Welcome, everybody. Welcome to Aberdeen. I'd like to say that I think you've been right, actually coming, all of you, to Aberdeen, because you'll have the opportunity today to meet with all Comex members. They are all of them in front of you, it will be very interesting and active day. We'll start this morning with the presentation. This afternoon, we'll go to the subsidiary Total E&P UK, where we'll walk the talk and see and show you how we put in acts, actually what is being presented. Proof of concept is very important. Let's start now. Before actually we do the presentation, we're going to start with a short movie about the highlights of 2019, and then Arnaud Breuillac will win you with a safety moment. Let's start with the highlights of 2019. All right.
The floor is for Arnaud for the safety moment.
Good morning, everybody. Today, we decided to share with you a safety incident that occurred on one of our drilling rigs. We are offshore Angola on Block 17 on the 10th of January of this year at 6:45 P.M. The rig is located on one of the Zinia Phase 2 well. We are in the moon pool, looking at the moon pool of the rig, which is where the drilling riser is going down the seabed. We have two Seadrill personnel working on a mobile platform, as you see, working on installing flexible lines to the BOP, the blow preventer. A third person that you will see a bit better when I will launch the video, is actually assigned to the panel controlling the platform. I suggest we look at the video now. What happened?
The personnel assigned to the panel attempted to move the platform closer to the riser. In doing that, he operated the incorrect lever. This caused the pins that are supporting the platform to retract. The platform fell to the seabed and sank approximately 1,500 m to the seabed. What actions were taken? Immediately, all operations were stopped. We recovered the two personnel who were on the platform. There was a general safety stand down on the rig, full inspection of the riser from the surface to the seabed, recovery of the platform a bit later. There was a flash report to all drilling entities issued on the 17th of January, a full investigation launched and a report issued on the 27th of January. The first observation is that the two persons on the platform were saved by their lifelines.
The use of proper PPE, which is one of our golden rules, was the last safety barrier. It played its role. The second observation is that the investigation revealed that two similar events had occurred previously on Seadrill rigs working for another operator. After these previous events, an action plan was defined, including, first, the installation of a secondary retention for the platform, and second, an isolation of the handle activating the pins retraction when the platform is in use. These actions were not implemented by Seadrill. The second takeaway is that learning from incidents is critical, and follow-up of safety improvement action is also critical. Finally, we asked the CEO of the drilling contractor to come to our office, to headquarters, for the debrief of the event, and he committed to improve on the company's lessons learned process. Thank you.
Good morning. Thank you, Arnaud, for this safe moment. I would like first, of course, to welcome all of you here in Aberdeen. First time in our history that we make these results and outlook not in London or Paris, Aberdeen. We've done it for several purposes, because as you can see, there are some new faces in the executive team. Not only Alexis Vovk as President for Marketing & Services, who took over from Momar on January 1st. Also our CFO, Jean-Pierre, you begin to know him, and Helle as a President of Strategy. We thought it was a good opportunity to gather together for one day so that you have more opportunities to discuss and know them better, and not only the previous members of the team.
It's one of the objectives today, which we will spend the day together here in Aberdeen to have more opportunity to discuss and to interact. The second reason why we are here is also a way for us to pay tribute to all our U.K. teams and subsidiaries. They have done quite remarkable work since 2017, and we decided to acquire Maersk Oil. You will have the opportunity also to see how we can work to in action the action on this merger, how we derive the synergies, or we have the new development as well, the Culzean development is good on stream. There is a lot of things to observe, to discuss.
This afternoon, we will come back on something which surprised a little when we decided to acquire North Sea, but North Sea is part of the strength of the company. We have decided to even rejuvenate this portfolio with Culzean, with as well, part of this portfolio. I think it's part of the reasons of the strong results we deliver today. It's a good opportunity for you to better understand how we can operate here in the U.K. and in the North Sea. Coming back to this presentation as an introduction, of course, as you had a chance to see with the results, we faced in 2019 a weaker environment, I would say an average of 20%, 10% on crude, 40% on gas, oil is 20%. In front of this, we managed to demonstrate once again the resilience of the company.
Net agency results is -15%. Net results IFRS is almost the same. More importantly, the cash flow delivery has been quite strong despite this weaker environment, plus $2.5 billion. One of them is coming from the IFRS 16 rules, but the other are real cash, which of course is strong and it's linked to, I would say, cash flow. We will come back on all the explanations, but I would fundamentally say two things in introduction. For me, it is a result of the two pillars of the strategy since 2015. One of them is, of course, to focus all the company of delivery, operational excellence. I think it's fundamental. I repeat each time, we don't know what the price will be. Volatility is strong.
We don't control the price, but our first duty of all teams around the world and the management is to deliver the most out of all the assets. It's a matter of safety, it's a matter of availability of the plants, it's a matter of cost control. This pillar is functioning well. For example, VCA in petrochemicals, we increase again the availability. It's part of the reason why we managed, despite lower petrochemical margin, to maintain a good result. That's an example. We will have others during the presentation. The second pillar of the strategy was to be, what I say, countercyclical since 2017, to be active in order to take some opportunities. Of course, this fit the growth and Maersk Oil, there again, required at $60.
The first two years of execution of production for Maersk Oil in our portfolio was $72 last, in 2018, $64 this year. Obviously, this helped to grow the cash out of operations. The second, I would say, emblematic acquisition we've done was the LNG assets, growing our LNG business. 2019 is really the year where all that is a combination of the LNG portfolio plus our own, I would say, development in LNG, like Ichthys, like Yamal, makes quite a strong push of an increase of production of more than 40%, the sales more than 50%. We'll come back on it. I would say this strategy of being countercyclical and to play to our strengths in LNG, in the North Sea, in Africa with Anadarko assets, has some strong end results and I would say, puts the company in a good position.
That's, I would say, the main message I want to deliver in introduction, and Jean-Pierre will come back on all the financial results. We'll make the presentation. You will have seven voices today, not one, not two, seven. Lot of theater, there are movies. I'm introducing, then Alain will present the macro environment, then Jean-Pierre will make the financial results, and then each head of the divisions will present his own results and outlook for 2020. Arnaud for E&P, Bernard for Refining & Chemicals, Alexis for Marketing & Services, Philippe for iGRP. I will come back to speak about, I would say, energy transition and return to shareholders, the future, for the conclusion. Before to give the floor to Alain, just two words about HSE. Like always, I'm taking that because it's fundamental. The S of HSE is safety.
You've seen the safety moment. We continue to put a strong emphasis about safety. Again, I just said it's a cornerstone of all the operational excellence and as we are all convinced of it. The statistics continue to improve. 0.8 total recordable injury rate in the company, so it's another improvement, of course. It's good for contractors, for staff, both. We are, I would say, in the middle of the pack compared to our peers, so we can continue to improve. There's no way to stop the domain. Unfortunately, I would say we deployed four fatalities, which is not at the level of excellence we are targeting. These four fatalities were all concerning contractor staff. That's a point. They were all also, in fact, the same code, which was 4 from 8. Which, of course, oblige us to remobilize everybody.
We put some working group together with the contractors on how can we reach zero fatal accidents, because obviously, the only acceptable, I would say, target we should have, zero fatal accidents. We put together with contractors, the teams at Total. Some decisions have been taken in terms of actions, in particular, no green light after some works on site. We need to have a special green light. I hope it will improve, but it's a concern, to be clear, for all of us. We are really mobilized on this zero fatal accidents policy because it's something we should eliminate. The industry is suffering too many fatal accidents, but Total is part of it. This chart on this slide, you have an example of what we speak about when we say the value of high safety standards. This year was the 20-year anniversary of the Erika catastrophe.
We took the example this year of shipping fleet to show you that we, even 20 years after, we maintain the same strict policy. It was not just a reaction, it's still a permanent policy. The average age of our charter fleet is eight years, compared to a world fleet of 14. We keep the standards, which help us not only to have, with a modern fleet, I would say, higher safety standard, but also, by the way, it's good for CO2 because it's reduced consumption. These fleets, the newest ships are consuming less, and so less emissions. Which gives my transition to my next slide. After safety, there's CO2, which is the other priority. We elevate it in 2019. We decided to elevate it so that it's part of the same level of priority, I would say.
On each site in Total today, you should see, and if you don't see, you can complain to me, but you should see on each site not only the safety statistics, but the CO2 emissions. It's a way to elevate the awareness of all the staff about it. What we observed, that there is quite a lot of positive reaction and even enthusiasm among the teams to try to contribute to fight these CO2 emissions and to contribute directly to the climate change. The board of directors decided at the beginning of the year to put Scope 1 and 2 objectives, not only a figure, but also it's linked to the variable pay of the CEO and all executives of the company, so we motivate everybody. We set the objective in absolute terms, which is, I would say, a challenge because we want to grow.
We want to, one side is less emissions, on the other side is more energy. Which is, by the way, I would say the global challenge of the world. How do we continue to deliver more energy but less emissions? We do it on our own limit, on our operated, on the assets we control with the Scope 1 and 2 target. We took the 2015 perimeter, 46 million tons. We want to be under 40 million tons. The results of 2019 is 41.5. You could tell me the target is not ambitious, it's not true, because if you look carefully to this slide, you can see that the dark orange perimeter, which we have the 2015, is declining and the emissions are declining strongly.
They are at about, in 2019, these are about 36 million tons, which means that the decrease of 22% of this perimeter of 2015, 22% in four years. In 2025, this perimeter will decline to around 30 million tons. A decrease of more than a third of emission. Of course, in the meantime, we continue to develop the company. We acquire assets, we make some startups. There are additional emissions on which the intensity should be, of course, absolutely controlled, which is, we need to be sure that the additional new emissions are really minimized as much as we can. It's why the 46, we should become 40 in absolute terms. Of course, if we can do more, we'll do more. Again, the mobilization in the company makes me optimistic about it.
In terms of intensity, you have on the right side, you can see that the upstream emission intensity of Total is at around 20 kilo CO2 per barrel, which is under peers are between 22 and 35, peers being the large, the five key large majors. We want to lower this CO2 intensity under 20. With some of our In the E&P, we can see that some of our colleagues are even targeting 10, we can do better. That's clear. This is part of the new projects must have this type of standard. This is the first, this is the results. If we look to a longer term, by the way, since 2005. In 2005, the company was, emissions were around 80 million tons. We are today around 40 million tons.
That means that again, this matter is a permanent objective, and today it's even more focused for company for obvious reasons. These were my two introduction about HSE, I would say. Now I will leave the floor to Helle to speak about the markets.
Thank you, Patrick. Good morning, everyone. I hope you can hear me all right. As always, we propose to reframe the business presentation with just a couple of macro charts. Starting with oil and oil markets. What were the highlights of 2019 and what's the outlook for 2020? According to the most recent data from the IEA, which is shown here in the bubbles on the chart, oil demand grew by 1 million barrels per day in 2019. That number is subject to revisions, as always, because we're early in the year. In any case, it's a little lower than the three-year average, which was closer to 1.5 million barrels per day. Good growth in 2019 for oil demand, but maybe somewhat disappointing.
On the supply side, the OPEC+ discipline has been on aggregate good and will step up in December with the additional 0.5 million barrels per day cuts, as you're all aware. We call that a supportive policy from OPEC+. When it comes to refining, the increase in crude prices and the higher product inventory levels in OECD countries put those refining margins under pressure towards the end of the year. For 2020 now. The IEA January report forecasted a pickup in demand growth for this year to 1.2 million barrels per day. Again, as always, this number is subject to upward and downward revisions. Right now, the markets are trying to get to grips with the impact of the virus outbreak in China. Will it impact overall economic growth? Will there be demand destruction?
I think very short term, immediately as we're talking, the answer is yes, no doubt, because China is slowing down and sometimes stopping activity. The real question is, how many barrels will be lost and for how long? The markets are very nervous about these questions right now. I think honestly, it's a little too early to say, and let's just be careful not to overreact. On the supply side, in addition to the ongoing slowdown of shale production growth out of the U.S., of course, geopolitical risk and instability is back on the front scene once again, notably in Iraq, also elsewhere in the Middle East and in Libya. OPEC+ cohesion is going to be a key theme this year, including the short-term market management of the situation in China with possible extension of the existing cuts and ongoing discussions on more cuts, Corona cuts.
Another key theme will be oil security, which cannot be taken for granted. For refining, we expect the beginning of the IMO regulations to be positive for business throughout the year. Moving on to petrochemicals. Illustrated here by the ethylene and polyethylene markets. 2019's been a good year when it comes to demand. The annual growth looks to be in line with the longer-term 3% increase trend. Asia in particular is driving that growth, pulled by China and by India. On the supply side, you know that the name of the game is access to low-cost feedstock and that worldwide capacities are split between ethane and naphtha crackers. We're showing here the historical margin trend in dollars to tons for three U.S. and European markets, specific segments, and we've annualized the margins because otherwise the graph would have been really hard to read. What you can see is that U.S.
ethylene margins on ethane, so monomer margins, and that's the orange curve to the bottom of the graph. These margins have been trending downward since 2015 and then really come under pressure due, if I simplify, to the wave of new crackers that came on stream ahead of the related new PE units. The integrated monomer polymer margins, on the other hand, on ethane, have been faring much better, and that's a lighter blue curve on the top of the chart. The darker blue curve shows the evolution of the same margin integrated monomer polymer on naphtha, which would be more representative of Europe and Asia, even if more and more crackers tend to be flexible, of course. The simple message is that monomer polymer integration creates value, and Bernard will tell you more about that, I think. Coming to gas, and more specifically to LNG.
