Hello everybody, a warm welcome here in New York at the New York Stock Exchange. For those who do not know me, I'm Ladislas Paszkiewicz . I'm in charge of investor relations for Total. We're going to have a full day today with three different presentations. I'm not going to go through. I just want to mention to you that there is an app application that I encourage you strongly to load on your mobiles where all the presentations will be there. They are valuable information that you can have access to, you'll have the full program for the day. There will be three sessions. They will be followed by Q&A, of course, all the questions from the floor will be taken care of.
Without further ado, I think I have to hand the microphone to the person from the New York Stock Exchange for just a safety announcement.
Good morning, everybody. My name is Frank Megaro. Welcome to the New York Stock Exchange. I am one of the fire safety directors here in the building. I'm just going to give you a couple of important points, information regarding fire safety and fire emergencies. If there is a fire emergency, if you look around, there's white notification devices around the room. You'll see them flashing. There's also speaker capabilities from those devices. We will make announcements from downstairs in the lobby, just in case if there is a fire emergency during the time that you guys are here. There are three egress points on the floor, three stairways. Elevator cars are not an option in a fire emergency. They get recalled to the lobby, automatically tied into the fire alarm system.
We have a fire alarm system in place for the building and a fire safety evacuation plan approved by the New York City Fire Department. The three means of egress to the south end of the floor are the C stairway. Behind me, I have the B stairway and the A stairway. The A stairway will terminate at Wall Street, the B stairway and Broad Street, and the C stairway and Broad Street. There will be fire wardens assigned to the floor in case there's a fire emergency to direct you and to assist you to get you to the proper egress points, in case of a fire emergency. Any questions? Thank you very much. Enjoy your stay here today.
Thank you very much. As regard to Total, as safety, of course, is a core value of the group, I propose that we view a safety moment before we start the presentations. All right. Well, now with no further ado, let me hand over to Patrick Pouyanné.
Good morning, everybody. Welcome to this annual strategy day for Total. We are back in New York City, like it was the first last year. We are very pleased and impressed by the attendance, so we have decided to transform the try. It's a Rugby World Cup in Japan. France will play against the U.S. in the coming days. No doubt about the results, for once. Maybe it's a new tradition in Total to be in New York, but I think it's also recognition, as I said last year, that 33% of our shareholders are here in the U.S. This event, this strategy day, is happening at the time in the city where there is quite an activity, quite a busy week with the UN General Assembly, and in particular, the UN Climate Summit, which took place yesterday.
It gave us the opportunity to meet many stakeholders and to explain how oil, camp, and gas companies are adapting ourselves to these new energy markets and to the climate change. It's also happening this day, this event today, at a time where the world is in the middle of quite a number of uncertainties and the recent attack on the oil facilities in Saudi Arabia. Quite a big shock in our industry. It's a shock from a geopolitical point of view because this Middle East region is the core of a lot of energy supply in the world. It's also a shock for the oil market, because obviously it increased somewhere the risk premium in the oil price, and it might also force the market to reconsider what are the acceptable levels of inventories and storage capacities in the world.
Like last year, we come into force in New York with most of the Executive Committee members and, of course, two new Executive Committee members, which are Helle Kristoffersen and Jean-Pierre Sbraire. You will see both of them because they will be together. We will make the first presentation, the strategy presentation, together. Three of us this year. Helle, as the head of strategy and innovation, will present the macro environment of the market. Jean-Pierre, as our new CFO, will cover the financial performance of the company. In the afternoon, we have the opportunity to listen to the other Executive Committee members which are there.
We have two focus sessions, one on the two key businesses for us, and you will understand through the strategy presentation why we selected these two domains, which is the LNG with Arnaud Breuillac, our President of E&P, and Philippe Sauquet, our President of Gas, Renewables & Power, together with Laurent Vivier, President of Gas, will explain to you what we developed as a portfolio in LNG, and we will see that LNG will be a strong contributor to the future growth of the cash flow of the companies. Then we'll have a session about downstream with Bernard Pinatel, our President of Refining & Chemicals, and Momar Nguer, President of Marketing & Services, will present to you how they will also develop their businesses.
More than that, of course, you will have opportunities to interact with all the top management of the company during the seated lunch and seated dinner if you can stay with us. Coming back to the presentation of today, I would say that last year we emphasized on the fact that Total had a strong capacity to deliver consistently on our objectives. We also explained to you what was the strategy for the future. On one side, building on our strengths in oil and gas integrated activities, and on the other side, willing to develop a low-carbon energy business, mainly on electricity. Since last year, of course, we have implemented that strategy and with some important events, we will come back on it. This year's presentation, I think that we'll focus on two main messages this year.
