the fouling, we improve the heat efficiency and the heat recovery of the exchangers. It's a bit like your boiler at home when there is a calcaire on it, it works less good, and there it's really typically exactly the same. The third example I would like to share is simply the fact that by adding more sensors on the field with Internet of Things, for example, sensors, things like that, we can deploy very easily.
And collecting all this with AI intelligence and so on, digital tools, we are improving the knowledge of our operators simply of the way the process is handled, and the way the energy can be saved on a permanent basis, on a day-to-day activity, or I would say, on a minute-to-minute activity. And by doing so, we have, we have, we are reducing the CO₂ reduction of around 1%. We have already implemented in 3 of our platforms, and we are developing the fourth one ongoing. Voilà. Very similar to what Arnaud explained, we have electrification of rotating machines. We have a lot of rotating machines. Some of these machines are driven by turbines.
Turbines are very efficient, but less efficient in terms of energy. And when we replace them by electrical motors, we improve the energy efficiency. And on top of that, you will see just after. I have an example of an initiative on that, where we are going to use green electricity, renewable electricity, for our platforms. And so at the end, all these machines will have a carbon footprint of zero. It represents, with all the machines we have already changed, something around 100 kt of CO₂. Finally, again, very similar to what Arnaud explained, we have flares, you know, on our platforms. The flares are permanent because we need to keep them for safety reasons.
But it's not because they are, they are permanent that they must be visible. One thing we try to do is to minimize them as much as we can. We try to recover the gas, if any, if there are leakage to the flare system. We try to recover the gas with recycled compressors. And we install an infrared camera, which allows to see if there is a flame still visible. Rather than having it visible, we install an infrared camera, and we see that the security is on, while the flame is not visible, in fact.
So it's very smart ideas, which at the end save 80% of flaring reduction. All in all, when we add all these 250 projects all together, it makes up 1.1 million tons of CO₂, so it's huge. It's 5% of our CO₂ emissions, refining and chemicals from 2015. And we have estimated an average cost of $35 per ton, so it's a valuable project also. That was my first initiative. Second thing I already touched on is shift to green power supply. My platforms are consuming a lot of electricity.
In Europe, we consume 5 TWh per year of electricity, and in the U.S., 1.5 TWh per year. Today, we buy this electricity from the grid... and gradually, we are going up this year in 2024 and next year, 2025, to 100% renewable electricity for this electricity. So this is a massive change in terms of the supply of electricity. It represents 2.5 million tons of CO2 saving for the electricity we consume, and it's 10% of our emission reduction. For this particular example, I have a little film, which is going to detail a bit more what we do concretely.
In order to produce polypropylene, the La Porte plant requires a lot of electricity to power its many machines and engines. Reducing greenhouse emissions in order to achieve the company Go Green initiatives requires a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from electricity consumption.
The Go Green project allows us to green 100% of our purchased electricity for the U.S. sites, and it's a fully integrated project. We needed three parties to make it work. First, TotalEnergies Renewables, who invested in the assets and produce the energy. Second, TotalEnergies Gas and Power, who sell the green electricity to the sites. And third, the sites, who purchase the electricity and use it. The Go Green project allows us to reduce our Scope 2 CO2 emission by 600,000 kilotons of CO2 per year, which is equivalent to 130,000 cars driven during a full year, or the electricity used by 116,000 homes per year. We're especially proud on the Go Green project because it represents the TotalEnergies company's values, pioneer spirit, and stand together.
Voilà. Now, the next initiative is, and Aurélien touched about it. It's to decarbonize our hydrogen, which we are consuming in our European assets. So we are consuming huge amount of hydrogen in our refineries, 500,000 tons per year, which is massive. And today, this hydrogen is mainly produced by steam methane reformer, so with quite an intensive carbon footprint. And the idea is to switch this hydrogen to a green hydrogen, so hydrogen produced from electrolyzers. In the framework, and we do that in Europe because we are using the framework of the EU RFNBO regulation. Voilà.
So, as you know, we have launched a massive call for tender for that, with the idea of having these 500,000 tons of green hydrogen delivered to our refineries by 2030. But we walk the talk. We have already started, and we have already 2 projects which are underway. One with Air Liquide, which is detailed on the right of the graphic. It's a 200-MW electrolyzer, and we are going to use half of it. We are going to supply the renewable electricity, mainly. The complement will be from the grid.
And, this will allow to produce 10 KT per year of green hydrogen, which we are going to consume in 2026 in our Normandy platform. We have a very similar project in Germany, on our Leuna platform, with VNG, and it's 2,500 tons of green hydrogen by end 2025. Voilà. So it's ongoing, ongoing. This ambition is huge because at the end, it represents equivalent of 5 million tons of CO2, which we are going to avoid by this transformation of, I would say, gray hydrogen to green hydrogen.
So it's a massive step, and we are pioneering in there the way because currently, we are the only one, or I would say the biggest one, to go for this massive hydrogen green hydrogen tender. The last initiative I would like to share with you is around carbon capture. Out there, it's a bit less concrete. It's in our platforms, in my platforms, we have some units which are producing interestingly CO2. And the point is that if we want to decarbonize this unit, namely, for example, the FCC units, if we want to decarbonize this unit, there is no other way than capturing the CO2.
Capturing the CO2 is a costly affair. And there, we are studying launching a lot of concepts, because the job we want to do is to find ways to de-risk this technology, and integrate innovation so that we can reduce the cost of it and to make it feasible for the future. So voilà, it's ongoing. It's quite a long way, but work is in progress, and by doing so, we will reduce for this particular unit, 0.8 million tons per year. Thank you.
... back to Arnaud.
Yes, because, when, as soon as it's captured, the CO2, it needs to be transported and, and stored. And, actually, that's why, we are building this, this portfolio of, storages in the North Sea, for the, for the CO2 that will be captured on our own assets. And you see here on the map on the left, the red and the blue dots, for power plants and, refining chemical platforms in, in the north east western part of Europe. But to, to store as well as a service, the emissions of our hard-to-abate, customers. So we are building this portfolio. It's, five projects today in the North Sea at various stages of maturity. The first one, Northern Lights, will welcome the first, CO2 cargos early next year.
Then, we are ready, will be ready, in the Q3, Q4 of this year to take an investment decisions in the U.K. in the NEP project. Aramis in Netherlands, we are in the front-end engineering and design phase, so preparing for a future FID. And then in Denmark, Bifrost, and back to Norway, Luna, here we are at the exploration and approval pre-FID phase. So you see a portfolio of project that will maturing and delivering increased storage capacity over time. Now, in Texas, on the right-hand side, you see as well this part of Texas, northeast of Houston, where we have as well red dots, blue dots, so refining chemical plants and more recently acquired power gen from gas-fired from gas.
And here we seize the opportunity to enter into a project which is a CCS, with a 25% share, through the acquisition of Talos Low Carbon Solutions. And this project is located close to our asset. It's 65 kms from the Port Arthur refinery on the right, and 115 kms from La Porte. La Porte is the plant you saw in the movie. And we'll have here hundreds of millions of tons of storage capacity that will be available if and when we elect to deploy capture on the sites that you can see on the map. Now, we have talked a lot about avoid and reduce, and there is the last element of the roadmap and the strategy, which is compensate.
Of course, even though, as was said, we plan to use this, those credits after 2030, we have to start now to build up an inventory that we'll be able to use later. So today in the portfolio, we have 11 projects. They have produced 11 million tons of 11 million credits, equivalent to one ton each at the end of 2023. This portfolio of 11 projects is expected to deliver 44 million tons accumulated credits in 2030. So on the basis of a consumption of 10% of this inventory per year, you see that we will be able to use 5 million credits from 2030 onwards with this existing portfolio. In this portfolio, we have a number of projects. One I want to showcase here is the one in Australia.
This is supporting farmers to improve their land management strategies and farming practices. Through that, we act on grazing plants for the cattle, we act on pasture, we act on crop strategy, and by doing so, we get a soil that is richer, with more biomass and more carbon sequestered in the soil. This, by the way, will help them to reduce the use of fertilizer in the future. This methodology I just described was actually validated by the Australian authorities as soon as back in September 2023. So it works. It generated the first credits that are now part of our portfolio.
What is good with this as well, is that we expect it to be able to scale up, whether in Australia or in other countries with an intensive farming activity. And I hand over to you, Christophe.
Thank you, Arnaud. So for the last bit before the Q&A, I'd like to take you to our client sites. And so our large clients, for a very long time, energy was a very simple matter. They were buying it in one form, be it power, liquid form, gas, whatever, and they were buying it short-term, not very worrying very much on the reliability, which is pretty much the definition of a commodity. And of course, the decarbonization journey that all of those clients, industrial, commercial, have undertaken, has made things a lot more complex. What kind of energy mix should I have today? I need to contract long term. I'm not sure of the reliability, the cost of the form of energy that I'm gonna buy.
So 2 years ago, we figured, we would need to help to support them in their decarbonization journey. And so we did set up a team of 30, 40 experts, whose job is really to go and help our clients market the decarbonization journey to our client. And you can see here that we've tackled quite a bit of, industry, some of what we call the hard-to-abate, and some of the more classic manufacturing, mining, construction industries. So I'd like to take you to 4, concrete example of what we've done over the last 2 years with, those clients. So I'm gonna take you first to the south of Belgium, to a site, for a customer, Holcim, a cement manufacturer.
So a typical cement plant, the size of that one in, in the city of Obourg, produce around 1 million ton of cement, 1.5, sorry, million ton of cement, which translate into 1 million ton of CO2. And the characteristic of cement manufacturing is that 60% of that CO2 is not coming from the heating of the limestone or the coal, it's actually coming from the mineral itself, what the EU is calling mineral CO2... and so there's no other option than to actually try to capture the CO2 at an economic cost.
So we've worked many, many months with Holcim and in-house, and we've came up with a project where basically they will change the furnace, so they will invest more than EUR 400 million in a new furnace, which instead of burning air to get the oxygen for the combustion, will be an oxy-combustion. They call that an oxy kiln. They will capture the CO2, and they will dispose of the CO2. So they needed a partner to do what? To produce the oxygen, give them the oxygen, give them the power that they need today, but also tomorrow, because they will double the power need for the capture of the CO2, and that will offtake the CO2. And that's exactly what we've done with them. So what's already done is that we've actually used the land around the, the cement factory. There's a lot of quarries of chalk.
There are lakes, so we've built floating PV plants of 35 MW. It's about to be commissioned to provide the electricity. We've actually, on the site, deployed the first charging point for the cement truck also. What we've worked with them, and there's been an award at the Innovation Fund, the EU Innovation Fund for that, is that we will offtake the CO2 toward Antwerp, where part of it will be disposed probably in our Aramis project that Arnaud just mentioned, and part of it can be used in manufacturing e-fuels. To build e-fuels, you need CO2, but you also need hydrogen, and one of the side product of the electrolysis is oxygen, which is very often not very used or not very valorized. So the oxygen will be sent back to the Holcim site, to Obourg.