Have a look at the bar charts here. I think they convey the main message. After 9% growth in 2018, LNG market growth accelerated in 2019 to 13%, which is above the 10% CAGR since 2015. That growth acceleration is due, of course, to the low LNG prices and also as a broader backdrop to local climate policies that are in favor to gas. LNG is definitely confirming its role in creating more integrated and more liquid worldwide LNG and gas markets. A lot has been said about China LNG demand. What are the facts for last year? You probably noted that China overtook Japan as the number 1 LNG importer worldwide in November and December 2019. Below the bar charts, we also show the estimated Chinese LNG import growth for the full year of 2019.
The growth has slowed down from the skyrocketing pace of the last three years, so 2016, 2017, and 2018, which is perfectly normal. Growth increase is still very strong considering the size of the imports that are now above 16 million tons. All in all, last year, there was double-digit growth for China LNG imports at around 13%. Europe was another key LNG market, of course. I'll come to that in just a second. For 2020, supply will continue to be plentiful. The year is starting with continued softness in prices. That's likely to continue to be a positive for demand. Even if the markets are focused elsewhere right now, specifically on the virus outbreak, I'd also add that the partial U.S.-China trade deal is positive for U.S. energy exports, amongst which, of course, LNG. A last chart on the European power markets.
What you see here with the bar chart is the actual power generated in terawatt-hours in Europe from sun and wind and gas turbines. We've shown it since 2016 with estimated data for 2019. What's really remarkable is that the amount of electricity generated last year from gas grew more or less at the same pace as the amount of electricity generated from solar and wind. That's remarkable simply because the installed power capacity expanded for renewables but was flat for gas plants. In other words, the gas runs and the gas power plant load factors went up significantly in 2019 in Europe. This is, of course, explained by the cheaper LNG resulting from the huge pickup in LNG imports into Europe. They were up by more than 85%, owing to the amount of available regas capacity in Europe.
Rising CO2 prices also contributed to creating a market arbitrage in favor of gas in several European countries, such as Spain, Italy, or Germany. In summary, 2019 saw really tremendous gas demand creation related to power generation in Europe, and it triggered a clear upside for those market players that are integrated on the gas power plant value chain, which Philippe will comment a little later. For 2020, the gas power plant outlook remains positive, with more countries accelerating the switch away from coal. Spain is continuing on the trend from last year, and the Netherlands are joining in. Of course, the increased penetration of renewables will continue to require reliable baseload capacity in Europe at a time when the French nuclear production has been somewhat shaky and at a time when Germany is continuing its planned decommissioning of nuclear reactors.
That's all I wanted to say as a global framing, and now, Jean-Pierre, I hand over to you. Thank you.
Thank you. Good morning, everyone. As shown by Helle, our industry is faced with volatility in commodity prices and margins. The consequence is very clear. We have to keep the discipline. At Total, I think we are relentless in our efforts to cut costs, to reduce the breakeven, and to upgrade our portfolio. Clearly, this is with constant pressure to execute and deliver that is reflected in our track records of superior performance compared to our peers. Despite a weaker environment in 2019 compared to 2018, so of course, I will come back later, today, we announced very strong results and growing cash flow. Once again, I think with these figures, we've demonstrated our ability to consistently deliver at the highest level among our peers. Let's move to one of the key metrics, cash flow.
You know the environment was weaker in 2019 compared to 2018. Oil and gas prices on average were down by about 20%, and gas prices over the same period were down by about 10%. Despite this less favorable environment, we increased cash flow by about $2 billion, so that means 8%, to more than $26 billion. Another very interesting or very remarkable element is that all segments performed well in this cash flow generation. For 2019, Total is best in class as the only IOC able to increase its cash flow. For Upstream, high-quality volume growth more than offset these weaker commodity prices. E&P is the largest contributor, up 1% for the year to $18 billion. iGRP is the fastest-growing segment with an impressive 8% growth to $3.7 billion. Of course, it's the reflection of the 60% increase in LNG sales last year.
Downstream continues to deliver strong cash flow from its diversified portfolio. Despite the 10% decrease in refinery margin and petrochemical margins, the result was stable, or the cash flow, sorry, was stable at $6.6 billion for the year. Cash flow allocation was delivered in line with guidance. We invested $17.4 billion, taking into account $4.1 billion of net M&A, net acquisition. Of course, we closed the Mozambique LNG deal in September and part of this $4.1 billion net acquisition. As you see, we returned $9.2 billion in 2019 to our shareholders, $7.5 for dividends and $1.75 through buybacks. As you know, we consider that controlling the breakeven is at the heart of our sustainability, and in the last year, we continued to reduce the breakeven, and we drove the organic pre-dividend breakeven below $25 per barrel. Let's move to the results.
Total is continuing to deliver strong results across all segments. The decrease in adjusted net income was limited to 30%, 13%, demonstrating the resilience of our portfolio in a weaker environment. Adjusted net income was $11.8 billion for the year, and return on equity remained above 10% at 10.4%. That means the highest among our peers. In the Upstream, E&P generated $7.5 billion, down 12% compared to 2018. This reflects, of course, the 10% drop in Brent and the 40% fall in gas pricing, and this drop was partially offset by production growth and of course, the efforts we have done on our costs. iGRP was stable year-over-year, thanks to the strong increase I mentioned already in our LNG sales, around 60%. Our Downstream sector resisted well, reflecting the advantage of our diversified low breakeven asset base. It generated $4.7 billion of adjusted net income.
That means a decrease of 7% compared to 2018. R&C, Refining & Chemicals net operating results was at $3.0 billion, in line with the lower margin. Marketing & Services, once again, continue to contribute significantly to the downstream net operating income at $1.7 billion. As mentioned in my introduction, we are keeping constant pressure on OpEx. You see here the significant progress we have made on cost reduction fronts throughout the group. Compared to the 2014 business, the cost saving in 2019 was $4.7 billion. We target more than $5 billion in 2020. Now we are setting a new target for 2023 to reduce cost by an additional $1 billion. This is a company-wide effort. All the segments contributed to this effort, even if the majority of the cost saving came and will continue to come from the Upstream.
As you know, we improve efficiency across the group. We have simplified our process and our organization. Leading the way is the TotalEnergies Global Procurement, which has achieved already more than $900 million in savings. The major driver for this cost saving is, of course, the centralization of the purchases. From an average of 15% of procurement centralized in 2015, last year in 2019, we are above 30%, and we target 40% in 2020. Digitalization and robotics, artificial intelligence will be, of course, the next wave of efficiency and will contribute to lower our costs and to structurally improve profitability. Of course, we are at the beginning of the journey, and so we are in Aberdeen and this afternoon, you will see some digital realization made by our E&P subsidiaries. A focus on upstream performance in 2019. Upstream delivered outstanding performance last year.
Brent was down by 10%. NBP, so the European gas prices, decreased by close to 40%. On average, I would say prices were down by about 20%. Despite this environment, the cash flow increased by more than 9% compared to the previous year. This means that the 9% increase in volumes more than offset the weaker environment. Upstream cash flow growth was driven by high cash margin production. What we call the Big Four, I mean the two LNG projects, one in Australia, it is the second in Russia, Yamal, plus the two deep offshore project we have in Nigeria and in Angola, I mean Egina and Kaombo project. These Big Four projects contributed around $4 billion of cash flow in 2019. In addition, of course, we benefited from 2018 value-creating acquisition. Patrick mentioned that in his introduction.
The acquisition, the [Nersco acquisition], the renewal of the Abu Dhabi offshore licenses. These acquisition are generating cash flow per barrel that are above the portfolio average. Of course, we benefited as well from the pressure on costs and execution of synergies that drove OpEx per barrel from $5.7 per barrel in 2018 to $5.4 per barrel in 2019. As a result, the net effect was an increase in the 2019 upstream cash margin, despite, once again, this downturn in the environment. Arnaud will come back on that in his presentation. Now the downstream. The downstream cash flow performance has been strong, consistent, despite, once again, the challenging environment. R&C margins fell by about 10% last year and were particularly weak during the last quarter. Still, the downstream delivered $6.6 billion of cash flow, remarkably stable, even the volatile market.
Total, once again, generated the highest downstream ROCE among IOCs. We have a diversified portfolio of low breakeven, high-quality assets. Refining, chemicals, and marketing are well-balanced within the portfolio, providing cash flow from different products and markets. Marketing and specialty chemicals are not linked to the oil cycle, and of course, this adds stability to the cash flow. Bernard and Alexis are here to expand on this subject later, and so they will comment in particular of the monomer polymer integration that we have developed on our integrity platform. Alexis will come back on this function of marketing and services in the fast-growing new markets. Maintaining a strong balance sheet is a priority for the group. This provides us with a solid foundation, allowing us to weather cyclical lows and of course, with the financial flexibility to seize opportunities. We have done that very successfully very recently.
It was in Africa, with the Mozambique LNG deal, Anadarko, or a few years ago in the North Sea with the Maersk Oil acquisition. Our objective is to maintain gearing below 20%. We show here a Total gearing on the left, including the impact of the leases. Taken into account the impact of the leases, the gearing end of 2019 was at 20.7%. With the implementation of the IFRS 16, as you know, the rules are not the same between European and U.S. companies regarding the treatment of the leases in the accounts. We presented at the right, in the middle of the slide, I would say, a benchmark against our peers, excluding the impact of the leases. We are very concerned that for Total, the impact of the leases is 4% gearing. That means that excluding the leases, the gearing is below 17%.
A few comments regarding impairments. In 2019, we recorded EUR 500 million of impairments. For our calculation, we use a long-term price trajectory that is in line with the IEA NZE scenario, so I would say the 2 degree celsius scenario, and that converge towards EUR 50 a barrel by 2050. This relatively limited amount of impairment as compared to peers reflects the resilience of our portfolio. I notice that most of the impairment done by our peers are clearly in line or linked to their exposure to U.S. non-commercial assets. As you know, our exposure to this kind of asset is very low at Total. That for me is the validation of our strategy to play on our strength and to try to act countercyclically. The summary of the execution, in 2019. We reported a strong set of results, once again delivering on the targets we set over here.
CapEx were in line. We are on track with the asset sales. We recorded $1.9 billion of asset sale last year, and we announced an additional $1 billion. We are on track to deliver the $5 billion target over the 2019, 2020 period. Cost reduction target was achieved at $4.7 billion, and we outperformed on OpEx per oil. Arnaud will comment that later on. Upstream production growth and downstream cash flow are in line, and we are ahead of schedule on share buyback. I remind you that we bought back the equivalent of $1.5 billion in 2018, and this year it was $1.775 billion. If you add up the two years, you have $3.25 billion of buybacks.
We achieved our targets because we maintained the discipline on cost, we maintained the discipline on capital allocation, and of course, we added major new startups and value accretive acquisitions to an already robust portfolio. We are predictable, and more than that, we are reliable. That's the illustration you can see on the right-hand side of the slide. Adjusting from volume growth and using the sensitivity we provide to you, our results have been at or above the expected level. Finally, let's have a look at our performance relative to our peers. I am pleased to show once again that we outperformed our peers across several key metrics. Total was the most resilient in terms of net income. Total is the only major that increased operating cash flow in the significantly weaker environment in 2019.
This reflects, once again, the advantage of our low risks, of our success in upgrading the portfolio with high-quality production growth. Group ROACE is the in class, around 10%, and return on equity at 10.4% is the highest among our peers. The conclusion for me is very clear. 2019 expands our solid track record of consistent delivery and performance in executing and delivering our strategy. I leave the floor to Arnaud.
Let start with a reminder that Total upstream strategy is to build on our strengths and to focus on value rather than volume. In order to implement the strategy, first, we must take the most value out of existing assets. We do this by delivering operational excellence, and of course, this starts with safety, which is a core value of Total, and as was mentioned by Patrick, the cornerstone of operational excellence. We are also actively reducing Scope 1 and 2 greenhouse gas emissions on our operating perimeter with the objective to reduce by 15% by 2025 compared to 2015. This objective is ambitious as it is expressed in absolute terms, whilst we are growing the company and upstream production. Finally, we maintain a strong focus on availability of our wells and facilities and on cost discipline to leverage our low-cost competitive advantage.