First is that we are in a situation where we can go beyond the 2020 guidelines and 2022 guidelines. We have developed enough of portfolio, sanctioned some projects, captured some results, which I would say give quite a lot of clarity of the roadmap of Total until 2025. We will describe this roadmap along the presentation and give you the key indicators of the way we intend to develop our activity, our strategies, and to invest and to generate cash flows and return to shareholders along these coming five, six years. This is first objective. The second objective is that through this presentation, we want also to demonstrate how we build a sustainable and profitable company and growth.
We recognize that there is in the market quite a lot of questions about the sustainability, long-term sustainability of the oil and gas industry because of all these climate challenge and the new energy trends. We believe that the strategy we developed is a good answer to the sustainability of the cash flows of the company and also, of course, to the return to our shareholders. You will hear, and I will go to the first slide, these words sustainable probably many times today. We try to emphasize on what in the way in our business model is sustainable and of course, profitable. We have, of course, our answer and sustainability is for us, can be in different aspects. The first one, of course, and it's important, is that we have to cope with volatile and changing energy markets. Helle will come back on it.
I think it's important that in this moving environment, we can adapt ourselves, and this is what we will try to describe today. The second part, when we speak about sustainability and resilience, is that, yes, these markets are volatile. We have put in place since 2015 a clear reaction to this volatility, focusing, I would say, on two pillars of the financial performance. One is to lower the break-even. We managed to get it under $30 per barrel. The second one is to have a strong balance sheet in order to be able also to face this volatility. Jean-Pierre will come back on the levels that we've done in the past, that we intend to maintain in the future in order to continue to focus on these two pillars of the financial performance of the company.
We have sustainability means also for us, if we want to have sustainable returns for medium and long term, is primarily in our oil and gas traditional businesses to play to our strengths and also to continue to have the integrated approach that we have developed through the whole value chain. It's also meaning that we want to take benefit from the growing energy markets. It's mainly natural gas and LNG in particular. It's also electricity. We will come back on the strategy that we want to develop in these two fields.
The aim of all that is to continue to increase the sustainability of shareholder return. I think you've seen an announcement this morning that we are doing it in a strong way by the strong support of the board of directors, which is to accelerate the dividend growth in the coming years in order to share with all our shareholders the additional cash flows that we can generate. We'll come back on that in the presentation. That's for setting the scene. It will not be complete, as always, without a word on safety. Safety, as you know, is a core value for the company. It's a matter, of course, also of operational efficiency. It's also, I would say, a matter of sustainability. A company cannot be sustainable if neither these assets nor these people, if we don't have a very high level of safety.
Of course, we continue to improve our statistics at the workplace, that you can see we are in the middle of the pack among the majors, and we target 0.8 as an injury rate for total recordable injury rate for group staff and our contractor staff. By the way, statistics is more or less the same between both categories of employees, which means that it's also part of the social responsibility to be sure that everybody is treated in the same way. Having said that, we are always a bit in safety because it's always fragile, all the efforts we do. We had to suffer three tragedies, three fatalities in 2019. It's really a lot. Which led us to react strongly internally.
We were mobilizing everybody around a campaign and not only campaign, the working groups, people thinking about zero fatal accident because it is not acceptable to have a better-performing company like Total is suffering fatalities. This, of course, is a permanent, I would say, journey that we go into the company. There is improvement, but it still has to be increased. That is part, I would say, of the commitments in terms of social responsibility. I will add a second slide this year, and I think it will come back in all our presentations, which is, obviously, safety is a value, but the other commitment we have to do is to the planet and to the environmental challenges and topics around CO2. CO2 is clearly something on which we want to emphasize.
We have taken a symbolic decision in the company, which is at each site, in the same way that we display at the entrance of the site, the offices, the statistics for safety statistics. Now, you will see in all our sites display the CO2 emissions. We want everybody to be aware of it. It's a first step to be awareness of our staff, of our management, and also in order to take some actions. In January, we take a commitment on the emissions on which we are directly responsible. We have the operated emissions from the oil and gas perimeters. We are emitting 46 million tons. We have put a target of less than 40 million tons. It's an absolute target, and at the same time, of course, as we expect, the company will continue to grow. It is a challenge.
Last year, 2018, we were at 42. People could say the gap is not very big between 42 and 40. In fact, it's bigger than it seems because in the meantime, we have new facilities. For example, Bernard will speak to you about petrochemical cracker in Port Arthur, which represent 1.5 million ton of emission. We need to continue, in fact, on the historic perimeter to lower the base. In fact, the ambition is to go down to the 46, as close to become 36, if we want to leave the space for the new facilities that we will put into production in the meantime. It's a real effort, a commitment which will come through different actions, reduction of gas flaring. It's obvious we have done already a lot, 80% of reduction of routine flaring. We can do more.