So it's a very good example, and you can see the CO2 stakes are actually fairly high, both currently and in the long run. I'd like to take you now in the middle between the U.S. and France, to a second case with our client, our partner, Saint-Gobain. So Saint-Gobain builds many things, but the two main product is the float glass, so that's the window you can see on all the big building, and also the gypsum board, so that's a construction material. And so the characteristic of Saint-Gobain is that some of its product are low temperature, so they can be electrified, so we will need a lot of electricity, a lot of power.
But some of it, especially manufacturing the float glass, you go up to 1,500 degrees, and there's no way you can electrify that, so you use gas. So what we've done with Saint-Gobain is, in the U.S., we've signed two PPAs with them to provide them with 200 MW of electricity over 15 and 20 years, and that's from our Cottonwood and Danish Fields project in ERCOT, in Texas. And in France, we've signed a first-of-a-kind biogas purchase agreement, which is structured like a PPA, if you want, for power, but to supply them with 100 GWh of biogas over the next 3 years from our BioBéarn plant in France. And you can see also the stake for Saint-Gobain. I'm talking about the Scope 1 and 2 stake for the client here. Got two more examples, and I'm done.
The third example is data centers. It's a fashionable industry. There's data centers being built every day on this planet. And with Microsoft, who's probably one... The data centers are very advanced in terms of sourcing green power. They're big actors in PPA. So of course, we're providing them with PPA, Microsoft. But I'd like to focus on a lesser-known aspect, is that every data center has, on the data center site, a diesel gen set generators. Those sites are working 24/7. They're a mission-critical site. They cannot shut down, so they have massive power generator on the site.
So we've built, in Sweden for Microsoft, using our SAF technology, actually, what we call a BESS or Battery Energy Storage System, that allows to get rid of that diesel generator and that provide 80 minutes of backup, within the architecture of the Microsoft Data Center. And so here, you're reaching close to removing any CO2, depending on the grid, of course, and the, and the PPA sourcing of the, of the customer. And my last example will be on the aviation industry. We've been, with Airbus, so I was gonna say, I'll take you to Toulouse, but actually the deal is European, so I take you to Europe. And we've been a pioneer with Airbus on, on the first, sustainable aviation flight power, fuel-powered, flights.
What we've agreed with them is actually to supply them with more than 50% of their SAF needs throughout Europe. So we're doing that from our site with a dedicated logistics in Germany, in France, and in Spain. And of course, that's part of the EU mandate, the incorporation mandate. You know that the EU has set a 2% incorporation mandate for SAF in the jet in 2025 and a 6% mandate in 2030, an obligation. And the second aspect of our cooperation with Airbus is to... We have a significant R&D program to try to design a 100% drop-in, because today there's limitation in terms of engine, in terms of the behavior of the seals of the engine, to have 100% SAF in a plane.
So we're designing, we have an R&D program to get to that point and to be able to run 100% SAF flights on a recurring basis with the existing engine. And that's about it, what I wanted to say. Thank you.
Thank you, Christophe. Let's move to the Q&A session. I would like to thank the four of you, because it was really insightful. So you stay on stage. So there is no basic rule, so you raise the hand, and you can ask a question. Whatever question you want to ask, these gentlemen are here to answer... if you can just introduce yourself, or we'll give you a-- I know you very well, but if you can just introduce yourself.
Sorry, François. Sorry for being late. I had a very important call because it was for the Climate Action One Plus, so I know this is important for you. I just want to say a comment to you, Christophe. I was able to hear what you say. I think you should give more examples at what you are showing like this. Don't be afraid to give more because the Scope 3 your clients are very important. So I think, I mean, I would encourage you to do more. I, of course, everyone encourage you to do more, but this, you should tell more about this, and it's also a message for the top management. Thank you. And Q&A will- I mean, questions will come later, but just want to thank you for that.
Thank you. We have a question here? Yes.
Maurizio Carulli from Carbon Tracker. Two questions, if I may. First, on renewables. So, TotalEnergies is continuing to invest a significant portion of its CapEx into renewables as a percentage of total CapEx. And this despite the fact that in particular in certain geographical areas, there are difficulties in the profitability of the renewable energy. And some other companies, oil companies are either pausing or retrenching. What make you think that you can continue even in these difficult situations to remain profitable in your projects? And so that is the first question: what TotalEnergies does different with respect to some of the other operators?
And also, do you think that this, the current market conditions can represent some value opportunities for inorganic growth into the segment of renewables? So that is the first question. The second question on nature-based solutions. So you mentioned that you have 11 sanction projects, and you want to achieve about, if I remember correctly, 45 million credits by 2030. What are the... Can you make some practical examples in the same way we, which you did of how you are trying to guarantee that these sanction projects will be effective?
Because they, I would say, particularly in the past, some of the nature-based solutions projects for in the world, not necessarily for Total, were, let's say, less effective than what less perfect than what could have been. So if we can have some examples of the procedures that you are trying to implement in order to be sure that these NBS projects will be executing what they are meant to do.
NBS, maybe we can start with this one.
Okay, yes, thank you for the question. So, the way we work is that we have, first, we have our own team of experts in the company. It's a team of 25 people. They come from the métier, by the way. Some of them were recruited outside. We form people internally as well, and we look, of course, for projects in various geographies. We identify the technical itineraries, we qualify it ourselves, and then we go, of course, through a process of certification with Gold Standard or Verra, using the latest methodologies and the highest level of standard, so that we guarantee some quality of the credits that we expect to get.
Then, like in any project, there is a part of uncertainty, which is we are treating with nature, and at the end of the day, you need constant and close monitoring to confirm that either when you do conservation, indeed, you have an impact on the area that you try to conserve, like in national parks, for example, through your actions. And when you do a removal, that you measure consistently, that the trees are growing, that the soil, as I showed there, is capturing the CO2, so they do samples to confirm the methodology, confirm the impact. Another element that is really important, I think, in our approach to guarantee the success of the projects is the socio-economic aspects.
And the way we frame our projects or the way we select our project, this element of socio-economic integration is very important because we do think that first, it's the way we should work on the ground, and second, it's a protection for your project, for the pressure, for the future, when the population is, of course, adhering to the objectives. And so that's an element maybe that we have in the way we approach NBS that might not be shared by our competitors in that domain.
On the renewable, question?
On that one, well, first, you know that, you know, we have shown that we're reaching the two-digit return on average capital employed in the Integrated Power segment. We mean to make that a net cash flow, a positive net cash flow business by 2028. First, you may recall, and you have that in mind, that we select the geographies on which we, in which we invest, so it's not everywhere. And we showed last year the geographies in which we mean to develop this business, because these are not deregulated markets, where there is value to be captured basically on the markets. It's also about the Integrated Power market that we aim for.
It's not only about renewables, that's, that's a significant brick in there, but it's about making sure that we integrate the value chain in power, and that's the way we can deliver value in these projects. And as Patrick mentioned earlier, actually, that we're not going to stay 100% invested in projects. Now, once we've advanced those projects and basically de-risk them, now we go, you know, the aim is to go to around 50%.... keep some merchant exposure, and with this mix of, you know, profile in the projects that we go after, we are able to create value.
We've selected projects, maybe more recently than others, you know, in this space, where we've been able to make sure that the metrics we have, namely in terms of, of price, of the electrons, you can look at Germany or the U.S., the recent announcements we've made, they're relevant to deliver, you know, net cash flow positive projects, basically.
Question, maybe the gentleman there. Well, yeah, you can. Okay.
Hi there, Harry Ashman from Robeco. I've got two questions. One is on the carbon accounting on CCS projects, so slide 32. When you offtake a customer's CO2, how are you claiming the credits? 'Cause in that example, you're obviously reducing wholesome Scope 1 and 2, but are you also counting that against your Scope 1, 2, 3 intensity? And I'm aware that the GHG protocol isn't very well set up for that right now. And the other one is on hydrogen. So 500,000 tons is great ambition. I think it's really good. You gave examples there of 15,000 tons and a whole load of suppliers that have responded. In the Air Liquide example, you're getting 50% of the offtake. Why not do it yourselves, have more control over the, the supply, and be able to take the whole offtake? What, what's the rationale for that?
Thanks.
On your first question, the CCS that you see actually under Scope 1 and 2, you've seen the levels, and Scope 3, they're not the same, okay? So there, there's no overlap between the two. They're different. The CCS projects, when we plan these levels, you know, we plan for that. They're different, so we don't use the same... we don't claim the same basically for Scope 1 and 2 reductions, and for what we put in front of Scope 3, reductions, basically.
Yeah, for the hydrogen, I think, in fact, the answer is exactly what you mentioned. We are developing some project locally with partners. The point is that if we go at that pace, it will take too long. And so that's why we went for a big, massive tender, so that we change gear, and that's exactly the purpose of this tender. In the first offers, we have been offered 7x the need of what we—of the 500,000 tons. So there is a huge appetite to provide.
I think what the market needs now is a client, and the client, we are the, this client. That's the role we play.
Okay. Yeah, maybe now, yeah. Just... We'll be, we'll be moving there. No worries.
We are here in the corner, no? Alejandro Vigil from Santander. A couple of questions about your view about cost evolution in terms of the different technologies, no? Looking at hydrogen, looking at SAF, which is the potential of cost improvement in these technologies? Because they're still very expensive, right? That's the problem of the implementation. That's the first question. And the second question is, in the context of the European and international oil companies, there is a lot of debate if the way of ele- of decarbonization is electrification or is carbon sequestration or some other technologies, no? Your thoughts about which is the right path for decarbonization of our company. Thank you.
Yeah, I can answer on SAF. In Europe, there's an incorporation mandate. So yes, it is expensive, but at some point, it will be mandatory to incorporate 2% and 6%. So whatever the price, at some point, it, there will be a price-taking position.
Maybe on SAF on technologies, because, you know, we have turned refineries into biorefineries. So, that's a first step, and you know, in Europe, in order for this to be eligible, it has to be so compliant with Annex 9 B of feed, so waste and residues. The point is that the amount of feed is limited. We are convinced that almost all this feed is going to be turned into SAF, but that's not going to be enough in order to go to the 2050 environment. And so the question is, what is the next step? And the things we are thinking of today, studying, what is behind the HEFA route of today, what is the next step?
It's work in progress, I would say.
Maybe to answer your first question, the way we see it is that it will be a portfolio of technologies and no one technology that takes it all. If we look at our upstream portfolio as an example, the example I showed, then you can combine them in a given site to some extent. You can have a capture of the CO2 and reinjection in an electrical plant, for example, and the question at the end is what is the most relevant technical solution there? If you think onshore site, probably electrification is the right way to go to consider because you might have a grid nearby.
But today, for example, in Norway, our assets are either new assets are electrified, like [Uncertain] are getting electrified, so it's possible to consider offshore as well. For CO2 reinjection, the native CO2 reinjection is now kind of a standard in any new designs that we consider. So at the end of the day, all those pieces will have to come together to achieve the best result, yeah.