For new projects, we focus primarily on our core areas, Africa, Middle East, and North Sea, and building up on our technical expertise in deepwater and LNG. 2019 was a good example of this strategy in action. In Africa, with the acquisition of Mozambique LNG, in Angola, with the extension of Block 17. In the North Sea with the Culzean and Johan Sverdrup startup. In deepwater with Egina and Kaombo startup. With the FID of Mero-2 in Brazil in deepwater, and also in LNG with the FID of Arctic LNG-2 and Mozambique LNG. Finally, for exploration and acquisition of new resources, we focus on prolific basins and manage our portfolio of assets proactively to lower the break-even and rationalize our geographical footprint. In 2019, we have continued to deliver a strong production growth with 9% increase compared to 2018.
This growth was essentially due to new startups in 2019, such as Kaombo, Culzean, and Johan Sverdrup, and ramp up to plateau of our new field started in 2018, like Egina, Ichthys, or Yamal LNG. As was already mentioned, in 2019, our LNG production has increased by more than 40%, and we are benefiting also from low decline, thanks to a significant share of new fields in our portfolio and long plateau production from LNG projects or in the Middle East oil fields in Abu Dhabi and Qatar. In 2020, our production will grow by 2%-4% with new fields started by the end of last year, like Tempa Rossa or Iara P-68 FPSO, developing Berbigão and Sururu field in Brazil. Also new start up again in Brazil with the second FPSO on the Iara block developing Atapu.
Overall, we are on target to deliver 5% production growth between 2018 and 2021. Together with production, E&P cash flows, this is E&P new perimeter, has grown substantially since 2016. This year's growth is about 1%, which is a solid performance in a lower price environment. It was due to the contribution of a high cash margin asset startups such as Egina and Kaombo. As shown on the right part of the slide, the cash margins of new projects started in 2018 and 2019 are above $30 per BOE in a $60 oil environment. One of our competitive advantage year after year has been our consistent discipline on OpEx, with $5.4 per BOE achieved in 2019, decreasing from $5.7 per BOE in 2018.
We should maintain this performance in 2020, thanks to approximately $250 million per year of synergies from [Norscoi], which is a new target, and which has been revised up from more than $30 million last year to $350 million this year, but also by leveraging on our global purchasing entity, which has delivered significant savings ahead of plan as presented by Jean-Pierre. This afternoon, we will give you some examples and more details about these synergies here in the U.K. As a reminder, we are targeting $5 per BOE in the next two, three years. On reserve replacement, our track record is very strong and has been consistently better than our peers, with 124% for the five-year average and 157% in 2019, with large gas projects launched such as Mozambique LNG or Arctic LNG-2.
This reserve replacement rate level is a solid performance given the fact that we have grown our production by 8% in 2018 and 90% in 2019. As you can see from the right part of the slide, we have approximately 20 years of proved and probable reserves and with around 60% of gas. To illustrate our capacity to capture promising exploration acreage, I have taken two recent examples with our entry in Block 58 in Suriname just before the Maka-1 Light oil and gas condensate discovery, which is on trend to the prolific ExxonMobil-operated Stabroek golden block in Guyana with eight billion barrels of oil discovered. Maka-1 has found 123 meters of net pay, there are three additional prospects to drill in that Block 58, one being drilled as we speak.
The acquisition cost in case of development will be around $2 per barrel, mainly the carry of Apache during the development phase, quickly reimbursed on their first oil after starter. We will operate this block. We are also a partner in two of three very promising prospects to be drilled in Guyana this year. My second example is in Brazil, another key area for the group with assets in production and development, where we have been successful in the E&P 16 last Bidding Round in October 2019, and captured one of the largest remaining blocks with two world-class prospects due to be drilled by the end of 2020, early 2021, in the prolific Campos pre-salt oil basins. Total will operate this block as well.
Finally, this slide provides a list of main projects already sanctioned in 2018 and 2019, or to be sanctioned in the next two years. All these projects are profitable, with an internal rate of return greater than 15% at $50 per BOE, and will represent a cumulative production of more than 800,000 barrels per day by 2023. Once again, we demonstrate that we deliver. By end 2019, we already launched half of these projects, including Arctic LNG 2, Mozambique LNG, and Mero 2. All these projects are benefiting from attractive market conditions following the downturn, as well as simplified design and ways of working. The geographical spread gives a good measure of the quality and resilience of our pipeline of projects that will fuel our profitable growth in the coming years. Consistent with our strategy, the majority of these projects are LNG oil quarter.
To recap, I hope that these few slides have given you good visibility on the profitability of the upstream segment. I'll now hand over to my colleague, Bernard, who will speak about Refining & Chemicals.
Thank you, Arnaud. Good morning. Let's now move to Refining & Chemicals. You certainly remember that Refining & Chemicals strategy has been around three pillars. The first one is, of course, long integration, which is really the backbone of the Refining & Chemicals branch. It means that we want to focus most of our capital allocation and development on our six large integrated platforms worldwide, with a target of having more than 70% of our capital employed on this platform by 2025. Of course, we keep working, as it was said earlier, on the operational excellence, what we control. Namely, all the cost along the energy efficiency. The second pillar is to grow and to grow in petrochemicals, not in refining. We want to grow in petrochemicals because it is a growing market, and we want to catch this growth.
The petrochemical we target are produced from gas, as you know, because gas is a low-cost feedstock. We also want to be balanced in our capacity between monomers and polymers by being integrated, and we will come back on this one. The third pillar is, of course, to invest in low carbon solutions. By that, I mean all the bio-based solutions, biofuels, biopolymers. We also want to be proactive in the field of plastic recycling with the ambition to have 30% of recycled polymer by 2030. All of this will translate into an additional CFFO of $1.5 billion by 2025. Of course, a return capital employed above 20%. Now let's move on to 2019 achievement. You see on the right-hand side that we have been able to deliver $4 billion of CFFO, despite a weaker environment, as it was said, in refining and petrochemicals.
You see also that we have been able to maintain a return capital employed above 25%, which is a best in class. What I would like to show you is how we did it by looking at the three pillars of the strategy, how each of these pillars contributed to these results. If you look on the left-hand side, you have Antwerp, which is one of our larger integrated platform. I think it's a good example of how we have played the integration between Refining & Chemicals.
We completed in 2017 a very large investment program, $1.3 billion, to upgrade the platform to reduce the production of high sulfur fuel oil, increase the production of low sulfur distillate, and also being able to increase the flexibility of our crackers to allow them to crack more low cost feedstocks such as ethane or refinery off-grade, which used to be burned as a fuel gas. You see that this has proven to be very contributive because this complex generated last year $750 million of cash flow from operations, with a very good utilization rate. I also would like to mention that we launched, last year, a consortium with five other players from the Antwerp Harbor to develop a carbon capture and storage project, which will contribute, of course, to consolidate the platform for the future. Integrated platform, of course, is a strong contributor, but not only.
Petrochemicals also plays its part in the cash flow generation. You see that we want to grow, as we come back on the four projects on the left-hand side. What I would like to start with are the two charts on the right, which really demonstrate how we stick to the two principles I've just mentioned in the strategy. First, which is to take advantage of the low cost feedstocks. You see that in 2019, we have been able to leverage or to benefit from these low cost feedstocks, because today the feed slate is close to 60%, so we will grab the benefit of these low cost feedstocks. You see also, on the monomer and polymer integration, that we have a very balanced profile, with close to 6 million tons of monomer, and that's pretty well balanced with 6 million tons of polymers.
By playing this integration, we are able to capture the margin all along the value chain regardless of the cycles. In 2019, we have moved forward on the four large projects, which you know, which all by the way stick to these two principles. The first milestone we achieved in 2019 has been in Korea with the expansion of the cracker. You know we are now able to crack 40% more, and that's all U.S. propane, so cheap propane imported from the U.S., which we crack now in Daesan in Korea. Of course, in this project, we also have downwards integrated derivatives, a PE line we are just in the phase of starting up now, and a PP line, which will start up in 2021. The next milestone will be in 2021 in the U.S.
with the start-up of our large project in Port Arthur, where we are making good progress, the cracker and also polymers. We are also making good progress on the last two projects, which are now in the feed phase in Jubail with our partner, Aramco, and in Algeria with our partner, Sonatrach. Third pillar is the low carbon solutions. You see that we dedicate 10% of our CapEx to this field. We want to invest in three areas. As I said, the bio-based solutions for plastic recycling and the CO2 emission reduction. There are just a few examples. The start-up of La Mède, our first biorefinery last year in August. The start-up of our first bioplastic plant in Thailand, producing biopolymers made out of sugarcane.
We have been very active in the field of plastic recycling through acquisition, with a company producing recycled polypropylene for the car industry, but also through partnership with large brand owners like Mars and Nestlé to develop chemical recycling. We have been also active in the field of the CO2 emission reduction, of course, through our energy efficiency program in our operations, but also by developing green H2 projects, one in La Mède in France, and one in Germany in Leuna. I'm going to stop here and hand over now to Alexis for the Marketing & Services. Thank you.
Good morning, everyone. Thank you, Bernard. To begin with, I would like to give you a quick reminder of the three pillars of the Marketing & Services strategy. The first one is that we are growing our retail network in large growing markets such as China, India, Mexico, Brazil, Saudi Arabia, and to a lesser extent, Angola. We anticipate the oil demand to remain strong in these markets, which represent actually 25% of the world demand. We aim to have more than 4,000 stations there in 2025, which will then represent 20% of our stations worldwide. Secondly, we are building on our existing retail networks to develop non-fuel sales to increase value. In Europe, we continue increasing our non-fuel revenues in shops and food, we are expanding our offers of services in cars, fleet management and mobility.
This non-fuel part of our business is due to represent 40% of our cash flow from operations in retail in Europe by 2025. In Africa, we are the leader in fuel retail. This is important. We actually have the biggest retail networks in the continent, whatever the business. We plan to further grow, targeting a market share of 18% and leverage on this size of our retail assets to develop non-fuel revenues to a growing African middle class. Thirdly, Marketing & Services has its role to play in the strategy of the group to grow in low carbon businesses by providing state-of-the-art solutions to our clients in mobility and these alternative fuels. Namely, serving the growing EV charging business. Our target is to have 150,000 charge points operated in Europe by 2025.
We're taking the advantage of the development of natural gas in road transportation by building an extensive network of NGV stations in Europe with a target of 500 stations by 2025. The U.S.A., we already have a good position with our 25% share in Clean Energy, the U.S. leader with 500 service stations there. We are also preempting the breakthrough in marine transportation that LNG is making by extending our customer portfolio and building strong position in the supply chain in the key hubs on the maritime routes between Europe and Asia. We are looking at hydrogen. We have been an early supporter of that gas, especially in Germany and in France, enabling us to closely monitor this energy solution.
This threefold strategy of capturing growth in dynamic geographies, developing non-fuel retail, and proactively building a stronger low carbon mobility will contribute to keep on delivering added value for the group. In the coming years, we are committing to delivering an additional $100 million cash flow from operation every year until 2025. Now I would like to take you through what we have achieved in these three areas in 2019 and what is unfolding in 2020 and beyond. First of all, let me take you to the right side of the slide, Marketing & Services exceeded its target of cash flow from operation in 2019, generating $2.5 billion of cash flows. Therefore, more than delivering on our objective of +$100 million per year on average, with a strong contribution from retail, but also from our high-value lubricants and specialties.
In addition to Europe and Africa where our retail operation was strong, the first pillar of our strategy is to expand in the large, fast-growing markets I have mentioned earlier. We have now started operation in Brazil with 300 stations operating after the acquisition of the Zema Group. Brazil is not only a large market for retail, but also the second-largest biofuel market. Growing our market share there will contribute to lowering the carbon intensity of our global sales. In Mexico, we are pursuing our development strategy and have now more than 200 Total branded stations operating. In Saudi Arabia, the JV we have set up with Saudi Aramco has completed the acquisition of a retail network of 300 stations, and you will see the first Total and Aramco branded station in the second half of the year.
When you add up all those figures, you can see that we already have 1,000 stations in these markets at the end of 2019. Operations have actually started in Angola last month, and we will start in India later in 2020. We are clearly, therefore, in line with our target of 4,000 Total service stations in these key markets by 2025. The second pillar is to increase non-fuel revenue. Fuel demand obviously will not evolve in the same way in all markets, and we see our retail stations as a platform for services, and we intend to leverage them to extend sales of non-fuel products which are independent of oil cycles. This is particularly true for Europe.
In 2019, you see on the right that we grew our retail cash flow from operation by more than $50 million in Europe, and the non-fuel share grew faster and was in excess of one-third in Total. In line with the objective of reaching 40% in five years. To keep that momentum in the competitive and dynamic retail environment from 2020, the customer experience in our Total workshop will be enhanced with the rollout of our new shop concept, the Mobility Concept, you see actually a picture in front of you, that will boost the value we capture from our clients. Our retail operation also benefits from strong and growing revenues coming from fleet management and mobility services. We are innovating in new technologies to extend fleet management services worldwide. For example, in 2020, Total will be qualified to collect toll fees in Germany.
This accreditation is part of the development of our toll solution in Europe for heavy goods vehicles, which will eventually enable trucks to cross Europe with the same onboard units that we market. Those B2B needs of fleet management are also fast-growing in other markets. We acquired a full online fleet card solution in 2019 to support our expansion outside Europe, in particular in Africa. Our strategy is to internalize this core business in order to create value around mobility as we are doing it in Europe. Another part of our non-fuel strategy is to accelerate the development of Total WASH sales. We actually currently have more than 2,000 car wash facilities in Europe. They are actually mostly in our retail stations, and this is a very good margin business.