Methane reduction, as you will see, we strongly believe that the energy of the future will be a mix of natural gas, renewables, energy storage, and other carbon neutrality tools like CCUS and others. If we want the natural gas to have this share of the energy mix, methane emissions is a challenge that we need to tackle. We are already on a good way. On our operations, we have less than 0.2% to 25%, which is very low. We will continue to drive down, and we need to target almost zero, like in safety on methane emissions. There are possibilities, there are technologies to do better, and we'll put that in place. Energy efficiency is also, of course, something in which we continue to improve. All our sites have to work.
By the way, one way to do it is that we put in place a CO2 Fighter Squad in the company, which has the objective to go around all the places, all the sites of the company, in fact, to leverage all our competencies in energy efficiency, renewables, in energy storage, in order to be the best pupils among all our customers, I would say, in the company and to have a business case to show to our customers tomorrow that we can be more efficient. The last area of improvement for future projects is process electrification. In all our businesses, we can use electricity as a way to, of course, lower our future emissions. Safety, CO2, to have my introduction, I would say on the E of the ESG challenges that we face, we'll come back, of course, on the social part in the presentation.
Having said that, setting the scene, I will leave the floor to Helle, which will come to discuss and to present you a vision of the market. Jean-Pierre will follow on the financial performance. Thank you.
Good morning, everyone. Happy to be here with you this morning. A few charts on the macro environment, and the title here really says it all. Our markets are volatile and they're changing. In fact, energy markets are in transition. Here is a recap of the world energy outlook that we presented to you in February, with the two scenarios for the evolution of the primary energy demand in the world between now and 2040. Two scenarios benchmarked against the IEA two-degree scenario. What does it say? Oil still has a sizable share of overall energy demand in 2040, around 25% in the two-degree scenario of the IEA, even if oil may no longer grow when we reach 2040. Gas will continue to grow over the period in all scenarios because gas is abundant, affordable.
It has multiple uses, power generation, heating, burning, feedstock, mobility, and natural gas is an essential complement to intermittent renewables. Power consumption will grow more than 50% in all scenarios and much more in certain scenarios. At least 60% of incremental power demand is expected to come from renewables, be that solar, wind, hydro, biomass, geothermal, and so on. That's really the long-term picture, and let's now move on to the short-term. First, oil. Oil markets are fundamentally volatile, and it works both ways. We saw the price of Brent drop by 25% between end April and early August. Of course, came the attack on the Saudi installations 10 days ago, with Brent jumping 15% in one day, and geopolitics and oil security being back on the center stage.
The chart here talks about market fundamentals, which is supply and demand, putting geopolitics on the side just for a second. Where do we stand? Short term, there are several questions around supply and demand balances, with more questions on demand than on supply. As you can see on the graph here, OECD inventories of oil began to grow in the summer of 2018, which is generally perceived as a sign of market deterioration. Let's look at demand and then on supply. The 10-year trend for oil demand continues to be very good. As you can also see on the graph in orange, demand has grown from 88 to 99 barrels per day, roughly over the last 10 years. What about short term then? Short term, oil demand is of course sensitive to prices, but also to overall economic growth.
Right now, people question the health of the global economy due to weaker GDP outlook in certain countries and due, of course, also to the impact of the ongoing trade tensions. The net result is that lower demand growth is expected for 2019 and 2020 compared to recent years, with the latest outlook from the IEA showing 1.1 million barrels per day increase this year. On the supply side, the prevailing feeling until the latest events in Saudi was that supply was sufficient to cover a weakening demand, and therefore, there was very low risk premiums, as Patrick said, factor into prices, which was honestly a little strange since the OPEC Plus discipline is working well. Several countries like Iran, Venezuela, and Libya are experiencing long-lasting production disruptions or production cuts.
The growth of U.S. shale is expected to slow down, and the industry is globally under-investing in new oil capacity. That was before, of course. Now, geopolitics and spare capacity tightness are back as a top concern on the supply side of oil. Adding all this up, there is for sure a lot of uncertainty out there, and price volatility will, of course, continue to be very high. When it comes to TotalEnergies, you know the conclusion we draw from volatility. We focus on assets and projects that have low break-evens. Moving on to gas. Worldwide gas supply is abundant. It has been boosted in particular by the output of the U.S., which has translated into growing U.S. LNG exports. These exports have, in turn, increased the liquidity of worldwide gas markets, facilitating global gas trade.
On the demand side, worldwide gas demand has been excellent over the last three years, and you can see that on the graph, almost 4% CAGR since 2015. Demand has been stimulated by lower prices and a switch from coal to gas, supported by CO2 or air quality policies, notably in Europe, China, and India. Let's just remember that China year-to-date demand at the end of July for gas was up by 12%. That being said, gas is a seasonal market and the winter has been mild pretty much everywhere. When you combine ample supply and low seasonal demand, gas prices have indeed come under severe pressure in the first half of 2019. Even if more recently, spot prices have been impacted by the Saudi events, and the forward curves show, of course, seasonal uptick in prices as we move into the next winter season.