When you look at the macro trends in this respect, you know, if you take the NZE scenario, for one, there is both. It's an and approach. There is, I think, in the NZE scenario, in 2030, 1 gigaton of carbon capture that's provided for, and there is massive electrification. So frankly, it's about both, and it's about other technologies that we've discussed, certainly.
Thank you. Question on the other side? Yes, Jean-Luc.
Jean-Luc Romain at CIC Market Solutions. You, you've shown a very interesting example of storing the carbon that will be captured from your client plants in the cement plant in Belgium. On your decision to acquire Talos, you decided to resell two of the three projects. Could you have instead tried to develop capture for external clients?
So our strategy is clearly, avoid and reduce on our own portfolio. So we give, we work on projects that are relevant, first and foremost, for our own assets. And that's why the location of the projects compared to our own sites and emitters is really important. BioBéarn was strategically located compared to our own emitters in Texas, so that was the primary target. The other ones, you don't have any emitters from the company nearby, so we think it's there will be other developers happy to develop them, but they don't have the strategic meaning for us. Yeah. And that's how we approach all our projects indeed in carbon storage.
Maybe Michele.
Thank you. Michele Della Vigna from Goldman. I wanted to ask a more strategic question. So we've gone through a period of extremely expensive natural gas, and that has been very bad for global emissions because we've returned to coal growth. Now, gas is becoming cheaper again, and that is very good. We see it in your Scope 4 emissions. But on the other side, it also can become a challenge with lower power prices that make more expensive technologies like offshore wind, less competitive. It also makes some of the gas substitutes, like green hydrogen, renewable natural gas, less competitive.
I wonder if, how that changes potentially your strategy and some of your capital allocation, but also if you think that for Europe to continue to achieve Fit for 55, something needs to happen on the EU ETS, on the carbon market, where it needs somehow to be delinked from gas and from some of the recent price pressure that we've seen there. Thank you.
Well, first, now we are in a volatile prices industry. And when you look at the prices of gas short term, they've declined compared to last year and the year before that. Having said that, when you look at the need to make sure that on the long run, clients do commit to buy the gas and LNG, namely, when the prices were too high, actually, there was a challenge there because, you know, as you said, the clients were moving back to coal, short term, actually. So there is a need to have that balance so that clients will commit long term for gas. So I don't see that, on the contrary, as something, you know, challenging our strategy in this respect, certainly.
Now, the ETS prices in Europe, they've been going down significantly in the recent past, now in the EUR 50 per ton region. And certainly, there is going to be, you know, a reflection to be had in at the EU level, looking at what's happening also abroad, at the investment signals that are being, you know, sent around. When you look at the IRA initiative in the U.S., it's not the same direction of wind, certainly. So there will be a need to review that when it comes to the next period of ETS, I agree. But again, long term, you know, there is going to be an increased demand in the EU, in other regions, in terms of electrification.
There are mandates, there are regulatory instruments, incentives in place. We see that happening in Western Europe. We see that happening in the U.S. and Texas as well. You know, we know there is a trend where the market is there to sustain our investments, certainly in the power markets, too.
Michele, just to complement, you're right, you gave the answer in your question. It's clear that the EU ETS has to be monitored. And I think the EUR 50 per ton today is quite low. We bet on EUR 100 per ton, maybe more, and then it gives a European electricity price around EUR 70 as an average. And in fact, we use that, so it's not so high. You know, we don't bet on EUR 100 per watt hour, including when we bet made some bets on the offshore wind. It's more around EUR 70 per MW. So I think it's reasonable to think that in the European, and then it's also back to which market, you know? The German market is different from other markets, considering their mix.
So it's why what is important in our strategy is in which market do we invest? And that could be, you could see us selecting some markets rather than others to grow the integrated power. We will not have the same power strategy in all the European markets because the mix is important on the price, local price. So that's where you will see. So there's no debate about the size of the capital allocation. It's more in which markets do we and in electricity, there's big difference with oil and gas. You know, research, you have to understand better where it is. So the German market for it is really one of the most interesting ones because the mix of political decisions of no nuclear, no coal. And so that's where what we think.
Thank you. Any question? Yes, please, Mike.
... Thank you. Will Farrell from Federated Hermes. Interesting to see that there might be some transactions in the future related to your renewables assets, and don't expect you to be able to comment on those. But how do you think about the potential impact on your lifecycle carbon intensity target? Clearly, selling those assets will make it harder, but at the same time, we understand that it might optimize your returns, and recycling the balance sheet can enable you to develop more renewable plants. How can you help us think about the transition risk profile of the business, given that recycling of the balance sheet?
When we say we aim for more than 100 TWh production in 2030, it does include exactly that. It does include the resale of, you know, give or take 50% of projects. So that's built in our, let's say, our plan. So the 100 TWh objective, which is in line with the life cycle carbon intensity, is including these 50% sales that we've, you know, we've always told we will do because it's about allocating resources actually on various projects. So that is very much consistent, one with the other.
Other questions? Yes, please.
Olivia Jean from AXA Investment Managers. Regarding the 10 million tons of CO2 remaining in Scope 1 in 2050, what type of operations or processes you don't expect to be able to decarbonize?
Well, 2050 is a, you know, what the company, you know, will be in 2050 in a net zero, let's say, scenario or vision. You know, they are hard-to-abate sectors. RC and ENP are, have, you know, big emitters, as we say. So that's where you, you would likely find significant emitters in our assets, and that's, that's why you will have, that, because, you know, as you saw, we, you still have, some gas and oil, a minority of oil production by, by then. There will be clean firm power, so that does involve flexible generation. So you do have a mix of assets that still emit CO2 in our scope one and two operated activities in that 2050 vision that we have.
Question? Yes, we have a question there. Please.
Jean-Damien Bogner from Julius Baer. First of all, thank you for putting the air conditioning so hard that I tend to forget about climate change. My question is about the gas and the LNG. So you focus a lot in all your reports about that it's a transition energy, and it's true, as long as you account that the emissions from like, you know, from the emissions intensity are lower than other sources of energy. So I'm a bit surprised to see in the report that you have released yesterday, that you account for about 300 tons per MWh produced for gas or LNG, while most of the science around that sets the bar around 500 or 600. So how do you account for such lower values? Is that for...
due to better efficiencies, or what is the source?
Well, I'm not sure which one you're referring to, sorry. Which value are you referring to?
In the report that you have released yesterday, on slide 45, I believe, there's a nice table that explains, like, how you use gas as a transition energy in specific countries versus oil and gas, and you show the intensity even per country. So the values for gas are around 300, 350, and of course, that looks very nice against the values on oil and gas, but it just differs from the science-
No, we-
that I'm aware of.
So we do use, you know, in this respect, data taken from the objective sources, like Enerdata, for instance. So we do use objective benchmarks, basically, to compare, you know, the emissions from one source to the other. So that's what we do when showing this table, I think, that you refer to. And the sources actually are provided in the slide, in the table. So you have the energy sources that we use, Enerdata, namely, in this respect. I think that's what you're referring to. Sorry, I don't have that handy here.
Okay. We have one question here. Yes.
Hi, I'm Pierre Lévêque from ERAFP. On the avoided emissions objective you have for 2030, is that just a consequence of your projected energy mix that will be more decarbonized than today? Or is there a willingness from. You highlighted some examples of Holcim and Saint-Gobain. Is there a willingness to scale this kind of partnerships, or is that more of a consequence of the natural evolution of the business mix?
I think it works both ways, frankly. You know, we need to accompany our clients in their journey, and this is what Christophe has illustrated with examples of Siemens, for instance, of Holcim or Microsoft or others. So we need to accompany them, and it takes the demand side to evolve so that, you know, we can also make sure that there is a demand to meet our energy sales mix evolution. That we are quite confident looking to 2030 because that's, you know, medium term, but certainly, it needs to ramp up, you know, between now and 2030 and certainly afterwards.
So we need to continue these collaboration efforts, you know, either on a client-by-client basis, as we've illustrated, or sector-wide initiatives that we also take in, you know, air transportation or maritime transportation, for instance. So it has to accelerate, and we're working towards accelerating that with our clients, with the demand side, basically.
... but to come back, you have a slide, I think, that you presented, Aurelien. So - 25% Scope 3 is fundamentally related to our energy mix, also our sales mix. You can-- I think you show the roadmap or it's in the report. I think you had, if I remember, maybe it's in the report, and I don't know if you show it, but, on the... Yeah, on the welcome. This one. You can see how we achieve minus 25%. It's fundamentally coming from, different source, but you have a big, which is produced and sell electricity, you know, so in particular, if it's green. So that's a big chunk of it. So it's fundamentally changing the mix. That's why we, we moved to a, a strategy to establish oil, gas, and electricity company. But why is that?
But it's linked fundamentally to what our customers will ask. So we are trying to accompany the decarbonization, means fundamentally electrification of many processes. But so that's why we have this strategy in place. So you have it. It's also increasing the amount of low-carbon molecules. It's also at this level, in 2030, the gas will contribute when we manage to demonstrate that the customers are shifting. So it's, it's... This is our sources. This is the levers that we have. We are energy producers, you know, and then we have the action, which is more the Scope 3 action, so to try to, to accompany our customers, that was explained by Christophe and Aurélien. You know, that's, that's both. This one does not account.
We don't account in the -25% of 300,000 tons per year saved by ArcelorMittal. It's not there. This is their Scope 2. In these figures, we account for the energy products we sold. We sell them, you know, so we, we don't take into our balance sheet any of what is saved by them. Be clear. That's the difficulty with Scope 3, you know, and we try to give a hint of what we contribute through this induced reduction, what we call the Scope 4, you know, but we don't account neither for the CCS part. We count in our balance sheet only what we store from our own assets, you know. The rest is really contributing to the evolution of the demand, but it's not in these figures. We don't try to, to mix both, to be, to be clear.
Any other question? Francois, again, if it's a question.
It's a question. Just to build on what was said by Pierre, would it be feasible to have more information on your strategy, your commercial strategy? Maybe you don't want to give more, but you have a plan. I'm sure you have a plan. One, two, which barriers you see as Total talking to your clients, because your clients are our investees. We invest in Saint-Gobain. We invest in these companies, so we may work together to overcome these challenges. So it's a suggestion more than a question. Yeah, and so this is your plan, the barriers you see, and maybe a breakdown of these. I mean, you don't give figures on this big chunk of green bar, but maybe the breakdown by sector.
You just show this nice slide of all sectors, how you maybe want to target some and not others.
Well, not by sectors, don't mix. Again, it's all sales, and we are selling electricity to either through corporate PPAs or through to B2B or B2C customers, you know, we. So that's what we will provide, and it's linked to what we produce, because at the end, we try to find an integration between what we produce and what we sell. So we, and I think for them, they have to decide themselves if it's profitable or not, you know. So we engage with them to offer the solutions, but they take the decisions to change or not their mix of energy. But if we don't provide solutions, we don't go to them. That's why we have established this team led by Christophe, specializing, having people who are able to speak with a steel manufacturer or a cement producer.