To further create value as our WASH brand is very well known, we decided to go beyond our retail assets and launch our premium standalone WASH offer in 2019. This first WASH center without fuel distribution, located in France, is autonomous in electricity by solarization and has water recycling. We're also moving in car parks, developing our premium hand wash also there. With these examples and realization, you can see how we are leveraging our existing sites to expand and diversify our sources of cash flow. The third pillar, growing in low carbon solutions.
Definitely, energy transition is happening, though at varying paces around the world, and TotalEnergies is already active in many alternative sectors. To illustrate that we're a real player in that transition, we are allocating 10% of Marketing & Services CapEx to low carbon businesses or solutions, and they are mainly around three businesses. The first one is marine fuels. As part of TotalEnergies' strategy along the integrated gas value chain and to capture opportunities opened by the new International Maritime Organization, we are developing clean marine fuels. We recently announced the signing of a second major agreement for LNG supply of new container ships for CMA CGM to be located in the Mediterranean. Along with other existing agreements, our portfolio now represents in excess of six million tons per year.
Additionally, in an effort to promote the use of LNG fuel in shipping, the group is ramping up its logistical facilities in the major supply hubs, therefore building a global network of bunker LNG logistics. That is, our first LNG supply ship will be operating in Rotterdam later in Q2. Earlier last year, we announced a contract for a second LNG bunker vessel to be delivered in 2021 to be positioned in Singapore, a third one to be located the same year in Marseille, and we're working on putting one in the Gulf as well. I'm happy to report that with all that put in place, we will start our first LNG bunker deliveries in 2020. The second part is we are developing top-tier position in electromobility by leveraging on three things, our strong footprint in retail network, obviously, but also in car dealerships.
That is possible thanks to our lubricant business and through our fleet car customers who are requesting multi-energy solutions. The number of charging points we are operating grew by 40% in 2019 to 16,000, and we aim to carry on growing at the same rate, at the same pace this year to reach 22,000 in 2020. You must have read recently that we were awarded the largest European concession contract for EV charging points. We will install and operate up to 20,000 charging points in the metropolitan region of Amsterdam. We are therefore moving nicely towards our ambition to operate 160,000 charging points in Europe by 2025 and to become a major player in electric mobility business.
To complete that electric part of the business, in addition, in 2019, we started our first super charging points in service stations, and we will roll out 60 stations equipped with those super-fast charging points. That means more than 150 KW by the end of 2020 in Europe. This is part of the future state of our service stations and confirms our ambition to offer super charging solution, obviously in urban centers, but also every 150 km in Western Europe. We also see a business opportunity in developing natural gas for road transportation. This is clearly located in Europe, where we have now a network of more than 200 NGV stations, NGV being compressed natural gas and also LNG, on track with a target of 500 in 2025.
As part of this strategy, in 2019, we expanded our partnership in India with the Adani Group to contribute to the development of the Indian natural gas market. We should open the first TotalEnergies NGV station later in the year, which is the first step to having more than 1,500 in 10 years. I would like to mention that we are looking at increasing the biogas penetration in our natural gas sales. As an example, today, more than one third of the gas delivered by Clean Energy Fuels Corp. in the U.S. is biogas. We are putting plans to develop that in other markets, too. Last, I would like to mention that in hydrogen, Total has been an early supporter of hydrogen in Germany, being part of the H2 MOBILITY joint venture. Today, more than 25% of the hydrogen public stations in Germany are in the Total network.
We also have some public stations in the Netherlands, in Belgium, whereas in France, we are looking more at captive fleets and with private customers. As a conclusion, I have shown you that we are delivering on all the three pillars of our strategy, and that marketing and services is positioning itself well for the future while being a significant and sustainable source of cash flows for the group. I thank you for your attention, and I give the floor to Philippe for the last part of the presentation.
Thank you, Alexis. Let's turn now to IGRP. IGRP being, as you are aware, the segment where we are chasing actively all the opportunities arising from what we call the energy transition. It's not the only sector, Alexis has shown in particular what MS was also going after in terms of new business opportunity as well. In IGRP, we focus on those growth opportunities, mainly in the three areas that you know. Global LNG being based on the gas growth that we see rising from the Sustainable Development Scenario that are developed more and more across the world. Opportunities rising from electricity, especially in Europe, where in fact, we know the market, we have the opportunity to go downstream the gas-electricity value chain, all the way to end user customers. Last but not least, the renewables.
The renewable being worldwide, the highest growth energy market that we are also pursuing. Of course, the story of IGRP is not only for growth of volume of energy. This is for history of growing the cash flows. I remind you all about the ambition and the target that we have ascribed to this sector, growing the cash flow from operation by EUR 3.5 billion over the next six years. We are investing significant amount of money, EUR 1.5-EUR 2, in the low carbon electricity business. Turning to cash and to results, we can say that 2019 was a good achievement in term of our target in environment that was clearly not really favorable, especially in term of gas pricing environment. We managed to increase significantly the cash flow by some 75% from EUR 2.1 billion up to EUR 3.7 billion.
This was the result of the long-term stable cash flow that we have in upstream LNG, where we are benefiting of long plateau and old project that you know in Qatar, Nigeria, are delivering year after year their share of this cash flow. Of course, we add the new projects like Ichthys and Yamal which started last year and contributed, of course, heavily to this growth. Second, is becoming more and more important in the group, and now it's 15% of the group cash flow that is generated in this sector. We are around slightly below 10 last year. The growth came mainly from LNG. We had also positive contribution of low carbon electricity. Next year, we anticipate, again, growth. It will be equal in terms of price and environment.
We aim at generating roughly 5% more, accounting for the fact that we don't have any significant new startups in the LNG upstream apart from Cameroon. Cameroon we started the production of train 1 in 2019. We started the second train early January. We are targeting to start up the third train middle of this year. Apart from Cameroon, no new significant startup. Integrated LNG. As I said, this is generating most of the increase of the cash flows. This is coming clearly from the growth of the volumes. Volume that we produce, volume that we are selling. You see what we call our LNG portfolio growth on this chart, where we increased our volume by 60% between 2018 and 2019. We anticipate to continue also this growth in 2020.
The growth will come from the supply from our JVs, where we have equity, which are in fact continuing to go to their plateau. It will come mainly from the growth of our U.S. portfolio. We are becoming the largest exporter of U.S. LNG, so we are making massive bet on low prices for the long term in the U.S. We will benefit from the volume next year coming from additional project, train 5 of Sabine, which started last year but will be 100% running in 2020. Also Freeport with the contractor that we, I shouldn't say we bought from Toshiba, because as you are aware, we paid $800 million last year to accept to take this contract. In term of cash, as you see, +70%, +$1.5 billion, so an impressive growth. We have to notice this very strong contribution of Yamal.
Yamal, I know that most of you have visited the site, which is impressive in term of physical operation. It's also very impressive in term of cash flow generation, and it contributed nicely to this growth. Russia, overall, if you add the contribution of Novatek, is contributing now nicely to the overall cash flow of the group, close to $1.5 billion that is generating from Russia. Long term, once again, our strategy in LNG is not about growth for growth, but growth for profit. This growth profit is really based on very simple parameters. The first one is that we want to build a portfolio of the most competitive sources of supply. Which is why you have seen us very active in the main rich gas-producing countries such as Middle East, Russia, Australia, U.S., and more recently, Africa, of course, with our acquisition of Mozambique LNG.
We want also to position ourselves on the main LNG markets, so Japan, Korea, Taiwan, and of course, the big giants such as China and India, where we anticipate dramatic growth that will continue over the next year due to the need for them to go from coal to gas. This, of course, when you consider the size of the population, the size of the need of both those countries, which are more continents than countries, will drive a dramatic growth in the gas market in the LNG. We think that we are well-positioned to benefit from this growth. We consider that this growth will remain profitable. Of course, there is a question of supply-demand balance, and we have seen maybe too much FIDs taken in 2019.
We could anticipate that it's up to you to judgment on that the low price environment could discourage a number of projects. That is clearly our hope. We, on our side, we are not ready to take FIDs on projects that we think will not deliver the appropriate economy of scale and cost threshold. Of course, it's a competitive market, and we are used to have volatility in this kind of environment. In terms of gas markets, we don't want to forget about Europe and when we bought a portfolio of LNG, this came with a very significant share of regasification capacity in Europe. You could question the interest of having this regas capacity for a market which is not, of course, anticipated to be the highest growth gas market as well.
We think the interest of the European market at that time when the markets in Asia can be very high, we know that we have Europe as a safety net. A lot of LNG cargo came to Europe last year, and we could take advantage of our regas capacity. Having built this global portfolio, we benefit clearly on economies of scale, but we also benefit of optimization opportunities, coping with volatility of the demand and coping also with the opportunities of avoiding unnecessary shipping costs. As we have already commented, we are generating nice profit from this optimization. Turning now to the integrated electricity value chain in Europe. We have those three segments ahead of you where we are growing.
CCGTs, of course, and Patrick commented that we are very happy to see the growth of the dispatch of those CCGT that we built over the last years. We had the opportunity to build a discounted price, build on CCGT at a time when the CO2 price was too low to push for a coal to gas switch in Europe. Now we are seeing with the combination of this CO2 price growing all the way to EUR 26 per ton, and we can anticipate that it's not over. We have seen this coal to gas switch very strongly calling for a high dispatch of CCGT and in terms of cash, the CCGT is generating a decent and interesting cash, especially when you consider the low prices of acquisition. In renewables, growth story worldwide, a growth story also in Europe.
We nearly doubled the portfolio of generating assets in 2019 getting those growth mainly from organic growth, which is delivering towards significant profit. In marketing, we continue our digital model, which allows us to disrupt the historical monopolies, the historical incumbents, especially in France and Belgium, where we have decent market share already. We managed to grow our power to customers portfolio by 500,000 last year. The growth is still there, and we are also generating profit. Overall, all those three segments delivered roughly $200 million of cash flow from operation in 2019. Renewables worldwide, to complete my presentation. It's clearly the area where we see the highest growth among all the energy markets. We have to be careful about the disciplined strategy in order to generate a profitable growth strategy, which is, of course, what we are aiming at.
Now we can say that we have now very efficient, very well-trained teams that we acquired, that we trained with Total Quadran, Total Eren, and now Total Solar starting to contribute. We try to focus on organic growth in order to generate, once again, the maximum value, acquiring also pipeline as early stage as possible. We cannot limit ourselves to a very early stage, but this is the intent. This is giving us the opportunity to generate more value by de-risking the projects, which means securing land, securing the permits, negotiating PPAs, negotiating EPCs, negotiating non-recourse financing, and with federal permission. All subjects that are familiar in the company, such as Total. Once we have developed the project, de-risked it, we use what we call the farm-down to sell part of the equity in order to ensure that we have a double-digit return on those investments.
We had several examples of this implementation into 2019 of this model in Total Quadran in Europe. Qatar is also a good example of a large success that we announced earlier in January with a 800 gigawatt of projects. That will be a landmark for the group in Qatar. Another landmark in this country that we like a lot and where we generate a lot of profit. You will have noted that we have also announced a 2.1 GW deal with Adani. As you know, we have been partnering with Adani in gas, in marketing and services. We are building the relationship with Adani, which is a very dynamic group and allowing us to benefit from the opportunities of this, once again, country continent, which is India, and be prepared to hear from acquisition also for additional portfolio.
We think that we can secure a nice acquisition and generate value. We don't forget about storage. As you are aware, intermittent renewables are growing a lot, but the more they are growing in the energy mix, the more we have to cope with the intermittency and storage for stationary use is going to grow. What we intend, of course, is to make this opportunity a profitable opportunity. We learn from, I would say, the mistake of experience of the past in the solar panel and solar cell and for battery, for what we call ESS. We were adamant that we were willing to develop this activity only with a local base in China. Why China? Because the Chinese are very good at developing the mass production at a very low cost.
We managed to partner with CATL this year, which is bringing us brand-new plants, very automated, 4 GWh of capacity, which is much more than what we had in Saft so far. But we can combine the unique know-how of Saft in terms of technology and with mass production basis that we have in China, and that will allow us, of course, to serve the Chinese market, but also the international market. Later on, we had the opportunity, and so you've seen the announcement to launch interesting, I would say, venture with PSA. The idea is to take advantage of the willingness of Europe to develop very quickly EV manufacturing, EV sales in Europe, electric vehicles. We had the opportunity to partner with PSA in order to develop a European production project.
It's clear that we wouldn't have done that if we wouldn't have a strong partners and a strong customers with PSA, and we wouldn't have done that if we wouldn't have had a very strong support of the authorities, and strong support meaning not words, but real subsidies. This is why we have decided to start this project. There will be, of course, a lot of further steps to validate in order to scale up the project up to its objective of 30, 48 GWh , the equivalent of 1 million vehicle, 10% of the European market. We have started the first phase for a very limited amount of equity, I can tell you. We continue to generate decent cash flow from half $100 million in 2019.
What we can conclude is that we are in good shape in order to pursue the growth that we have started some two, three years ago when we created an iGRP and regrouping our sector inside our iGRP, generating growth, generating cash flow with the goal of being more and more visible in the renewable segment as well, but on profitable basis and delivering the target that we have of 25 gigawatts, equivalent of 25 nuclear plants, more or less, in 2025. Now I will let the floor to Patrick to conclude.
We had an extensive review of all the segments by my colleagues. Now just to set the scene for the future, I will come back. Of course, I come back with climate and the strategy that we deliver in the coming years. The objective being, of course, to demonstrate to you and to convince you that not only we can be strong on our results, at the same time, we have to prepare the future. The future is partly linked to the evolution of our markets in the energy field. If you look at this slide, there's no change, and you know the conclusions that we draw from this slide. We have to adapt our company to the evolution of the energy markets.
We all are in a two degree world. More and more society is claiming to go towards this world. The oil consumption could decline, which means that there is plenty of supply, which will put pressure on prices at 2040 horizons, which means that we focus oil projects with low breakeven. On the contrary, natural gas should find growth in this mix at the expense of coal. We continue to expand our position in the gas value chain, as was explained by Philippe. Renewables is growing, electricity company electrified. That's why we want to develop a profitable and sizable low-carbon electricity business. Last but not least, if we want to be in a carbon neutral world, we'll have to invest in carbon neutral technologies and businesses, and I will come back on it.
We have set an ambition, which is summarizing this whole strategy, which is summarized in this chart. This is a result of the strategy among the four pillars that Joe described, which is to reduce the carbon intensity of our energy products we sell, we use by our customers. Of course, this is not like Scope 1 and 2. Scope 1 and 2, we are in control. Scope 3, which is underlying this slide, we are not in control. This is a society, the demand. We are not car manufacturers. We are not plane manufacturers. We are not the cement industry. We deliver energy. The demand will be influenced obviously by the evolution of each segment of the demand. People do not consume oil because we produce oil.
They consume oil because there are processes, there are vehicles, there are planes, which ships, which are using oil. This, of course, but we can contribute to this evolution of the society demand. Of course, we have an ambition, which is to decrease this carbon intensity by 15% by 2030. Beyond it, let's say up to 40% by 2040. Just to remark, the slope of this decrease is aligned on a 2 degree scenario. Of course, actually the absolute number of the carbon intensity of our oil and gas and power company of an energy company is higher than the average of society. The slope of decrease is in line what the society expects. That's not only words because we walk the talk. In fact, in the last four years since we implement that strategy, we have already decreased by 6% this carbon intensity.
It's a lot of efforts. It's a result of our strategy in natural gas, multiplying the energy sales by three, EUR 15 billion have been spent. Electricity sales, of course, were very small in 2015, so multiplying by four, by eight. It's again, more than EUR 5 billion being invested in low-carbon electricity. This 6% is honestly among the major company, by far the highest achievement. Two other companies are communicating about Scope 3 in the oil and among the IOCs. One has set a target of 3% by 2020, and the other one is today at 100%, by 2018 did not decrease yet. We walk the talk, and I think it's important to underline in the context and the global debate that the society and the pressure is putting on all the energy fields. What is the way to move forward?
I think, again, it's not only about emissions, even if acting on emissions is fundamental. It's back to Scope 1 and 2. It's also acting on products and acting on demand. These are the key levers we want to put into action in order to reach our objectives. What does that mean? That means that we should not speak about oil, gas. We should talk about liquids and gases. We can decarbonize oil by blending oil with biofuels. There is a new activity which will be developed, biojets for planes, in many countries is under scrutiny. We have obviously a role to play to provide the new, I would say, liquids, which will allow planes to continue to transport the passengers around the world, with lower carbon products. We can also decarbonize natural gas by blending it with green gas, with hydrogen, with biomethane.
We can easily put into natural gas European networks around 10% of hydrogen. It's a way, again, to contribute to the global ambition. Acting on products is a way to do it. Acting on demand, of course, is another action. Oil, we consider that we should try to substitute to all low carbon products whenever it's possible. For example, producing power with fuel oil is not the best way to use oil and to produce power. There are other ways, natural gas or renewables. We envisage to stop selling fuel oil for power generation. It would be a concrete contribution to this society demand. Of course, on natural gas, we should promote gas use. It was described by Alexis on LNG bunkering.
When we invest in India in natural gas, it's the best because, of course, their coal is their only natural resource, and it's less expensive than natural gas. It's also a way to help that country to transition and to get, of course, we are looking for profit from a growing market. In petrochemicals, when we substitute ethane to naphtha, it's also a way to contribute to this lower carbon society that we are aiming for. Emissions are also very important. Acting on emissions has been described by Arnaud for liquid, for oil. Methane is obviously a key topic when we speak about natural gas. It's not only among our own operations where we have, again, we target less than 0.2% of methane emissions, but it's along the chain where we are to be steward, because there are some leakages which could appear even in city gas.
We have to steward the full value chain in terms of promoting natural gas for controlling methane emissions. On the electrons, I would say on the power, investing in the electric mobility value chain is a clear axis for the company. There are two good examples in the last month. These JV for batteries, these charging stations concession in the Netherlands, you will see us quite active. Investing in electric mobility value chain is also a way, again, to contribute to lower the carbon intensity of the energy we sell to our customers, like developing storage solutions. Philippe spoke about batteries. We spoke about hydrogen as well. The more we will be involved in renewables, the more the question mark about generating hydrogen from peak solar farms is a matter of being able to store energy.
I think it's another axis of development to create value from these investments in renewables in the future. Carbon sinks is the fourth pillar of all these actions. It's not a matter of compensation at all. It's a matter of making investments, betting on the fact that carbon pricing will come step by step. In Europe, it is there, but around the world. These investments will become quite profitable. We have begun to invest in nature-based solutions. Our first project is in Peru for Amazonia Forest. It's not only a matter, by the way, of planting trees. It's a matter of investing in social investments, in order the community to avoid to deforest, I would say, and to give them some economic activity.
Total will become shareholder of a chocolate plant there in order to make the full story and to have a sustainable solution for these natural carbon sinks. It's also CCUS. We are in a country today, and I think this afternoon we will have opportunity to ask questions, where there are quite serious in the North Sea. I am convinced that North Sea could become a sort of new area, a new business opportunity with CCUS. We are embarked in a project in Norway with Equinor and Shell. Here in two projects. Again, they can come back on it. Bernard mentioned that we take the lead of a new CCUS project in the Antwerp industrial area, where many heavy industries are emitting CO2s, trying to combine that with some depleted material fields in the Dutch North Sea. There is a lot of things to be invested.
There again, we allocate $100 billion per year. Last but not least, we have to promote innovation, and we put in place a carbon neutrality venture fund, where we have dotted from $400 million by 2023. Of course, all the strategy requires investments. We reiterate in front of you these guidelines, $16 billion-$18 billion over the 2019-2023 period. No change. We spent in 2019, $17.4 billion, as explained by Jean-Pierre. A little under the $18 billion we gave as a guideline after the Anadarko acquisition. We acquired, by the way, $4 billion of around $2.4 per barrel. We've seen the positive impact on the renewal of resource. For 2020, same guideline that we gave in September, $18 billion of capital investments, including acquisition, less disposals. On the disposal side, we set a program of $5 billion after the Anadarko acquisitions.
We have already sold or announced around $3 billion, so we are well on the way. There is a program, you probably know that, for example, we put on sale Bonga in Nigeria, it's public. We have other work projects on which we work in order to fill that program. It's a strong commitment from the company. In fact, we are targeting to sell more than that because we know that execution of sales, it always sometimes could take time in our industry. Another remark on this slide is that when you look to the program of the 2019, 2020, you can see that what we call low carbon CapEx contributing to LNG, to low carbon electricity represent.
That also the actions taken in refining and chemicals about biofuels or in marketing and services, like it was described by Alexis about charging points and batteries, et cetera, represent more than 30% of the investments of the company, globally speaking. The strategy is really in action, and this is a condition, if again, we want to adapt the company to the evolution of the energy markets and contribute to lower the carbon intensity of the energy we sell to our customers. At the same time, we play to our strength. This is combining this ambition to play to our strengths. I think here today, we are in North Sea, so we'll have the opportunity this afternoon again to discuss about it. Just a word about Africa.
Africa represents $10 billion of cash flow from operations out of the $26 billion announced by Jean-Pierre. It's a big part of the company. We have made some strong move, of course, this year with starting up Kaombo and Egina, but also accessing to more resources. Mozambique LNG was the jewel is of the Anadarko, I would say portfolio. In agreement with Oxy, we already closed it in a record way, by the way. Now we are in command of this large project. It's not only a project for today, it's a large base of resource for many years. I would say the LNG field total between our Arctic position in Russia, between Mozambique, between the U.S. projects we have in our hand, not only the next wave and growth for 2025, 2050, but beyond.
It's a matter now of being able to execute all these projects. We have also secured, you've seen end of the year, maybe to come back in Angola, which is a core country for our group. Block 17 extension to Golden Block. You have 3 billion barrels. You have one which have been produced, 1 billion is still there in front of us. It's a nice way to extend this license, this Golden license. We have also signed an agreement in Senegal to develop two discoveries. It's around 350, 400 million barrels of oil, which can be developed in Block 2021. Consolidating, again, all our strength in Angola, on deepwater, is the best way to create more value. You notice that we finalized all the agreements on Libya with a NOC entry.
Exploration, of course, in Africa with a discovery in South Africa, which will be approved this year from keywords to come. It's also Africa for us, a country where we put into action our strategy in natural gas and demand and renewables. This year, teams have been able to have access to a new gas terminal in Benin, and we work on Ivory Coast. We also have announced that we are working on Maputo LNG in Mozambique because it's a large country, Mozambique from north to south, and bringing gas to customers in Maputo, but also potentially exporting natural gas through pipeline to South Africa could become also a profitable way to add value from this acquisition in Mozambique. Renewables, we begin to develop in South Africa and Kenya, in Egypt, some projects.
Last but not least, of course, as reminded by Alexis, we have our presence in more than 40 countries for our networks, which also drive around a little less than $1 billion of cash flow every year and growing ones. This is, I think, a perfect demonstration of our strategy, which is to play to our strengths and to continue to build, to develop, to create value for shareholders. That's the result of all these strategies. Again, this year, pleased with the $26- $20.1 to increase to $28.5 of the debt-adjusted cash flow. I remind that $1 billion is coming just from the IFRS 16, so forget this one. The rest is your cash, which will allow us to increase the return to our shareholders.
At $60, we confirm for 2020 that we'll have another billion and for the years to come in a quite a progressive way. It's coming again from the startups, the Big Four, which have generated more than $3.5 billion: Egina, Atlantis, Kaombo, Yamal, but also from the downstream and, with the sensitivity for next year of $3.3 billion for $10 per barrel of liquid, realized price. We are 3.2, 3.3. The increase is just because we produce a little more. For the gas sensitivity, around $350 billion for $1 per MMBtu of NBP. Only on the share of the gas production, which is linked to NBP. Cash flow allocation, this scheme does not change. The shape is changing, the content is still the same, we are consistent on it. We allocate the cash.
Capital investment, the discipline is there, $16 billion, $18 billion, $18 billion next year like this year. This is the guideline we gave you. The dividend, we announced 5%-6% increase in September, doubling from a 3% increase. 3% to 5%, 6%. The last two quarterly dividends were increased by 6%. As a result, for the full year 2019 dividend, as the first two quarterly interim dividends were 3%, it results at around 5% increase. Consistent road is okay, walking the talk, as I would say. The balance sheet gearing, again, is the first priority for us because in the volatile environment, we consider we need absolutely to have this low gearing, under 20%. The IFRS 16 increased it by 4%, so it's just an accounting issue. The acquisition, of course, has also stretched a little bit with the Mozambique acquisition.
We are committed to come back under 20% as soon as possible and quickly, and to maintain a grade A rating. The last part of this allocation are the share buybacks when we have more cash. We have announced in 2018 a program of $5 billion. We've done $3.25 billion. We, for 2020 at $60, as we said it, by the way, in 2018, we can deliver $2 billion. We will execute this program of share buyback. A word about ESG. We have a lot of questions from investors about what you do in ESG. I think, again, Total has a strong commitment. We are recognized by the Global Compact as one of the lead company in the last two years. There again, walk the talk, I would say, in transparency and environment, on the E, we issued our climate report.
We also assessed all our industry association memberships about the climate stance of each of them. We decided to exit of one of them. Also advocating, in the U.S., for example, to maintain and to not relaxing the methane regulations, because I think it's very important that we can use towards for the natural gas products on which we base part of our growth. That's part of ESG. I would underline that diversity, gender diversity is a reality in the company. The Executive Committee is leading by example and the Board of Directors also. In governance, I would just underline again, two actions that which have been taken through initiatives, not only the link between climate CO2 reduction targets and variable pay, but also we adhere to some responsible and sustainable tax principles with The B Team, which means no aggressive fiscal policies in the company.