So we had put together a team of people who knows about their business and not just about our energies, which was a limit. So setting this team, for me, was fundamental because otherwise, we just send people who produce a product of energy, and we are not able to to understand their logic. So now we have people in the company who can speak about the RI and the challenges of the RIs. At the end, they will take the decision to invest or not, but we are there to dialogue, and, you know, we invited the CEO of ArcelorMittal to an executive committee meeting of Total to engage more, to try to understand what are their own decisions. Then they will do it where? In Belgium, in Switzerland, or in the U.S., that's their, their, their choice, you know?
That's, that's where we have the, the point. But for own commitment, the - 25% is we engage because we invest, that the mix of products we sell will be, decarbonized by 25% because increase. Again, then Aurélien question, answer was perfect. It's 1 TWh. All that is very consistent. I can tell you, you have many mathematicians and engineers within TotalEnergies, including the CEO, and even if Aurélien is a lawyer, so he counts also.
We have time for one question. Yes, please.
Yes. Hello, Lise Moret from Banque Hottinguer . So I have one question. In your presentation, there are two very interesting charts. One, where we can see that in by 2050, there should be something like 80% of the sales mix that, that would be exposed to, to low-carbon and, and electricity, renewable, et cetera. But by 2030, it's more the reverse. That is, we still 80% of 75, I don't remember, fossil. So my question is-... if between 2030 and 2050, the demand, on the demand side, the demand is not strong enough so that we, we cannot reach this 80% share of the, your sales mix that would be fully green.
By how much do you think you can use offsetting and, let's say, CCS to achieve your carbon agenda? And in which proportion of your decarbonization targets do you think you can rely on those offsetting solutions? Not sure it's clear.
Yes. Yeah, you said you had two questions. These are the two questions, or?
Um-
Sorry. Sorry.
I don't remember this kind of one.
It's two in one. Okay. No, first, you know, the 2050 approach we have is, you know, together with society, and this goes back to the discussion just before, basically. You know, the... And it's also one of the takeaways of COP28, is transitioning energy systems. It's demand and supply, basically. So, we're working that path. You know, we are on the supply side. As Jean-Marc mentioned, we are also sometimes on the demand side, you know, for green H2, for instance, but we are working that path with our clients. 2050 is a long way from now. We are making every effort so that, you know, we and clients, everybody can take that path onwards. So we have a clear view as to 2030 and where we're going.
When you look at what we've achieved in terms of, you know, transitioning from the last 5 years, and let's look ahead at 2030, you can see that that's something significant in terms of having these 20% sales of, you know, low-carbon electricity and low-carbon molecules in 2030. So achieving something that's a leap to 2050, 20 years afterwards, you know, is feasible based on the track record already achieved. Now, having said that, we will have... You know, everybody will have to adjust to what happens, and this is what is the end strategy. It's, you know, it's all of the solutions that need to be taken into account. It's about providing, you know, low-carbon energy, and we are building that, and it's about also investing in carbon capture technology, nature-based solutions.
So we are doing that, you know, at a pace that's sustainable and reasonable, and we'll continue. Now, saying where it will lead in 2050 is a bit far away. I'm not a mathematician, as Patrick said, so I haven't made the math already, but I'll try.
But as a technician, I can tell you, we don't think it's achievable to have more than 100 billion tons of compensation. That's 100 million tons is really for me. So we will have the demand has to, I mean, the demand pattern, and again, in that vision, it's a vision of what could be done. We took a reference, which was a net zero scenario via IEA. So if the society is moving together with that, in that direction, we have to, we will have to do it. Again, it's a strategy of the company to go together, and growing this electricity arm will be because you have more electrification. If you have more electrification, we'll have less emissions.
But honestly, at the end, when we look at it, I don't, I would not put 300 million tons instead of my 300 million tons. That would be a gap. So even 100 is, I would say, something which could consider feasible by that time, because that means, again, in this scenario, I think you have 5-8 billion tons of CO2 storage per year. So what is the percentage that Total could find, and could think we will do on our side? We have 2%-3% of the market. You know, we are not ... So that's. And we could do a little more for our customers, knowing that, because we have some capacity, some technologies, but it's, that's reasonable, just to be clear.
We'll, I wouldn't – I don't want to tell you whatever it is, we'll do it. No, that's not the answer. So we'll have to go on both sides, you know? It's a question of changing the supply mix because the customers will change the demand pattern, and we have to work to help them to change, and at the end, the compensation, what we call carbon sinks, maybe it will be DAC, as direct air capture. You know, we are looking to these technologies as well because whatever we are sure that we'll need to be net zero, we are sure to have to be able to negative emissions. So we are looking to that to see if it's an area of investment for the future as well.
I think we need to take the break. We are on time. We can continue the discussion during the break, so we are taking 15 minutes break maximum. We'll go back in 15 minutes. For people connected, stay tuned. We'll be back in 15 minutes. Thank you.
... You tell me when you- Okay, we are back for the second part of this sustainability and climate workshop. So we welcome Namita Shah and Pierre Bang, who will be talking about people, and then we'll have again a Q&A session. Namita, Pierre.
Thank you very much, and good afternoon. My name is Namita Shah. I'm the President of OneTech and of People and Social Engagement.
I am Pierre Bang. I am the Senior Vice President, People and Social Engagement.
So we're gonna talk to you a little bit about our people, the second part of our sustainability and climate report. And we're going to try to be as concrete as our colleagues have been earlier this morning on the technical side of what we're doing. So I would like to just begin with some numbers about when we talk about the well-being of our people. So in order to be able to ensure well-being, you need to listen to your people, and that means that we pay a lot of attention to and use very well the different surveys that we deploy within the company. We have three important numbers on this slide. The first is that of employee engagement.
So our last survey was done in 2022, and we do a pulse survey every other year, and we will be deploying a full survey again this year. You see that our employee engagement score is 82.4%, and which has gone up to 0.1% since the last time that we did the survey, the full survey in 2022. We also follow what we call a care program, and I will come back to that in a little bit more detail after this slide, where once again, you see our score is 81.5. In the last year, we have seen an increase of 2.9 points.
The third number that I think is interesting on this slide for all of you is to see that 87% of our employees, they have confidence that, in, in the ability of our company to achieve, the ambition, the ambition that we have shared with you in the first part, of this, presentation. So, when we, look at all these numbers, just to be very clear, we of course, look at the questions and compare ourselves not just in terms of progress that we make internally, but also in terms of benchmarking with companies, with other companies. We work quite carefully on choosing the questions with Ipsos to make sure that Ipsos is able to provide us benchmarks.
In this case, the benchmarks that you see in the previous slide and in this slide are benchmarks with respect to companies around the world who have more than 10,000 employees. As a reminder, we, TotalEnergies, we have over 100,000 employees across the world. Just a little zoom on caring for our employees' well-being. We started looking at this index a little over a year ago, a year and a half ago, where in addition to the engagement scores, we wanted to pick questions which would help, in particular, our managers, to be able to understand what was maybe not working within their organizations, because the only way to work with your employees is to be able to understand what's not working for them.
And if you look at the slide, you'll see you know, very clearly the kinds of questions that we need to look at when people feel that they are part of an organization. They want to know that they're working in safe conditions. They want to feel respected at work. They want to know that we trust them, which is what the question about sufficient freedom and autonomy is all about. They want to have a good time, so, you know, share moments of conviviality and celebrate our successes. And so this year, we will be hopefully, definitely delivering on celebrating our successes with our 100-year anniversary celebrations. They want managers who listen to them. I think beyond that, they want to know that they are heard.
It's fine to be part of a company or a team, but if you're not heard, if you don't have a place, if your voice isn't heard, then it's almost as if you're not there. And of course, the last two, which are very important, people need more and more to be able to be sure that they are balancing their personal life with their work life and not to have too much pressure at work. So these are all indicators that we follow. Any manager who has a team of 15 people or more gets their own individual scores to be able to then sit down with their teams to understand the questions on which or the issues on which things might not be working out.
It is really at that level of work that we need to do in order to ensure that, that every place in the world with different cultures and countries that we work in, that we are ensuring, the well-being of our employees. I will now hand over to Pierre to talk a little bit about beyond the day-to-day work and the day-to-day lives of our employees within our offices. What are the other things that we are putting in place to look after our employees?
Thank you, Namita. We work in more than 100 countries. Every country has its own social standards, regulations, and they are all, not all the same. So we have decided through this program of Care Together by TotalEnergies to implement one worldwide standard benefiting to all our employees. And it's about a program that is based on concrete measures on these four pillars that are on the screen. First one being, of course, the social protection, a quality social protection for the people of the company. The second is around health. We have to preserve the physical and mental health of our employees. And the third pillar is around the family sphere, and I will come back on these three pillars.
But the fourth one is about working environment, and I will not come about on this, and I would like to just give you examples of what it means for us. It's about building a better place to work. It's about promoting, I would say, a modern and attractive work environment. We have made the decision to empower our people. For instance, we have established clear rules on remote working, and we empower our people to make responsible use of remote working, while, in fact, they are delivering on their objectives, while, in fact, they are also working on the collective intelligence of the organization and connecting with their teams and managers.
There is a very recent initiative, which we started this year, which is, we call the Green Friday. It's a very interesting initiative, where in fact, and, Patrick and the executive committee is leading by example on this, there is no, collective meetings imposed by the management. We love Green Fridays because, then every employee in the company has the freedom to organize his work as he wish.
Every other Friday.
It's every other Friday. So, let me cover now the global benefit programs that we have for our employees, which is, in fact, complemented by additional local initiatives. Can I come back to the slide?
Mm-hmm.
Okay, thank you. So first, is the health insurance plan. There is a supplementary health insurance plan that is implemented by the company in 2023. 94% of TotalEnergies employees are covered worldwide by this supplementary health insurance coverage. We also implemented a health check every two years for each employee, and the score in 2023 is 77%. But if you look at these figures differently, you will find out that it's almost 100% because there are six countries in the world, in these numbers, that are mainly Northern Europe.
We're talking about U.K., Denmark, we're talking about Belgium, we're talking about the Netherlands, we're talking about France, where the regulation is three to five years. But the health system in these countries and the access to health centers of quality is not at question. We have also, and the second topic I would like to cover is more, I would say, a special scheme, more local, a local initiative, which is in the retail, the retail African affiliates. In the countries we are talking about, there are almost 20 countries that are taking part of this local initiatives.
The pension system is not great, and therefore we have established a program where the employees are saving some money and the company is so one third is by the employee, 2/3 by the company. It is invested in a strong currency, uses US dollar or Euros, and when they retire, they have the option to select either to take a lump sum or annuities.
For all countries, we have a death benefit plan which is covering 95% of our employees worldwide, where there is a, I would say, a benefit of minimum the equivalent of two years of gross salary, when the sad situation like that occur. Now, I would like to also talk about the opportunity to take care of the families. We have developed a neutral definition of the family for pregnancy or adoption, and we ensure for our employees 14 weeks childcare leave paid 100% for the primary care parent and two weeks for the second parent. There is, in addition, a guarantee of an average salary increase during the leave.
In 2023, 99% of women of the company have benefited from a 14-week maternity leave with 100% pay. I would like maybe to take the opportunity to launch the video of Audrey, who recently joined the company. Can we launch the video?