We are also acting and taking the lead on zero tolerance against corruption around the world. I'm showing myself the initiative of the World Economic Forum on anti-corruption. It's a matter of level playing field for large corporations like Total. This is recognized by some rating agencies like CDP, where we have the A managed rate, which is the best score among the oil and gas majors. In terms of delivering shareholder return policy, just to make some advertising for us, we make not only the two-year TSR, but the one-year TSR, the three-year TSR. Number 1 at two-year TSR, around 10%, Number 2 on one year and three years. We are honest. We can say that we are really today offering to shareholders a good return, best-in-class TSR, and I think it should be also underlined.
To conclude this presentation, which was maybe a little long, but seven voices is longer than two voices. I think, again, the message are clear. We are working on delivering first. This is a priority for the whole company. We should never forget that, of course, we work to prepare the future in the energy field, but at the same time, what we are first is delivering, and this is a condition, I would say, for gaining the right, having the right to invest for the future. Growing the cash flows, reducing production of the break even under $25, discipline on OpEx and CapEx. We execute the strategy by upgrading the portfolio, announcing profitable projects on the upstream, developing our energy position and delivering cash flow from it.
The downstream also with, I would say, focused growth of R&C, petrochemicals, no refining, and some large market, emerging markets for marketing. On both sides, by the way, contribution to the low carbon emission of the group, which is also important. The electric mobility will become a reality in Europe, so we have to adapt ourselves. Continuing to seize all the opportunities in the energy market, including in low carbon electricity. We do that, of course, while increasing the shareholder return. This is our commitment. I would say today we have announced something quite at the same time. There are several press release. The two of them, I would say, or three of them, which are symbolic of what we do. On one side, these results, which again, I consider are resilient and strong and increasing cash flows and shareholder returns despite a weaker environment.
There is another press release, which is our investment in India on solar. I would like that way to thank Namita, because this is a group of, it's not only a matter when we work on solar, we don't only work Philippines but we leverage all the knowledge around the table. Namita, for obvious reason, has been the key driver of these investments in renewables and managing this partnership with Enel, with Adani also. Thank you, Namita, for that. It's the way we work together, like Momar is working and still advising us on Africa, I would say, in order to leverage the maximum of competencies around the table for the future of the group.
I think these two, Chris, this for me are quite a symbol that we can, at the same time, be good at delivery and both deliver also of being part of the energy transition and increase the cash returns of shareholders. Some people are asking question, can you do both, working on energy transition, increasing cash returns to shareholders? I think it's not at all mutually exclusive, and this is exactly what we want to demonstrate, and we are demonstrating to you. This is, by the way, the conditions of sustainable return to the shareholders Total for the long term. Thank you for your attention, and now we'll be ready to answer to your questions after the presentation. Who wants to be first? Michele, start please.
Thank you. Congratulations on a strong set of results against the backdrop of a quite a difficult macro. I have two questions. The first one relates to the LNG market. As Helle highlighted, it was a strong year of growth from a demand perspective, 13%. Some of it came from low gas prices and stronger affordability. One of the key questions long term is, if we want a strong growth in the market, prices probably need to remain relatively low. At the same time, we need new supply. At a time of fewer long-term contracts, that could be difficult under volatile and low gas prices. How do you think about a good long-term gas price to both incentivize demand but also have decent profitability?
How do you compare it with the minimum gas price that you need to achieve a good hurdle rate in your new projects? If I could ask also a second question. When you think about your business, in the past, you had to run it mainly for financial budget, but today you also have effectively a carbon budget to look after. When you think about implementing it, what is the best way to do it? Is it through higher hurdle rates in your new oil investment, or is it, for instance, by applying a carbon price, including Scope 3 in your new investment?
Okay. First, energy, I think it's interesting. I think, again, for me, natural gas is competing with coal, not with oil. This relationship, historic relationship that we should target a sort of oil equivalent is wrong. If we want the project to be resilient, we are more looking to the equivalent of 11% of [CO2], if you want, rather than 13%, 14%. When you test a project, we have to keep resilient assumptions. By the way, the assumption for natural gas are around $6 per million BTU long term. Why we take? We are prudent on all natural gas assumption. Why? Because we think that this market is really going to be commoditized, more short term, more spots.
I think the idea that you have long-term contracts, of course, we By the way, it was the beauty of the Mozambique LNG projects that the teams of Anadarko have done an incredible work to be able to find 10 million tons of long-term contracts with good relationship to oil, by the way. We will benefit of it. We have to be pragmatic for the future. The next project, we have to be able to market it. This is why we implement this strategy described by Philippe, which is to be, it will be more a trading market, so you need to have the logistics. You have to have the regas, to have the customers, to have the fleets, and if you want to be able to move and to maximize the value out of this business.
Yes, that means that also, which I strongly believe, the capacity to take the risk to launch projects will rely upon few companies with a strong balance sheet, able to face this market, which is exactly why we think that this is a perfect market for a company like Total and why we developed this strategy. Yes, be prudent on the long-term gas price when you sanction your projects. That's obvious. That means also that, again, I think things will change, but in the U.S. market, obviously, where you have these low environment projects which are promoted today by, I would say, utilities and utility where you think you can make the money and another will take the risk, the downstream risk. Taking the offtake risk as a limitation.
I would not be surprised to see a less or a slowdown there, because who is ready to take this risk for somebody else being sure to have 10% return, like a utility, once the others are taking the risk? I'm not ready to take that. It's why we integrate on Cameron, and we are discussing the business model with Sempra about what will be the next phase of Cameron, because obviously, we should align the risk and rewards on such projects. Otherwise, there is something wrong. We can take the risk. I think, again, the competencies of the teams, the logistics, it's investment in logistics because trading is a matter of optimizing logistics, fundamentally. I think that's why also we put together, by the way, we move all the trading team of natural gas from London to Geneva. It's not because of Brexit.
It's because the competencies we think really need, and the fact that they are all there together is quite important. In a huge room, I can tell you, they deliver already synergies between both teams working together. The desks have been geographically well planned in order for maximizing and learning from each other. I think there is there for a company like Total a source of added value for the future. Coming back on oil. Yes, we put, by the way, carbon price. We put $40 a ton now, $40 a ton in all the projects systematically. Is it enough? We can increase it. Honestly, I will tell you, the reality is that $40 a ton, it impacts your project by, let's say, 0.5% of IRR. Does it change the decision?
No, because either the fundamentals of the oil projects are strong in terms of cost per barrel, in terms of technical cost, and in term of breakeven, or it does not work. What it will influence is, obviously, our very long-term projects, where you will ask then not to keep $40, but to increase it. Back for me to oil sands again, where we will not invest in oil sands. Does it eliminate Deepwater? No, because Deepwater is more short-term projects. When we invest in exploration in Suriname, which I hope will be a success, we will explore during what? The time of exploration is something, six, seven, eight years, let's say, when you produce most of it in 10 years. It's a matter of 15, 18 years, in fact.
In fact, you can capture this value in an environment, and I can tell you, we continue to have oil in 15 years in this world for quite a lot of consumption. I think it's, again, for me, it's a matter for selecting the right place and being stringent. We continue to approve our projects at $50 a barrel because this could come. This could come, pressure on the price, and this is a condition for being able to maintain investments in oil projects. The worst thing is oil. Let's be clear. Even if it's maybe not oil, as I said, it's liquid, which means a new blending of oil and biofuels or different, but we need liquids. You will not be able to drive a plane longer than 1,000 mi without liquids. It's a question of storage. Let's work on this type of approach. Okay?
Just two questions, if I may, as well.
Yeah.
The first one on renewables, where I think you've grown your own capacity already quite fast, with more plans to come. I wonder, for that future growth, what is the constraint? Is it capital or is it opportunities now that you've been around the world a few times dealing with easy and difficult partners? The second question, hopefully, is a quick one. I wonder whether perhaps you, Jean-Pierre, could translate the $18 billion all-in CapEx figure into something that's comparable with, I think, again, which was a very impressive $13 billion organic CapEx number for 2019.
Fourteen.
Close enough.
It's translated. That's true.
Okay.
First one, let me be clear. On renewables, first, we keep the discipline. We want the budget return on all the project we've done. The Indian project, the Indian investment we just announced, EUR 500 million, is more than 13. It's 13, let's say. Okay. No, but just to give you an idea. We keep it on systematically. Okay. The business model has to be, and we can do it. Of course, it took us time to understand that when you win in Qatar, we have more contenders. The reality is we have more contenders. We have different competitors there, utility, new players. This is a different field, but we keep the discipline, and we can do it. We are not limited by financing today. No. We are limited by the opportunities. One, because you have a lot of competitions, and when it's bidding, honestly, it's tough.
We have teams, as you said. We have many in France. It's an ecosystem. We have the Total Eren, we have the SunPower, we have the Total Solar. We let them develop, but it's a matter of increasing competencies again, because these projects take time. A renewable project is easy to execute. Very different. These 800 MW solar farm in Qatar will be into production for half of it in one year. The competence you need to have is more people able to commercial. Supply chain control is very important. Now we have developed that expertise to be able to put together what are the best Chinese producers for cells in order to mobilize them. The larger the project will be, the more we are comfortable. Offshore wind, obviously, is a field where we look at it, even more capital intensive.
We have set a team for floating offshore wind. Within, by the way, our new teams. I want the exploration, the production in E&P engineers. Quite motivated, by the way, because we know what is a floating unit. We have done that. We can leverage this expertise, and we think that again, by the way, in renewables, don't forget that we see the same evolution than in LNG. I'm convinced that this renewable business will not be a regulated business for long. It will become a merchant business in many countries. Then the capacity to be able to sign PPAs on the long term, you need the balance sheet, you need the counterpart. It's a business where we can also leverage part of what is strong in our company. There are things there where we can really deliver for the future.
Of course, we need to grow, because we know we speak about gigawatts, but a gigawatt is nothing. Let's be clear. A gigawatt of solar, I always translate that in 1,000 barrel per day, is 2,000 or 3,000 barrel per day of oil. We have people, "Giga is big." No, it's not big. We have to be realistic. If we want to be a serious player, we will have to grow and to invest. That's clear. Keeping, again, a double-digit return. It's a matter of growing the teams, growing the competencies, differentiating, having, again, growing the ecosystem, different JVs on different countries. The other point is that it's more local business. We don't develop the Indian market, is not the same, what you can do in the Middle East or in France. It's not true.
You have to also to have local teams and local competencies. Again, we've done that in Marketing & Services, so being local. I think there is ways to find a profitable growth. Again, when I look to what the society is asking to us, we can do it. My commitment, our commitment to the shareholders is that it should, at the end, grow the returns, the cash flows, and be part. I think it will be a fruit of the sustainability of our dividends and return to shareholders in the future. Irene?
Thank you. Irene Himona from Societe Generale. Congratulations on that. It figures that sets you quite apart from the two industry leaders. I had three questions. Firstly, can you please clarify the terms of your deal with Apache in Suriname? Secondly, your production guidance for this year between 2% and 4%, depending on Anadarko. Obviously, you've closed Mozambique. It seems to have stalled elsewhere. What happens next, and is there any time limit? Finally, on OpEx, I think Jean-Pierre highlighted the benefits of centralizing procurement. The rate of that appears to be quite slow. You went from 15% to 30% in about four or five years. Is there any particular obstacle to speeding that up, setting the pace up? Thank you.
I will let Arnaud. The central procurement team has been established in 2017. I know life is quicker than that. Arnaud will come back on it with maybe Namita as well, which is in charge of this team. You can take the question, Namita, on procurement. I would say, first, Apache. Apache, the deal is quite clear. It's quite simple. We pay $100 million up front to have access to the exploration license. We will carry Apache for a big amount. It's a short-term financing because we will recover all the carry from the cost oil of Apache. If the cost oil is not enough, we have a system to have access to more of a share. We use our balance sheet. I would say on Apache, I think for me, it's a perfect example.
It's a company with a limited competence in deepwater and limited balance sheet. They came to find a partner. We offer the competence in deepwater. We become operator, and we offer the balance sheet. We offer them, in fact At the end, as we said in the release, this is a big amount of carry, but when we translate that in dollar per barrel, it's around $2 per barrel of cost of acquisition. To be clear, when we made the deal, we had already the results in front of us of the well, and so it was not a pure exploration acquisition. We knew that this first, we could look. We had the data in front of us, so we knew that there was some hydrocarbons and probably more to come because this first well has been stopped because of a pressure at a certain horizon.
As we know, there is more under, but the architecture of the well was not strong enough to support a deepening of the well. It's really something where we have leveraged two of the strengths of the company in order to have access to something which could become, I hope, a success for us. Again, touch wood, never a cigarette. We could have access to a very interesting license in the trend of all the discoveries in Guyana. Anadarko. Let's be very clear where we are. Where are we? Mozambique is closed. It was a joint decision with Oxy and us to close the Mozambique as quick as possible. It was our interest because it's project going on, FID. Embarquing, being on board was a priority. You know what I think about the good financial conditions which require Mozambique, things are very competitive.