My name is Audrey Bojorquez. I'm Director of Development in the Utility Power Division. I manage a team of transmission and interconnection specialists, spatial analysts, and project managers. I joined TotalEnergies just under two years ago when my company was acquired. I was in my last trimester at the time when we started the acquisition process with Total. I quickly learned about the parental leave policy and the benefits that they offer for expecting parents, and just felt a wave of relief. It meant that I didn't have to worry about whether or not I wanted to sacrifice our family's income when our expenses would be at an all-time high, or sacrifice spending time with our precious newborn, time we would never get back.
My only worry, once I found out about the parental policy, was how my new colleagues would react when my first few months on the job would be on leave. I felt so comforted when several of them, who actually just had babies themselves, encouraged me to take full advantage of the parental leave and, and enjoy that time with my family, so that felt really good, and just the, the culture is very supportive of families and, and new parents. I ended up having a pretty complicated delivery and ended up having to spend a couple of weeks in bed after I gave birth. If I had only had two weeks of leave to begin with, it would have left me with just barely enough time to physically recover, much less emotionally, and to really get that good connection with my family.
So three and a half months was really a gift for me. Having that extra amount of time allowed me to adjust and more smoothly transition back to work.
So you see, even the system work in developed countries, and I think this social protection net is reinforcing the sense of belonging of the TotalEnergies family for our employees.
So, I'd like to come back and talk about an important part of our sustainability report, which is a just, orderly, and equitable transition plan for our employees. We had begun to talk to you about this a couple of years ago, because clearly, when we elaborated our new strategy, there is this question of: How do you accompany all the employees to make sure that they do not feel that they are being left behind? How do we give them the skills to be able to help contribute to all the different areas of technological, you know, growth that we need and ideas that we need in order to be able to execute on all this?
At the start of this new strategy, we took a lot of concrete measures because I will not hide the fact that people who worked in exploration, production, or refining chemicals were worried that maybe in some years, in 20 years, in 25 years, you know, people in our company stay for a very long time, so would not have a job. So we worked hard, of course, to make sure that everybody would have access to all kinds of information and upskilling programs. The way in which I can sort of summarize it for you is what we did was I will take one example.
Just the fact that we are developing in electricity, electricity is a new subject for a lot of people in the company, and so we decided to deploy a 3-day training program, where we would really bring people in, sitting in rooms, you know, with live presentations and a lot of interactive work to explain what electricity is, what does it mean from the, you know, how does wind and solar work? What is the technological execution that we will need to do? What is the business model of it? What kind of countries do we want to work, and what our strategy is?
Because it was very important for all of our employees to be familiar with this new energy in which we were going to work, because we were all very familiar with oil and gas and what we were doing in the oil and gas business. So that's one example of a massive deployment, which covered, you know, a large majority of our people to embark them on the strategy of the company. More specifically, two years ago, we created an organization called OneTech, where we put together all the engineers and researchers working in the different business units in one organization. One of the reasons in which we did it was also to give all of the engineers and researchers the reassurance that they would be able to have access to different businesses and to learn and to be able to work on different businesses.
So today, an engineer who works in OneTech is able to work for a few months of the year on an offshore platform for exploration production, to work on helping out a problem of support of operations in a refinery, and to help develop a hydrogen project or a solar or a wind project. So it gives them all that exposure and that confidence, and the added, I'd say, cherry on the cake on that for us has been that they have all understood that their competencies are very transferable, and we have also benefited in different branches and businesses from competencies that we thought a certain business didn't have, but from another business was able to find a solution to a problem. Last example is very specific.
For example, you know that some of our refineries have converted into biorefineries. Very specific programs have been put in place to accompany all the employees on site to help them learn what it means to be a biorefinery, how to manage their new industrial tool, and how they can place themselves in the new organization and the new kind of business that we are going to do. So that is sort of in a nutshell what we are trying to do to accompany everybody in the transition, of course, our business and of course, of what is happening in the world around us. Last but not least, talking about a diverse and inclusive workplace. We've shared these numbers with you before.
We continue to progress on gender equality, gender diversity, and on international diversity, to be able to bring to senior-level positions people from all kinds of backgrounds, all kinds of countries, and of course, pushing women up along the chain. We've also worked a lot in these past years with people with disabilities. And again, it's one of those subjects where when you are in a developed country, there are a lot of rules and regulations which sort of push you to make things easier in the workspace for people with disabilities. But in a lot of our affiliates in other countries, there is no such sort of external pressure.
Now we have over half of our affiliates who have made commitments as to what they would like to do to help people with disabilities feel more comfortable and more integrated in the workspace. All of this numbers are good, and I told you that I would try to be as specific in terms of numbers as examples as we had been before. But I would like to close with a video which to just illustrate to you that in the end pushing all this means that you have to change the culture, and it means that people have to understand how, not just why diversity is important, but how you can include people, and I hope that this video will illustrate that for you.
[FOREIGN LANGUAGE].
[FOREIGN LANGUAGE].
[FOREIGN LANGUAGE].
[FOREIGN LANGUAGE].
[FOREIGN LANGUAGE].
[FOREIGN LANGUAGE].
That's it. End of the presentation.
Thank you very much, Namita and Pierre. We can open the Q&A session. Just same principles, raise your hand if you have questions. Don't be shy. Yes, we have a question.
Thank you very much for the presentation. Matthieu Fermon, AXA Investment Managers. OneTech, you said that reminded, it's 3,400 engineers, and you reminded at the same time that you have more than 100,000 employees at TotalEnergies. In terms of just transition, for your own workers only, what is the gap you assess between the people you will need to upskill, retrain, in the near future, considering that the energy mix will be 50% on renewables, in the future? So yeah, what is the gap? Because 3,400 people can be considered as a little bit low. Do you plan to scale the experiences you had at Grandpuits, for example? Yeah.
Well, well, I think the reason I tried to show you a lot of different examples was to say that we need to accompany people at many different levels. We're not. You don't have simply a one-size-fits-all program where you just suddenly offer upskilling to everybody. So, the Grandpuits example is an example of where we have learned that when we want to do a conversion of a business model, how to accompany people to acquire the new skills. And clearly, it's something that has taught us how to do it over and over again when we need to do it.
The second thing that is important is that we don't want people to feel that it is only when it is their site that is in transition, that they will have access to information or to the ability to try to do something else. So in the company, we already have a very robust job posting system, where people from all branches, where managers from all branches post jobs that are available, and people from all branches apply for these jobs. So there is a lot of, we encourage cross-branch movement, and if in order to do that movement, a person needs to have an upskilling program, needs to be accompanied, depending on the job that they are taken, then we are able to provide that accompaniment.
We don't want people to be refused because they don't have the background or the context or the technical skills that they might need to have. So as there are people who move back and forth from different branches, over time, more and more people are exposed to different businesses and to the acquisition of different skills. I talked specifically about OneTech, because it is a concentration of engineers and researchers who have traditionally, till two years ago, been very much within their own businesses, and these are the people who do all the design and conceptual studies and studies for all of our major projects. And before they would do it, they would be able to participate in that only for the project of the particular business unit.
Now, they have the opportunity to work on this, on these kinds of studies and to learn about all of the businesses. And actually, collectively, we've learned about a lot of new businesses that were not even in the company, for example, hydrogen. So it is different depending on where our people are, but the important thing is... And then, sorry, the last thing is, Visa for TotalEnergies, where I explained that we did a three-day training program for everybody in the organization, everybody, 100,000 people, have access to that to be able to understand and learn about electricity. So we try to accompany people at every level in a different way.
It's not, by the way, a just transition just for the new energies, it's also for what's happening in the world outside. So, for example, we are launching this year a training, a similar program for everybody on Copilot, so that they can then become familiar with artificial intelligence, what that can mean, and be aligned with the change that is happening in the world outside. And we work... All of the branches have their different specific programs, and this way, we touch the 100,000 people of the company in many different ways, and also beyond, because it's not just our direct employees, but often we have the involvement also of our contractors.
... Thank you. Questions? We have questions online. Maybe I can try if there is no question here. I have a question: so do you start to struggle to hire new graduates?
No, no, and no. We really don't. We do not struggle to hire new graduates at all. We've done a lot of hiring in the past two years in all of the branches. Not... You know, people tend to think we have increased our hiring and it's easy to hire because we are hiring just in the new gas, renewables, and power sector, where that is actually not true. And again, I can give you a very concrete example. First of all, remember that we hire people all over the world, and this question is mostly asked for us here in France, so that's the first thing.
But even here in France, where OneTech exists and where we have our 3,400 engineers, we launched a young graduate program last year, where we hired 60 young graduates. You know, we got over 2,000 applications, and, and we still have people sending us applications asking when we are going to open the second year of a young graduate program. So, so no, we really, we really do not have a problem in hiring young graduates.
Okay, thank you. Question in the room? Yes.
Olivia Jean from AXA Investment Managers as well. Do you have an idea of how competitive, what you described in terms of health, protection, how this package is compared to your peers or compared to other large companies, whether it really makes a difference or not?
I don't have a specific benchmark, but what I can say is that most of the countries, and especially in Africa, where we are located, and in some of the countries in development, usually we are the best package, among the best packages.
Okay. Question? Yes, please.
Hi, Chulantha De Silva, GQG Partners. Two questions: First, what percentage of your labor pool is sitting in developing markets versus developed markets? Follow on to that, your, your legacy or the existing pool of, or fleet of assets are sitting in, call it, developing markets. The new systems are coming in other jurisdictions, so there is going to be a dislocation in terms of where you're building out and where your existing assets are. So how are you thinking about mitigating that dislocation? Is that in your thought process when developing assets? And, what will be the outcome for those pools of labor? Because today it's, it's not easy to move people around.
No, it's not easy to move people around. I mean, I think... Just so that you understand our model a little bit, so we have, you know, we have our central offices, and then, in each country, we have affiliates that are up and running, and they hire locally, and of course, you know, that's the way. Whether they're in exploration, production, marketing services, or refining and chemicals, locally, each affiliate is running their hiring and looking after their packages and their people locally.
It comes, it happens in the life of the company from time to time, that maybe you have to shut down an affiliate, or you sell an affiliate, or you open a new one when you make a discovery, for example, and you're going to be building a project. When we make a discovery and build a new project, we work in two ways. We hire massively locally, of course, to train people to be able to operate, to construct and then to operate our new installations, and so that's where the training comes in for them, right from day one. Every time you start a new project, even in an affiliate that already exists, we will provide the training for those people to be able to operate whatever new project we have on the ground.
We have very technically complex projects, so we need to put a lot of training in place for these operators. And secondly, we send expertise from our head office of international people, so it's not just, you know, not just French, not just European, but a pool of international people who have had the opportunity to develop all these different expertises to go on the ground and accompany an affiliate that is starting up to be able to train people and make sure that the systems are up and running, and that people are being trained on the ground locally. So the idea is not to be able to transfer somebody from, you know, an affiliate in Angola to an affiliate in Congo en masse. That's not the kind of thinking that we do.
What we think about is, how locally do we give them the maximum opportunity to develop their skills for the businesses that we have on the ground locally? So that's really the approach that we have.
Yeah. If I may add, just to come back to your fundamental question, I think that's one big difference between TotalEnergies and other competitors. In fact, first, the question is probably 50/50 between developed countries-
Yes
... and emerging countries. Why? Because, you know, we have 100 years anniversary, but this company, we had little hydrocarbons in France, to be honest, and in fact, we have been built history. We were born in the Middle East and then in Africa. It was Total in the Middle East, half in Africa, and fundamentally, the DNA of the company is linked to these emerging countries. And when you seek to. The big moves we have done, by the way, in the last 10 years since I'm CEO, it's Brazil, where we have established a very strong position because we consider that, you know, when I take the helm, I say it's a nice company, a world company, but we are out of Brazil, out of the U.S., out of India, so think to the future of the world.
So, Brazil, we managed to go through, and we are establishing not only in oil and gas, but also renewables with Casa dos Ventos. We are strong. It's one showcase of the integrated strategy. Second is India, where in India, we had nothing, and now we have established, with Indian partners, a strong position in India, and culturally, it's not all about only investing in gas and renewables, but also having access to technical skills. And Namita, of course, is taking care. She's a godmother of pushing the organization to work with India, and that's a cultural shift which prepares the future. The third country we moved quite a bit in is the U.S., but that's different for other reason. And in fact, when you see the moves, it's less Europe and more of these countries.
If recently I have appointed Helle Kristoffersen in Asia, it's because fundamentally she's based in Japan. It takes a developed country, but I wanted somebody at the helm of the company to look to the world with different glasses than us as Europeans. Because for me, our energy world is moving to the east, I would say. This is where the demand will grow, to the east and the south, and also where, by the way, Middle East-producing countries are strong. So that's very important. We have that very much in mind, and that's clear for us that we have to drive that. And yes, we are historically Eurocentric, but and we have in Europe, this transition is accelerated, so it's also for us a field of opportunity to build competencies and skills. But in fact, fundamentally, we are also looking to Africa.
Africa is strong in the company, one-third of the company, the Middle East, and so that's very well in mind in the way we elaborate the strategy. You know, moving Helle to Asian countries, I can tell you, you know, she, she's looking to the way the transition is perceived and, in fact, put into action from these countries, and it's quite interesting every two weeks with her to discuss. So I think this is, I perfectly understand your question, and again, it's a company where the DNA is not in France. In fact, we have built the company abroad, and that's very embedded. Sometimes people think we like to go to some risky countries.
I think, in fact, this is where the demand will be, and this is where we have to be able to work with, and that's probably one competitive advantage of the company.
Yeah, and which translates, of course, locally into jobs and training and skills, very, very high technical skills.
We can take one more question, if you have one.
As of this week, we have zero.
But I have one on the platform: We saw the Care press release this morning. When can we expect it to be deployed across all the company?
It's done. It's deployed. It's a question of it now, and now it's a question of making sure, you know, that every single subsidiary works, you know, on every single aspect, but it's absolutely... You don't need to wait for an announcement. It's now. It's in deployment.
Okay, any last question? Thank you very much, Namita and Pierre. So we are now moving to the last sequence of today, which is about our sustainable transition with the Zoom on Uganda, with Mike Sangster and Jean-Philippe Torres, please. Thank you very much.
Good afternoon, everyone. Great to have a chance to speak to you today about some of our projects in Africa. My name is Mike Sangster. I look after the upstream side of the business in Africa.
I can introduce myself once again. I'm Jean-Philippe Torres. I'm in charge of Africa in the marketing and services branch.
So we're gonna have a zoom on Uganda. So I wanna just start by saying a few words about the Tilenga and EACOP projects. So you can see on the chart on the right-hand side, you have Tilenga and EACOP about 300 kms to the northwest of Kampala in Uganda. Two upstream fields, Tilenga, which we operate, Kingfisher, which is operated by CNOOC, and of course, the EACOP pipeline, which runs from Kabale in Uganda to Tanga in Tanzania. Excuse me. We have a 57% interest in the upstream and 62% in the pipeline. I think there's about 1 billion barrels of resources to be developed across the two fields, and about 230,000 barrels per day of production.
I think the first thing I want to say is that this is a low-cost, low-emissions project. The cost, the CapEx and OpEx together is less than $20 per barrel, and the emissions is less than 13 kgs per barrel, which I think was the figure that Aurélien showed you for our target for our portfolio in 2028. It'll be developed with about 400 wells across 29 pads, eight of which are in the Murchison Falls National Park, which you can see on the top corner of the chart there. So how is the... And of course, the EACOP Pipeline is about 1,400 kms, roughly 300 kms in Uganda and the rest in Tanzania. So how is the project progressing?
So I think, you know, today, we're over a third of the way through the upstream. You know, we've 3 rigs running, drilling the wells, the flow lines are being laid, the central processing facility is being built as we speak, and it's going well. Then on the EACOP side, I think at the moment, we have about 300 kms of the pipeline is being delivered to Tanzania, and we're commissioning a, a coating plant at the moment in the central Tanzania, and then we'll, we'll start the pipe laying in, in a, in a few weeks' time. So I think this project will create a lot of value for the, for the communities. I mean, obviously, it's a decision by the governments to develop their natural resources.
Uganda has 15% in the upstream, and both governments have 15% in the pipeline. It will create value also in terms of employment. I mean, in the construction phase, you can see the figures on the chart. You know, many positions have been created in the construction phase, and we're well on the way to the targets that I mentioned there of the 18,000 direct and 60,000 indirect positions. And again, during the operations phase as well, not as many obviously, but still 1,200, you know, highly skilled jobs and a number of indirect positions there as well.
And also, in terms of investment in local goods and services, you know, we see local companies participating in the civil works and the waste management and scaffolding, security, and catering, and so on. And again, we're also doing a lot in terms of training, and training could be in welding, it could be in scaffolding, it could be in driving, 'cause we have a lot of driving to do with HGV vehicles. So I think overall, the project is going pretty much according to plan at the moment. I mean, it is a challenging project, but I say it is a low-cost and low-emissions project. Now, obviously, one of the big parts of the project is the land acquisition.
I think like any large infrastructure project, we have to acquire, you know, a, a certain amount of land, and you can see some of the figures there on the top left-hand side of the chart. There's about 19,000 households which are affected by the acquisition. 775 of those have their primary residence on the, on the... in, in the areas impacted by the project, and overall, it's about 6,400 hectares of land, which we need, which we need to acquire. And I think the success of the project really will only be achieved, you know, if we, if we deliver the land acquisition project, you know, correctly and fairly.
So, of course, we're applying, you know, very high standards to the way that we do that and applying, of course, to the IFC performance standards, especially number five on the acquisition and resettlement. So how do we, how. I mean, let's say the three pillars in terms of what we've been doing, you know. Firstly, we want to minimize the impact that we have, so we prepared at the beginning a very clear framework in terms of how we're going to develop the project, applying, of course, the avoid, reduce, and compensate principles, and discussing with the, with the communities. The environmental and social impact assessments were approved for both projects in 2019 and 2020.
We surveyed very closely the land that would be needed for the project, and if we look at EACOP, for example, you know, EACOP doesn't cross any IUCN-categorized areas, nor does it cross any Ramsar or wetlands. And then, once the construction phase is finished, of the 6,400 hectares of land, about 5,000 will be restored to its initial condition. The second part really is about listening to our stakeholders. So we've run lots and lots of meetings, literally thousands of meetings with our local communities and with the stakeholders.
The compensation process, you know, we provide full compensation for the value of any assets, and also an allowance for disturbance, which, for example, in Uganda, is equivalent to 30% of the value of the land which is to be acquired, and also additional payments when there are delays in the payment process. I think what else is really important there is to have a very accessible and a very transparent grievance process, you know, which we've put in place through a number of means, through our community liaison officers, who are on the field on a daily basis, you know, websites, free phone numbers, and so on, and community meetings.
You can see there, we have had a high number of grievances, but most of which have been resolved. The grievances can cover any sorts of thing from, obviously not happy with evaluation, so we have to deal with that. Don't agree with the, let's say, the survey in terms of the number of trees or not, the quality, the quantity of crops on the land. But also, a lot of the grievances come from people whose land was not affected by the project and are asking why?
And then, we've also had a number of independent third-party reviews on the process, I mean, by the, by Golder Associates, for one, and also by the an association known as IBLAC, the Independent Biodiversity and Livelihood Committee, which we put in place ourselves, you know, several years ago, and they publish a report every year, which is available on the websites. And I think you may have seen as well, at the beginning of this year, there was announced a mission by Lionel Zinsou, you know, the former Prime Minister of Benin, who's actually, as we speak at the moment, doing a review of the whole of all of our social programs and the land acquisition program.
So then finally, in terms of how do we support the project-affected people and the communities? So clearly, you know, we will compensate either in kind or in cash. And if we take the houses, for example, I think of the 775, you know, households that were affected by the project, most of them asked for a new house to be built. And you can see at the bottom of the slide that today we've handed over 735 of the 752 houses. There are 17 which are under construction and should be completed by May. We also provide support, obviously, for relocation and what we call transition support.
So if someone can't use their land for a certain period of time during the, during the move, then we will provide, you know, food, food support over that, over that period. I think financial literacy, I think, is important as well. You know, we're helping people to... many people to open bank accounts for the, for the first time, and making sure that, you know, they understand, you know, what, what that means and how to, how to, how to manage that.
There's also an ongoing livelihood restoration program, where, again, we will provide assistance to the people, maybe to and some vocational training, for example, to help them improve the yield from their crops, and provide different, a slightly different strain of cassava, for example, which will grow more quickly and which will grow larger, so it enables them to get more value from the land. And I think it's important just to say as well, that we'll provide a particular attention to the vulnerable people in the community, which could include, you know, older people, people that are sick, mental illness.
Also make a point that any time that we're opening bank accounts and dealing with a family, that, you know, both the husband and the wife are present at the compensation discussions and opening of the accounts. So I think rather than listen to me, I think maybe now you can hear from one or two of the people affected by the project in a short video.
[FOREIGN LANGUAGE].
[FOREIGN LANGUAGE].
[FOREIGN LANGUAGE].
[FOREIGN LANGUAGE].
[FOREIGN LANGUAGE].
Okay, so I think that gives you an idea of some of the real-life example of some of the programs that are being implemented. I just wanted to say a few words now about biodiversity in the Murchison Falls National Park. I mean, you know, it is a site recognized for its rich biodiversity. It covers an area of about 3,900 square kms. There are a lot of challenges for the park at the moment. There's pressure on the wildlife. The Uganda Wildlife Authority, you know, is challenged in terms of resources, you know, both people and financial. And there is a big issue with poaching, I mean, in the park.
I mean, you know, for bush meat and an issue with deforestation and also, you know, grazing of animals near the park. So what can we do to help with that? So I think the, you know, the actions that we're trying to put in place, I mean, one, I think as I said earlier on, we try to minimize the design of the project, you know, to minimize the impact on the park. So for example, you know, the reduced footprint of the well pads. I think in the park, I mean, ultimately, we have about 90 hectares of area in the park, which is gonna be used for the well pads and for the roads.