We have just closed South Africa last week. A small deal, but it's done. In Algeria, the debate today is between the authorities have said to Oxy that the change of control from Anadarko to Oxy can be preempted by them. Again, by the way, the fact that the Algerian authorities have a preemption right, we knew it, and we respect the rules and in each country where we are. It's not a matter of the transaction between Oxy and Total. It's Anadarko, Oxy. I would say Oxy is dealing with the Algerian authorities. We are there, and we respect the deal, but if it's preempted, it's preempted. I think we'll have clarity. You probably noticed that in three months, there have been three changes of CEO in Sonatrach, which does not help, I would say, the momentum of the discussions.
We are there to answer to Ghanaian authorities. In Ghana, I would say there is a fiscal discussion. We and Oxy consider that it's written that there is a tax stability clause in the contract. Ghanaian authorities, they want quite a big capital gain tax. This discussion is going on. Let's discuss. It's a matter of convincing people that our way is all right. Honestly, by the way, I say that positively for Mozambique, if we have been able to close, it's a very good signal to me about Mozambique, is that the governance of the country is quite. Despite what I hear, I can tell you we signed the deal beginning of August, and one week after, we had the right calculation of capital gain tax, no dispute, no complications, smart way to work.
Very smoothly, we managed to close in a record way into less than two months, which is good. When you invest quite a lot of money in a country, it was a positive signal to us and the way we have been welcomed. These processes can be sometimes tricky. We have experience in some countries, Uganda. Let's work. Of course, as you know, I think Occidental wants to close as quick as possible. We are there, but we want to do it in the good conditions to be done. That's the situation on this deal. We are very aligned with Occidental about the way forward. It's why we put, by the way, on the production, because we don't know exactly when it will come, and if it will come. If Egina does not come, obviously, we'll not have the production.
At the same time, we'll not have made the investment. Christyan? Sorry, Namita has to answer to centralization of procurement.
We put together our PGP in September 2017. Two and a half years later, we are over EUR 900 million in savings. Our target over two years was EUR 1 billion. We are going fast, I would say. Jean-Pierre talked to you about our centralization, which our target is 40%, which we should be able to meet this year. What he didn't talk about is we have about 30% of our procurement, which we put in a category that we call piloted. Piloted means centrally, we look at everything that's happening globally, and we put together contracts that we negotiate with large suppliers, that the negotiated prices, that give the option for different affiliates to use those base contracts to do their own procurement. It's very piloted, that's where is another source where we will be driving down costs.
I'd say don't just look at what we put in centralization, which is purely managed in France, where we do all the work from A to Z in France, but we also do a lot of piloting where we make sure that we are aligning our policies and our prices across the world.
Merci, Namita. Thank you.
Christyan Malek from JP Morgan. Thank you for a lot of great information and detail on energy transition and what you're planning to do. One thing, this is going to sound quite theoretical, and I might confuse you in the question, but you mentioned, and you were making this point across the challenge around trying to deliver energy, but lower carbon energy. Within that context, demand will be bifurcated in terms of how we can solve for that demand of energy in the context of low versus high carbon.
When I think about breaking out demand and thinking about Africa as an area which is consuming energy and low cost energy, and where you're placed in Africa, being it's a very large part of your portfolio from a cash flow perspective, what I'm trying to grapple with is the challenge of you generating low carbon energy in a continent which is screaming for low cost energy and the dilemma in that in terms of solving for it, particularly going through Scope 3. I hope I haven't lost you at this point. How do you see your portfolio fit in terms of exposure to Africa? You solved for that and being able to do what you've done in Europe, which is be able to actually generate renewables as part of their energy challenge.
Equally, to do it in a continent where you're very exposed to, which is almost going the other way in terms of looking for even lower cost energy, which is not conducive to non-oil, but actually more conducive to oil. It's a bit of a question, but also a comment. It's much more long-term. I'm just trying to understand how you think, the strategy around the portfolio in that context. The second question is thinking about M&A, and you've done some great deals in the past, and M&A is clearly opportunistic, but also has to work from a returns perspective. Anadarko, some great transactions there. As you think about M&A going forward, will it be oil or non-oil? What's top of mind in terms of being able to deliver? If it's non-oil, how big would you be willing to go? Non-oil and gas, I mean.
Okay, two strategic questions. You take the first one, Helle, about Africa, or you want me to answer?
No, I think we can maybe take this offline because it's a long question. I would say Africa, like many other places, will have to rely on as diverse an energy mix as possible. I think there is room for all energies in Africa. The roadblock for Africa today, if I make a long story very short, is simply the electricity grid. We are building renewable power plants, as Patrick showed on one of the charts. Of course, in many African countries, the grid is not reliable, so it doesn't help to just add more renewables. In some countries, it works well, in others, it doesn't. Some countries have hydro, others don't. Again, if I super summarize, a big opportunity but also a fight is indeed to displace coal.
For those countries that either have coal or have existing coal plants and are importing coal, which is back to Patrick's point on cheaper coal versus cleaner gas. We're working on that. We mentioned the wind in Benin, the lead we have in the Ivory Coast or in Mozambique. That is for sure the deal. You know that the easiest way to reduce emissions short term is to substitute coal with gas. We can take all the details offline if you want.
In all these countries, there is a sort of what I observe, like in India, like in South Africa, I don't know why, each time they have the same answer. It's EUR 5 per million BTU. EUR 5. Under EUR 5, you find a way. Above EUR 5, I don't know why, it's almost the same answer. South Africa, I discussed recently, and India, same figure. In spite, the reality for us is that we need to continue to drive down the cost of projection and logistics of natural gas. This is a clear condition, and this is our duty. If we are able, I say to Philippe, my brother in India, "If you are able to deliver a long-term contract with fixed price of EUR 5, we sign plenty of natural gas." This is where our mission is, somewhere. Even for Africa, Benin was a good example.
Ivory Coast, why do we spend three years on Ivory Coast? At the end, there was a competition, but again, a coal-fired power plant and a gas plant. You're right, their access to energy is just a fundamental thing. On renewables, I think today it's not going as quick as possible because there is a lack of regulation, a lack of land management. Owning the land is just a question. Who owns the land? It's complex. It's growing much slower than expected in Africa because people have a confusion between access to energy from few solar lamps in the village and a real industrial capacity, which is a 50 megawatts or 100 megawatts or 200 MW. Clear in our business model, if you make only like we do in Kenya, a 50 MW plant, it's very small, in fact.
This is something that is not a way forward on a large scale, I would say. It's still, for me, a continent where maybe a potential but a little immature. On your side, I would say the best asset we have is that we are local in many of these countries. We are there. Through our marketing and services business, we are there. We have seen the impact in Mozambique, for example, the fact that we have these retail stations. We came, we are known, we have the reputation. I think on that, we could build on this continent for the future, which is a growing population, growing economies. By the way, that's from a pure geopolitical point of view, a geoeconomy, the interest of Europe is to try to localize more people in Africa rather than having migrations. It's nothing to see with us.
I think we have to keep this long-term vision on Africa. The second question, it's an excellent question. Let's be clear. On oil and gas, I'm still driven by the idea that you make money when you acquire at the right price at a low cycle. Honestly, $72 and $64, which were the average of the last two years, is not really a low cycle. When you have on the screen $68 or $70, people want to sell to you at $70. You are not there. Like we were not there in the TOL licensing round in Brazil because it was $70, so we were not there. You could have specific opportunity, like on Anadarko, moving quickly on somebody who was ready to negotiate. Honestly, Mozambique is a good acquisition.
You could have some specific situation where you could, I would say, take benefits from one seller. To negotiate when the price is at 65 and you want 50, it doesn't work. Let's be patient. I think for me, it's being opportunistic with Total having in mind that we play to our strength. You will not see Total buying a shale oil company in the U.S. Forget. I cannot be more clearer than today. I repeat, because it's not part of the strategy, and it's not because today By the way, I didn't see much in the last year. There was many transaction, all in shares, no cash in any transaction. No fresh money coming in the U.S. shale. It's not a criticism. It's just again, I understand the logic of some of my peers. They do it, we don't do it.
By the way, I think that we have no shares, so no write-off and no problems today in our own results. Again, this is oil and gas, it's a matter of, for me, counter cyclicity. You ask another question, which is out of oil and gas, for the time being, we are comfortable with, I would say, this EUR 500 billion bolt-on acquisitions like India. I'm not yet ready to make something at a larger scale on this field. We need to understand better this business. It's a question. We learned a lot, it's a matter of risk management. This team around the table, three years ago, we had no idea, few ideas, but not many ideas about this power business. How does it work? What are the competitions?
We need to build before we can maybe one day do something, but it's not on the agenda today, I would say. Again, the intent is to continue to grow this electricity business. I'm very clear. We set a target. It's not only a matter of scope, it's a matter of the energy market will evolve. We need to prepare the future of the company, and electricity markets are developing. The demonstration we have to do, but we do it better and better to our board. Can we bring them projects? We have a double-digit return. If it is the case, we will do it, and we'll continue and grow it. Other questions?
We switch to Oswald and Lydia after.
Thank you. In the essence of time, I won't ask a long-term strategy question. Just three very quick numbers focused.
Three. Not one, but three.
Very short.
Good introduction.
Very short. Marketing & Services, the $100 million is a very nice number for us to model and use forward, but you beat the number quite well last year, both in lubricants and retail. Just explain what was happening there, and could we expect that type of?
Okay
uplift coming through, one?
One, Alexis?
Second one was the $4 billion of cash flow from the Big Four in the upstream. What length of visibility do we have on that $4 billion repeating year after year? I guess the big water projects will roll off at some time. Then thirdly, LNG, 25% of your sales were spot cargoes last year. What portion of cash flow did that contribute to your cash flow last year, please?
Philippe, the last one. The second one, I would say 3.5 on an average of the next five years. Just to give you a guidance. It's not bad. Alexis, your increase, which is partly due to some OpEx, if I remember.
Exactly. We had the $300 million growth, but actually out of those $300 million, $200 million are, I would say, an exceptional item by reevaluating some contracts, what we call open because at the end of 2018, the price were low. They were a bit higher in 2019. So this is the gap, I guess. If you take that out, the $100 million is there, and you can model that in your models, as I have said.
Yeah, which is an effect that we had on the working capital. We have a counter effect. The price of oil at the end of the year, last year was quite low. In fact, $ 54, $ 56. This year was $ 68. This $12 had a positive impact on some open positions, which is one of it, which will normally disappear. We are very honest. It does not manage to increase its cash flow by $300 like that. We have a counter effect in the working cap. The increase of $1.2 billion is mainly due to the reevaluation of inventories. On one side, it's a result, on the other side, it's in the balance sheet.
Okay.
Philippe, your spot activity and your dollar per million BTU.
Yeah
any volume to trade.
The spot activity, you have to understand why we are pursuing the spot activity. It is not to make profit per se on the spot cargo. In fact, we use the spot in order to optimize our global portfolio. For example, if I have a cargo going from Yamal all the way to China, if I have an opportunity to buy a spot cargo in Asia and deliver to my customer in China, I will do it, and I will put the Yamal LNG cargo to another market, BTU, or another one. Just one element of the global portfolio, and this is why I cannot tell you what is the size of profit that we generate by this spot cargo. What is clear is that when we say overall on all our flexible volumes, that we generate some $0.8 per million BTU on average.
The spot is one way to, of course, to generate this sort of optimization.
4.9 million tons. You convert 5 million tons, you multiply the million BTU by 0.8, and you have the answer. As an average, because we don't follow each deal one by one, but you have the average. Lydia.
Thanks, Patrick. Two quick questions. The first on digital, seeing as we are in Aberdeen, we're going to spend some time talking about this afternoon. How has the approach to change digital over the last year? Has it just accelerated from what it was? Are you seeing better savings? Just a little bit how you think about the digital side. Just a target question on production. It was nice to see Tempa Rossa actually coming on screen. Any kind of comments on how that ramp-up is going? Also, what are you including for Libya within the guidance for this year?
Tempa Rossa, thank you for the question, because we did not issue a press release. It took us 18 years to put back into production.
Yes.
So we are super-
Superstitious?
Superstitious. Super one. It took here 18 years. For one year now, to have the right to produce, which is incredible in Italy. It's a country with no oil, but one year. Now it's done. I don't want to announce anything public because I don't know what will happen. It's producing, by the way, $15,000 per day, I think today. It's ramping up to 50. Things are in action. It took time. Sorry for that. No, by the way, it was why we made 8.7% and not 9% this year. There's a small gap. We will not complain about 9% or 8.7%. It's Tempa Rossa.
Libya.