Keep everything to a minimum, a minimum height. Build bound walls around the well pads where we're drilling, so there's no visual impact if you, if you're looking across the, across the landscape. Sound insulation, I mean, you know, the drilling rigs there are almost silent. I mean, you don't need ear protection if you're standing beside the main generator on the drilling rig. You know, you can have a conversation just like this because of the sound insulation. Crossing points for animals when we're laying the trenching for the flow lines, and no nighttime movements. I mean, there is drilling at nighttime, but no nighttime movements in the park. So one thing is to minimize the impact. Try and minimize the impact.
We're also trying to collect data on wildlife and to share it with the scientific community. So, for example, we just finished another campaign on elephant collaring in the park with the UWA. We did a number of aerial surveys of the wildlife in the park last year, and as I say, we'll share that with some of our partners, with WCS, with the UWA, with Makerere University in Kampala, and with civil society in general. What can we do to help enhance the management of the park? So we are providing support for some additional rangers in the park and providing them with some tools, you know, and to improve their effectiveness.
I mean, for example, one is called SMART, which is a kinda digital GPS-based tool, which enables them to track better, you know, where the... which areas they've surveyed recently and which areas they need to go to in the future to make sure that, you know, they can optimize the use of their time. And I think we'll also do a big campaign this year in terms of removing invasive plant species, which I think will involve the local community. It will be employment for some of the local community and should cover about 250 hectares. Poaching, I said earlier on, is a major issue, which does need to be addressed in the park.
And part of that as well, I think, is on working with the communities in terms of awareness for the, you know, the benefit of the park to the local community. So we have organized a number of programs, you know, consultations and awareness sessions with the communities to so they can try and understand, you know, better what the benefits of the park are to themselves, understand the interaction with the wildlife. And, for example, if they're going to plant crops near the park, I mean, don't plant crops, for example, which some of the wildlife might want to eat. So, I mean, elephants, for example, make sure there's different crops which are more or less attractive, so trying to give advice along those sorts of lines.
Overall, the ambition we have is to have a net gain on the... over the next 20 years, to have a net gain in terms of biodiversity, that you know, focusing on some of the key species, such as elephants and lions, and also maintain the population of antelopes and kob. But I think the main thing we're trying to put in place now is what we call a collaborative management partnership between the UWA, ourselves, the Ugandan government, and a specialist partner in running national parks. And we're just about to launch a call for tender for that shortly, which will should then be put in place and run for a minimum of 10 years, and hopefully help on the overall management of the park.
And I think, I think at this stage, there should be another short film as well, just to show some of the, what's happening in the park at the moment.
Tilenga Biodiversity Program involves designing and implementing conservation actions in partnership with several stakeholders, and this includes the government, conservation agencies, communities themselves that live around Murchison Falls and depend on Murchison Falls National Park. So for today, we are working closely with the Uganda Wildlife Authority and the Wildlife Conservation Society, that is WCS, to pilot one of the conservation actions, which involves snare removal, as well as improving the effectiveness of ranger patrol within Murchison Falls National Park.
Wire snares are one of the tools that are used by poachers around Murchison Falls National Park, especially here in Buligi sector. They are used to target antelopes and animals like buffalos. But wire snares are indiscriminate in nature. Any animal that come across them can be trapped, injured, or killed. Animals like lions, elephants, and even giraffes have been intercepted and trapped by wire snares.
TotalEnergies E&P Uganda has been a good partner, and they have supported us in a number of areas, and we have held quite a number of meetings, especially in areas where we have a lot of illegal activities taking place. When they came on board, they tried to do also their part. We shared with them some of the threats that we have, some of the challenges we have, and they played a role in helping us try to minimize on those challenges through engagements with communities and also through those radio talk shows that are aimed at minimizing the threats that we have around the park.
[FOREIGN LANGUAGE].
With the introduction of the SMART technology, which TotalEnergies and WCS has supported us, it has now improved on our performance as law enforcement department. We indeed go straight now to the real areas, and through that one, before, we used to collect less wire snares.
... around 600-700. But with the introduction of this smart technology by TotalEnergies Uganda, now we are collecting around 1,000 and above wire snares in those areas, and this one has motivated the law enforcement department.
After a successful phase 1 of the program, a second phase has been initiated in 2024 to scale it up and cover 2 additional sites of Rwankwa sector in Murchison Falls National Park and Bugungu Wildlife Reserve for a period of 1 year.
As TotalEnergies E&P Uganda, working closely with our partners and stakeholders, Uganda Wildlife Authority, Wildlife Conservation Society, the Petroleum Authority of Uganda, National Environment Management Authority, and all the others, we are conserving together for future generations.
I think just to put that in perspective, I think the first, the first campaign they did in this year, in February this year, they recovered 600 snares within one week. So moving on now to renewables within Uganda and Tanzania. So, I mean, as we're doing in, you know, many countries around the world, we're implementing our multi-energy strategy. So we have an investment in upstream, in oil and gas in Uganda, but we're also trying to develop a renewable power business. So what have we done so far? I think the concrete actions we've taken so far is we are putting in place a 15-MW plant within our central processing facility as part of the Tilenga project.
So that's being developed, and that should be ready for startup by the end of next year, and obviously will, you know, will reduce the consumption of of gas at the plant to provide electricity. And we're also looking at a much larger project, a 150-MW project, which thermal project, which would, which we need, we need to heat a lot of, a lot of water for the process there. So we're looking to put that in place, but through using solar panels on a much larger scale, also in the central processing facility.
As far as the, let's say, the grid is concerned, so we have one project already in, in Uganda, which is the Soroti plant, which is a 10-MW plant, which started up a few years ago. And at the moment, we're looking at a couple of new projects, both at 25 MW each. The Tororo and the Iganga project, which both 25 MW, with a plan to sanction them by the end of next year. So that's in, so that would be 60 MW in Uganda. Then as far as Tanzania is concerned, then we're progressing towards what's called the Kishapu 115-MW plant, which is kind of in the middle, in the, in the, in the middle of, pretty much in the middle of, Tanzania.
And again, we're looking to sanction that project next year as well. And then beyond that, we've signed an MOU with Tanesco, with the Tanzania utility company, to look for a 100-MW wind farm. And in fact, again, in the central Tanzania, there is a very good area with very good potential for wind power. So I think our ambition really between the two countries, Uganda and Tanzania, is to have something between 500 MW to 1 GW of renewable power in place.
We can see from what we've done already, then we are saving about 200 kilotons already of CO2 based on what we have already implemented, and obviously, that would increase as we move towards the ambition for 500 gigawatts to megawatts to 1 gigawatt.
Thank you very much, Mike. So I am the last speaker of the afternoon, so I know that you have already got a lot of information. But please give me another 10 minutes of your attention because I'm going to talk about what I think is a very important topic for Africa, which is clean cooking. And to start, I would like to give you some background information about clean cooking in Africa and LPG. LPG, liquefied petroleum gas. Do you know that out of the 2.3 billion people who don't have access to clean cooking worldwide, 1 billion people live in Africa? It means that more than two-thirds of the African population has not access to clean cooking. It's not written on this slide, but it's my mistake.
Do you know that 500,000 women die each year prematurely in Africa because of bad cooking conditions? It is just unacceptable. To fight this unacceptable situation, we do think, like, IEA, by the way, that LPG is really a key enabler to fight and to develop access to clean cooking in Africa. Why? First of all, on health, it is quite obvious. LPG produces much less harmful fumes than charcoal and wood, the traditional biomass fuels. Number two, on economy and gender equality. In the households without access to clean cooking, an average of two hours per day is spent to collect wood, and obviously, this task is, most of the time, maybe I should say every time, done by women and even girls. Third point on environment.
When you switch from charcoal or wood to LPG, you reduce deforestation. And last point, on CO2, LPG has a, also a positive impact on, on, LPG, on, CO2, sorry, compared to, charcoal and wood. And according to, IEA, in the last report they issued in, in July 2023, achieving clean cooking in Africa for all would save 900 billion ton CO2 a year. So it's, I think, very clear that the use of LPG has to be promoted in Africa, has to be developed in Africa, and we do think at, at TotalEnergies, that we have a, a role to play in this. How? First of all, we can distribute locally the LPG we produce. And let's take the example of Uganda. In Uganda, the LPG market is very small.
It represents, it is 25,000 tons a year, which represents 0.5 kilo LPG consumption per person. Just for you to have some comparison, it's 4 kilos in Kenya, 4 kilos in Zimbabwe, 9 kilos in Ghana, and more than 10 in Senegal. So it's really very low, and only 5% of the population has access to clean cooking in this country. So the picture is not that nice, but we have good news. The good news is that the project Mike has just spoken about, Tilenga and Kingfisher in Uganda, will produce 100,000 tons LPG a year. So really, really, really, what we have to do is to bring this LPG to the local population.
And for that, we have to in a way, to create a market, not alone, with all the stakeholders. And for that, the action plan is quite clear. Number one, we have to engage and work with all the stakeholders to promote LPG as a safe, reliable, and competitive source of energy. We all know that in these countries, there are sometimes some psychological barriers to use LPG, and we have to change this. And for that, we need everybody. We need the NGOs, we need the association, the local association, the women association, which are very powerful. And this is, by the way, what we did in many countries in Africa and also in Asia, to convince people to switch to LPG. Then, obviously, LPG has to be affordable.
But in this case, it's really an opportunity because we will produce LPG locally, and today, the LPG, which is consumed in Uganda, comes by road from Tanzania and Kenya. Obviously, the transport costs are extremely high. Then, it's our job with the industry is to invest in additional assets: storage, LPG storage, filling center, filling plants, and cylinders. The last point in this action plan, which is, I think, very important, is to try to fix an important problem for bottled LPG in these countries.
You know, when you switch from, let's say, charcoal to LPG, you need a quite high upfront cost or payment because you have to pay a deposit for the cylinder, you have to pay for the burner, you have to pay for the stand on which you put the cooking pot, and then you have to pay for a minimum of six kilo gas. And this is a lot of money for a lot of people, for these poor people. And that's why we need a solution. And there is another good news, is that now in East Africa, not only in East Africa, by the way, but in some countries in Africa, we have now digital solutions, which allow people to pay as they consume.
Actually, it's relatively simple. It's a smart meter connected to the cylinder, and then people don't have to pay $20, $30, $40 before starting. They just pay exactly what they consume. And this is a major, major, major improvement for this market. So this is with this action plan, once again, not only done by TotalEnergies alone, with many stakeholders, but we do think that we can market this LPG produced by Mike and his colleagues, and we can impact positively 5 million people locally. But it's not the only thing we can do, because in Africa, we already have quite strong positions in LPG marketing. We already distribute LPG in Africa in 17 territories.
which means that we impact today 11 million households, representing more or less 45 million people. It's not small, it's still significant, but we are convinced that we can do and we must do more. And to do this, there are two ways. The first one is to try to enter new territories. So it's what we did last year because we started LPG activities in Rwanda and in Tanzania. In these countries, we had already retail business or service station business, but we started LPG bottled business. And this year, we intend to start to launch LPG activity in Mozambique and Namibia.