Libya. Libya, you know Libya, you read the newspaper like me. There is a blockade on all this production. Today, I think Libya production is probably down to 200,000 or something like that, 250,000 from 1.2, so we will suffer from that. Okay. That's not small, but it's part of when we put the two to four, the two, there is a certain prudence. Some people could be surprised that organically you must have a little higher figure, but you know you have always some in execution, nothing is perfect. The two are taking part of the prudence, so it's a little prudent. That's point. Digitalization accelerating. What I would say to you is that we have, by the way, awarded a contract yesterday to set these digital plans with 300 engineers yesterday to Accenture, so it's moving forward quickly.
What I remark is the really enthusiasm of those teams, of Refining & Chemicals, of Bernard, of Arnaud. They want to make. The idea is to have 20, like it's a plan. You will have 20 line of production in parallel of teams, agile teams, able to deliver every four months, more or less, a project. 20 times four months for a year is to make 60 projects per year. It's a way to scale up and to speed up and to scale up all the digital, I would say, implementation of the technology in the company. Today, it was one by one. There, the fundamental idea is to be able, in parallel, to have at least 50 projects per year, and not only to scale up the, I would say, the creation, the development, but then the implementation within the group, because it's a matter.
You will have some more insights this afternoon from the teams here in U.K., because it is not only a central approach, it is also decentralized. I think Hubert will come back on it, if I can say. Somebody wants to add something on it? No? Somebody else? Yeah.
Yes. Bertrand.
Bertrand.
Two questions, if I may. The first one, as you change your long-term assumption for either gas price and oil price for your impairment test, you were using $70, I think, like that?
No. Gas or oil?
No, $70.
Okay. We'll come back to this
if you can clarify now, what's your, I would say, long-term assumption for impairment test? The second question, which is also a bit related, is you are quite, I would say, not very optimistic for long-term gas price or for LNG price. I think you said $6 per MMBtu or $6-$7. I just wonder, how do you think you can make money out of your US LNG offtake given the condition under 16% of Henry Hub plus a fee, plus transportation?
Okay. Philippe, you take the second one. Jean-Pierre, you explain your impairment assumptions.
I mentioned to you during my presentation that we use a long-term trajectory in line with the SDS scenario. That means oil, by 2050, will be at $50 a barrel. For the gas, we are very conservative, so we are below the SDS scenario.
To be precise, because it will be disclosed in the document reference, we are fully transparent. It's a little more complex. We consider today we are at 60, 64. We consider that the oil price, by the way, like the SDS scenario of the IEA, which is going quite high, will increase until 2030, we'll have a plateau at $70. We think that there was an underinvestment in this industry, and that this underinvestment, despite the shale oil, will have an impact. We have a curve, and from 2030, then we go down to 50. We have a straight line down there. It's sort of 70 going down to 60. You will see. It's not one assumption, it's a little more smarter. Why? We think. The world is not today on the two degree scenario.
It will be one day, maybe. Today is more on the, I would say, the current scenario. We don't see why we should take the lower one immediately, because, again, on the impairment test, time has a value. On the gas price, we have nothing to modify because we are very conservative, $2.5 for the U.S., I think five or six for Europe. We kept the same assumptions because our assumptions were already quite low. And I think we made already the write-off in the past on the few shale gas we had in our portfolio. It's not much to write off yet, which has been done systematically. The $2.5 has been taken as an assumption two, three years ago. It was done. We are on this 3,002, and you will have all the details. Jason? Yeah, Philippe.
I can keep the tricky question, but okay. Well, clearly, if you take a long-term strategy, our hypothesis will be between, let's say, 6 and $3 billion BTU. When you start with Henry Hub at $3, you don't make any money. You don't lose, but you don't make any money. What is the consequence? If there is no LNG developed in order to export the massive amount of gas that will be exported, that needs to be exported in order to continue to produce in the Permian and so on, you cannot stay with $3 billion BTU in the U.S.
By the way, we have an assumption.
Why we are bearish of Henry Hub.
We have an assumption of 2.5, I just tell you, not three. Fundamentally, our U.S. position is based on the idea that the gas price in the U.S. will be low.
If I might add, the cherry on the cake is that all the U.S. volume are flexible, and this, of course, has a value, $800 million as a value. If you are a global player like TotalEnergies, you can generate this kind of value. If you are, I would say, a simple-minded player who have in mind, "I will buy this LNG from the U.S. and ship it to the same customer, for instance, in China," go away. Fly away. I think there are some people who had a lot of trouble when, due to Mr. Trump and Mr. Xi quarrel, there was, for instance, a tax on importing U.S. LNG. You need to be a global player to make money again.
By the way, the consequence of what we said is that we don't want necessarily to produce the gas we use in the U.S., because we have plenty of gas. You can find today all producer ready to commit you their gas at a very low price if you want to do it.
Hi there. It's Jason Kenney from Santander. Two short questions, please. First, on tax rate guidance. You've mostly below your estimates for tax in the fourth quarter. Where do you think they're going to go in 2020? Secondly, on going back to LNG. I think two Chinese companies at the minute are declaring force majeure for February and March deliveries. What event is being said as the reason for force majeure? I wasn't aware that weak demand was causation for force majeure. If force majeure is being served, are you seeing those notices yet? What kind of impact could that have for your LNG volumes in the second and third quarter?
No.
Yes. The tax rate for the group last year was at 34%, down by 5% directly in relation with the low prices environments, because at the same time, you have the contribution of E&P that has been reduced and the same for downstream. We consider that now and last year, we are in a $60 per barrel environment, we anticipate at $60 per barrel, more or less the same tax rate for this year. I would say 35% at the level of the group and for E&P alone, between 40% and 45%. Again, it's dependent on the prices.
Yeah. For the force majeure, we've not yet received any notice, but Philippe will know.
The basic situation in Asia, clearly, is that the winter is warm, three degrees above normal. The demand is on the low side, and there are a lot of people, a lot of customers that have contracted long term who have too much LNG first. Second, it's clear with the spot prices that are very low, as you can see on the screen. There is a strong temptation from some long-term customers to try to play with force majeure concept to say, "Okay, I cannot take my cargo under the long-term contract, but I would like to buy spot," which is a bit contradictory. The last step, yes, might get a bit more serious because, of course, with the coronavirus, some Chinese customers, at least one, is trying now to use the coronavirus to say, "I have force majeure. The terms cannot be used and so on.
I have real force majeure. We have received one force majeure that we have rejected because our legal analysis is that there is no force majeure. It's, I would say, the way we negotiate on an ongoing basis with China. It's nothing. Of course, we have to be careful. If there is a real quarantine in all the loading port or unloading port in China, we'll have a real case for force majeure. For the time being, as you might be aware, this is not the case. For me, it's ordinary negotiation.
You have the question in front of us there.
Yeah.
This is only branding. Shooting is off for one hour now.
Thanks very much. Jason Gammel, Jefferies. 2019 was a very big year for Total in terms of sanctioning LNG projects. It does appear like the industry is sanctioning quite a bit of capacity as well. I know that you're looking at a multi-decade period when it comes to evaluating projects. How do you think about the potential for the macro to be oversupplied again in 2025 the way that it is today when it comes to evaluating whether you go forward with new projects? Just specifically, in Papua New Guinea, is the apparent delay in the expansion of PNG LNG going to have any effect on Papua LNG moving forward?
First, yeah. It has never been a very linear industry, the LNG. There was no sanctions during five or six years. Suddenly, people are sanctioning projects. If we have a gap again, by 2022, 2023, 2024, if we continue at the pace of 10% a year, I can tell you have a big tension on the supply, and you don't have enough because there is no trains coming really on stream, not enough. 2025, it's clear that suddenly you will have a wave of projects. We'll see if all of them are executing in the same timeframe. We have observed in this industry, and unfortunately, we had a very good example in our portfolio like Yamal. We had some examples like Texas, where it has been more six, seven years than five years, or four, five years. There is a matter of execution.
Yes, it's clear that today you have many projects coming together. I would say it's a matter of each decision. At the end, I think each consortium or each operator is looking to each investor to, is the project resilient? Even it's a question of the answer of, I would say, the question of Michele, what is the assumption you take? You have to face the reality. If you think that you can have $8 per million BTU in such an environment in 2026, I'm afraid you are wrong. You have to be prudent in the way you plan, you decide, you make your decisions.
I would say from this point of view, being the first to decide is better than being the last one, because the more you have sanctions in front of you by the others, we begin to think, "I am in trouble or not." Coming back to PNG, because you know perfectly, and I declared that this morning to the press, that these projects are joint. In fact, it's an extension. In Papua and PNG, we decide with Exxon, with the approval of the PNG government, that the best way, the most efficient way to develop the LNG plant is to make an extension of the existing plant and to add 3 trains. 2 for Papua, 1 for PNG. We, on our side, have set all the terms. Exxon has to set all it.
Okay, I don't know if it's the best way to make statements publicly when you negotiate, you know it's a question of time. I'm convinced that the three parties will find an agreement and that the PNG government and Exxon will find an agreement. I would say yes, that's true, but in this context, where does it depend? No, PNG at the end is not a big project. It's a limited project. It's two trains. It's well positioned geographically. A lot of attraction from Japanese buyers, Chinese buyers. At the end, it will be a project which will have to be competitive in this type of low price environment. That will be the conditions. I would say with the terms we have, it is profitable. It's okay. Because of the environment, particularly on Total's side, we are not in a hurry.
We are not driven by volume. We are driven by value. If we have to wait six months, we wait six months. If we have to wait one year, we wait one year. We are patient. At the end, I'm convinced the project will be developed in the best efficient way, and the best efficient way is to do it jointly with Exxon on the downstream side. That we are convinced. I think we have one last question because I see time running, from Lucas. We didn't have the question of Lucas. We are not happy.
That's very kind of you. It's Lucas, I'm at Exane. Two, if I might. One, I'm going to ask you to let me dream. The first one is to J.P., and it's just loan repayments from associates. Understand the concept, increasingly coming through the cash flow from operations line. Nigh on impossible for me to forecast how much loan repayment is going to come through in any one year. I just wonder whether you can make any or give us any indication of the extent to which one will be seeing loan payments coming through the CFFO line as we go into 2020. The second question around dreaming, you suggested $200 million or so of cash flow from operations from the renewable business, the electricity business. I think that's exclusive of the EUR 100 million from SAM. You have plans out to 2025.
You talked about gigawatts of capacity. You've talked about lots of things that you're doing around battery. When you look at those plans, what do you expect the CFFO to be 2025 from the renewable part of that business, not the LNG and LNG marketing component?
Okay. First question is loan repayment. I know what this means. Again, if you model all our SMEs, you can do it. You will find. We don't have so many. For example, that's clear that in the CFFO this year, we had $500 million of loan repayment coming from Yamal. The price was good. This plant, by the way, it's good news for You don't have that in your figures, but the production today of Yamal is 20.5 million tons, 20.5. This plant is just extraordinary. Not only it's on schedule and budget, but it's delivering an increase compared to the initial 18, I think it was, or 16.5. 16.5. 16.5 is delivering 20.5 today. This was a plan. All reserves and planning and productions and cash, which allow us to accelerate the loan repayments. This has an effect.
Loan repayment is linked to what is the price environment, what is the production, it's more difficult to plan. That's true, let's be clear. The objective of all the teams in Total, in all these companies, is to accelerate the loan repayments. They have a duty in Korea for HCC, in SATORP with Saudi Aramco. Generally, I don't know why our co-investors are in agreement with us. We are all happy to see money flowing back to the investors. You know that's clear. It's the same mechanism. It's a loan repayment. When you're making a PSC, some cost recovery, at $64, we have accelerated some cost recovery from Kaombo. It's better to start Kaombo at $64 than at $50. Compared to the model, it's the same mechanism, and that's linked-To the oil price, and the production, of course, are the two.
There is not much difference in terms of models between a cost recovery on oil and the loan repayment in your LNG plant, in fact, fundamentally.
Patrick, I'm not criticizing it.
No, I mean, in a sense.
It is simply to try and understand. What I don't know is the scale of the outstanding, and therefore what one can expect.
It's not outstanding. It's, believe in our $1 plus $1 billion at $60 next year. Believe in it. That's all what I. We will deliver it. That's why the guidance we gave. Okay? It's taking into account all these effects at the group level. The group is large enough with many assets, that one will deliver, the other one will not deliver. It's not linear, all that, and it's the advantage. We have a large portfolio of assets and this type of assets. Okay?
Now the dream?
The dream. The dream is that we gave you a figure. Today, it's only EUR 200 million of CFFO, so I think it would reach EUR 1 billion. I don't know. I could give you a figure. No, I know. You don't need. I will come back to you in September. Honestly, all that is a growing business. We invest there and there. We have to put together, and we have a. EUR 1 billion is a good ambition. Honestly, either we manage to have an acceptable size for all that, or we'll have a question mark. It cannot be just a. It's not a greenwashing story. To have an acceptable size, it will go through CFFO. That's one of the metrics we need to reach.
All right. Well, thank you very much. We are one hour delayed. That's the bad news. The good news is you can continue interacting, actually, with top management over lunch, which is going to be served right next door. I think, actually, we'll postpone by one hour the program, so we'll meet at 2:30 in order to leave to Westhill. That will leave us with one hour lunch. Thank you.