And the second axis is to increase, our growth, the growth of the or the, our growth strategy, or to increase our development in, the countries where we have clearly a clean cooking potential. On the slide you have in front of you, we, we listed a few countries, Cameroon, Kenya, Ivory Coast, Senegal, South Africa, and Uganda. In this country, we, we do think that we can do more, that we can, impact more people. And that's why altogether, we are ready to invest from now till 2030, more than $400 million CapEx, in Africa, in these countries, in order to impact, to double the impact we have on LPG, business, on clean cooking. And it means that, we, we should, we will, impact 85 million people by 2030.
As we intend to do the same thing in India, altogether, TotalEnergies intends to impact 100 million people by 2030 with LPG clean cooking. So this is what I wanted to tell you about clean cooking. I think it's a great project for TotalEnergies. Let me tell you that in my teams in the countries in the affiliates we have in Africa, all of my colleagues are extremely excited and proud to have the opportunity, the possibility to be part of this great project, and to have a concrete action on the improvement of health, of environment in the country where we operate. So this is what I wanted to tell you. And now, I think-
Thank you very much, Mike and Jean-Philippe. So last Q&A of the day. Who wants to start? Yes, we have a question here.
Thank you. Hi, Harry from Robeco again. I just wanted to clarify something about the route. Mike, you said that the EACOP doesn't cross any IUCN one or two or Ramsar wetlands, but the feeder pipeline from some of the well pads in the national park, does that not originate in an IUCN area across a wetland to get to the gathering station or the processing facility?
Yeah, that's right. I mean, I was talking about EACOP. I mean, obviously, we've got eight well pads in the Murchison Falls National Park, you know, which is an IUCN Category II site. And I think... And we have to do a crossing across the, underneath the River Nile.
Yes, go ahead. Yeah.
Hello, Alejandro Vigil, Santander again. It's a question about in Africa, probably one of the challenges is to find the contractors, no? For such a huge pipeline. Which are your contractors, and how you develop or establish the, the, the standards in terms of the, the construction works in that project? Thank you.
Yeah, well, see, I mean, it's, I mean, we are obviously we have to bring in a number of international contractors. I mean, for example, for the upstream, the main contractor is McDermott. But then McDermott will then employ a number of local companies to do some of the, say, some of the civil works, for example. And I mean, we showed some figures in terms of employment. So again, the contractors are employing lots of people through the process. I mean, on the pipeline, I mean, on EACOP, I mean, the pipe is being manufactured in China by a Chinese company, and the company laying the pipeline is a Chinese company as well.
But again, in Tanzania, they have to employ a lot of subcontractors for the construction works and train people to do that. So that's why the employment figures are so big across both projects. So I mean, it's a mix of international companies and local companies. And for example, I didn't mention the coating plant, I think, and for EACOP, it's just being commissioned at the moment, and that's actually being done in country, in Tanzania. So the 1,400 kms of pipeline will all be coated. It's manufactured in China. The insulation will be put on in Tanzania, then obviously laid across the whole length.
Question? Yes, we have a question here.
Yeah. Howard Risby from Federated Hermes. Just interested in the financing of the project. I understand that a number of financers and insurers have withdrawn from the opportunity of financing the project due to concerns around the environmental and social impacts, and there's still a portion of the debt financing that is outstanding. Could you give us some insights into the conversations that you're having with potential financers and how you're trying to allay their concerns, and any insights on when the financial close may happen? Thank you.
... I mean, we're working actively on the financing at the moment. And I mean, okay, we'll see where we are in the coming weeks and months, if we can, we should be able to close that maybe in a couple of different stages. I think, you know, we've done a number of field trips for some of the potential investors, the banks, and the export credit agencies that are interested in the pipeline, and I think the best thing we can do is take them there and show them what's actually happening on the ground.
I think it dispels some of the perceptions I think there may be about the project or some of the untruths that I think have been mentioned about the project over recent years. And I think the second thing is that really now for about two years, we've been much more proactive, I think, in communicating on the project. And any time that we're challenged, any time we see something published which we think is just plainly not true, then we will, you know, publish something just showing what's actually been done and try and challenge some of the untruths that have been said.
So I think a combination of the field visits and, you know, really I think if you look at the website, the EACOP website, the via TotalEnergies.com, you can see a lot of information there on the project.
Yes.
Thank you. Mathias Pedersen from PFA Asset Management. Picking up on your point, Mike, it is obviously a controversial project in some stakeholders' eyes. Wondered if you could shed a bit of light on your own ESG risk assessments in the project as it has developed, perhaps notably in terms of the climate aspects and also human rights in terms of compensation, and whether that has led to some reflections on TotalEnergies' conduct or perhaps some of the conducts on your partner's behalf or subcontractors.
I would say from my own personal experience from when I've been on the site, I think what we're doing in Uganda and Tanzania, I think, is raising the bar in terms of what we do as a company. You know, you know, I mean, I think like any large infrastructure project, there are lots of... We need to acquire land, and I think as we say, it's been done to high standards in a very professional manner and in a very caring manner. You know, I mean, I think, you know, we... 99% of the agreements have been signed.
You know, out of the thousands of agreements, I mean, you know, there's only a relatively small number which have finished up in disputes. I mean, I think if we look at Tilenga, for example, there was about 40 agreements not signed, and many of those are because, you know, we can't find the people that own the land or because disputes amongst the project-affected people. There's really about 6 or 7 which are really not happy with the compensation. I think on EACOP, I mean, it goes over a much larger area, but I think then again, we're down to a relatively small number, 20, 30 cases where there's been a- they haven't accepted the compensation so far.
So I think, we say we're trying to make an effort to be sure that we, that we handle that correctly. And in terms of human rights, I mean, again, there's, you know... And any time that we see, if there's a protest against the project, I mean, maybe the people have been arrested or whatever, we always make sure we go to the local police stations and, you know, look out for the welfare of the people that are in custody and make sure that we remind the local authorities of their obligations in terms of how to deal with the people.
So I think, you know, we, you know, we can't - we're not responsible for that, but we can do what we can to make sure that the - it's limited and the impact is as small as it can be.
Questions?
Just to add, I draw one lesson of these onshore projects personally, and it's true on both sides, in Uganda and Mozambique. I think, one of the problem is that it has been too long, the process of studying. And because there were some delays in the approval of the project with the Uganda authorities, we raised some expectations from the people which were affected five, six years ago. And in fact, at a certain point, because of this, I would say, negotiations which were on stage, we had to stop, and then we came back. That created obviously something. And the lesson I draw is that, these, in these type of projects, first, onshore projects are more complex than offshore, it's clear, and we need to have that in mind. So be careful before to engage.
And secondly, we should tackle with this question of land acquisition much early, much... And including of the relocation before even we launch the project. Because what is difficult is to make in parallel the whole project, with the project itself, and to take care at the same time of land acquisition. That creates an interface, which is difficult, by the way, and it draw some of the criticism. So my personal lesson I draw is that if we are to embark in another project like, onshore like that, we will have first to take care of the people before we have can embark with the projects.
I know that that means sanctioning, because it's a question of having done it so that when we come to build, it's done, and not in parallel, which creates this type of, I would say, controversies. But let's be clear, the behavior of our teams on the ground is really taking care of people, as we said, is fundamental in the DNA of the company. So I know they are doing their best. The reality that these projects is probably the most complex we have ever built in the company, even if I discovered that in 1934, we built the longest pipeline between Iraq and the Mediterranean Sea in order to bring oil from the discovery in Iraq to France.
But there was less people probably by that time today, and less media as well, and less... So that's the lesson I draw. So it's clear, to be honest, that, as a CEO of the company, when we see some onshore projects coming, we have to take care of hydrocarbons. Knowing that in renewables, we have a lot of onshore projects, in fact. And so what we experienced that not of the size of a 1,000-km pipeline, but, you know, and we are facing this question with communities and interface between a wind farm or solar farm and the local communities, even in developed countries. And so that's something where we need to embed all this capacity to anticipate and to dialogue and to answer questions in the company, because, again, developing deploying some renewable projects is also putting some challenges.
But I think phasing that in a better way rather than parallel is something we should have. We should have cope with some of the questions, demonstrating that it's done, and then we can do it. Again, do it quicker because it's too long. In Mozambique, to be honest, we suffered as well of the COVID. The relocation of the people in the village was stopped during the COVID because it was impossible to work. We re-accelerated; now it's completely done. That created, by the way, some also, I would say, some people when I visited them, you know, the village was cut in two parts. The ones which were relocated and the people who remained in the old previous village, obviously, for us, not comfortable.
We immediately said we need to relocate them, and that was not in our... The COVID, unfortunately, stopped the work, but after we visited, it was done in 3-4 months. So it was just a question of timing and being able to expedite is also important, respecting, of course, the will of the people. But I think that's the lessons I draw of all that. So we, you know, and if I have asked Lionel Zinsou to make a mission, it's not because they have any doubts, but I'm sure there are things which can be improved, like Jean-Christophe Rufin explained us in his report on Mozambique. I read it, and I saw some areas of improvement. So we have to learn, and I saw Lionel Zinsou do the same on the ground.
It's not because they have doubts, that is 99% doubt, but we can always improve, and maybe he will raise some ideas that we have to take on board in order to make it even better. So that's raising the bar. That's what I think. And having an external eye is also important for me. I think, of course, our teams are doing their best, but being able to bring somebody who looks at it from an external point of view is helping as well to improve and even to do it better for the people.
Thank you. Any question? I think it's 5:30 P.M., so I think we can close the session on time. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mike. Thank you, Jean-...
Just one point. You've seen some video. The video, of course, are nice. But, I think if some of you would like to go on the ground, seriously, because I think the best is to go on the ground to be convinced or to look at it, not to be convinced, but just to have your own personal assumption of that, because it's quite a controversy. I can tell you, it's something which is heavy to bear, to bear. We are organizing a first field trip, but if some more people would like, we'll be happy to do it, because I think most of the question you can see, have, you, you could have in your heart, in your mind yesterday, you could go and discuss with people on the ground.
It's really, it's really, for us, and don't worry, it will not be an organized trip, where we show you only the great, the good thing. But I'm serious because it's, I think I'm convinced the people who all visited that and are just coming back, the board members. Some board members will go very soon. I invited them to go on the ground as well. And some bankers, which are some banking teams that I met, told me that they changed their mind compared to what they read before. So that's the best thing we can offer today. That's the point.
Thank you very much. I would like to thank all the speakers who have been doing a great job. I would like also to thank my team, because they have been doing a good job. There are a lot of efforts, a lot of energy, and, of course, the ESG team, Manon and Benoit, are always available if you have questions, follow-up questions. We hope that you enjoyed the format, and, we hope to do it again, soon. Thank you very much. Have a nice evening. We move to the cocktail. Thank you.