The good news is that the lower gas prices will continue to stimulate demand. Our strategy in gas is to prioritize integration along the whole value chain to capture margins, and you will hear more about that in just a while. Coming on to LNG, what's the picture? Says so in the title, there is strong momentum. LNG markets have grown by 9%, almost double digits, in the last three years, which is, of course, simply huge. On the other hand, there is a clear softness in prices right now because of the numerous project startups or ramp-ups, especially out of the U.S., Russia, and Australia. In addition, storage levels are high in Europe. There is a feeling that markets are oversupplied right now. Prices won't stay low forever, ever. As shown on the graph to the left, markets will be tightening from 2021 plus and onwards.
This chart shows you the lines which is expected demand evolution and the bars is available supply or expected supply to become available. Market tightness will be true even if the current LNG demand growth were to slow down from the 9% to, say, 5% or 6%. Of course, there'll be a much bigger shortage in supply if the current three-year trend in LNG demand continues. The pace of demand growth will largely depend on Asia, which you can see from the graph to the right. Asia leads LNG demand growth. Given this outlook for LNG between now and 2024, 2025, there is clearly room and even need for competitive new projects, meaning projects with low break evens. As you know, the fundamentals of our portfolio are very strong, and in addition, we benefit from integration all along the LNG value chain.
A few words now on low-carbon power markets, which are another strategic area and focus for us. Let's start with Europe. The liberalization of power markets in Europe over the last 10-15 years has created a window of opportunity for newcomers like ourselves to take positions against incumbents. At the same time, the European power mix shown here, based on Total's momentum scenario, is changing rapidly, as you can see, with a collapse in coal and a shift towards low carbon, meaning natural gas and renewables. Gas is growing in the scenario shown here, a little less than 3% per year, and solar wind are growing more than three times faster.
This trend is triggered by various EU policies supporting the substitution of coal by gas in power generation via emission trading schemes, for instance, and also supporting renewables through multiple incentive schemes, contracts for difference, and so on. When it comes to us, we are pursuing a strategy to become an integrated low-carbon power player in Europe, with activities ranging from power generation all the way to the end consumer, excluding regulated markets, but including trading activities, of course, which are very important in the power section. Outside of Europe, our low-carbon strategy revolves around profitable growth in renewable power generation, so call it power upstream only. As we've discussed before, the worldwide power market is increasing very fast, especially in non-OECD countries, due to economic growth, rising living standards, electrification of other sources of energy, and so on.
This is certainly true in China, India, and a whole range of other countries. In whatever mid or long-term scenario that you look at, renewables are capturing the lion's share of incremental worldwide power demand. What we're showing here is, again, TotalEnergies' momentum and rupture scenarios between 2018, 2030, and 2040. You can see how the growth of natural gas in dark orange and renewables in lighter orange, how the growth is increasing both in absolute terms and in relative terms in the worldwide power mix. We'll hear more about how we're investing to create value in this market opportunity a little later. Finally, a last chart on petrochemicals, another key area for us, illustrated here through the PE market.
The market fundamentals for PE are very strong in terms of demand, with more than 3% growth per year expected between now and 2025, which effectively means no deceleration in demand versus historical trends. Demand in petrochemicals is sustained by population and GDP growth, rising living standards, for instance, in Asia, and also very importantly, by a structural shift towards lighter materials. That being said, the PE market will be impacted in the coming years by a host of new capacity additions, which are expected to create excess capacity, assuming that all these new units run at high operating rates, which of course, is not entirely granted everywhere. We do expect new capacity to come online in Asia. Of course, here in the U.S., there is the ongoing startup of the first wave of Gulf Coast projects.
As far as Total is concerned, we focus on securing access to low-cost feedstock and on integration, physical feedstock integrations, and also monomer polymer capacity integration. You'll hear more about that from Bernard in a while. With that, I'm done with the macro framing, and I hand over to Jean-Pierre. Thank you.
Thank you, [Helle]. Good morning, everyone. This section of the presentation focuses on our performance to date in terms of reducing the cash breakeven and strengthening the balance sheet, which we regard as the two essential elements to coping with the volatility of our markets and preserving the group's long-term sustainability. At TotalEnergies, discipline is the cliché. First, we control cash breakeven to minimize the impact of recurring cycles and downturns. Second, we maintain a robust balance sheet to provide the group with a solid foundation and financial flexibility, allowing us to weather cyclical lows and possibly to act countercyclically on opportunities that might arise. We are committed to maintaining these high standards in order to consistently deliver on long projects and objectives. Let's start with the breakeven, which is a synthesis of the strategy to be resilient in volatile markets. As you see, we have made remarkable progress.
In 2014, the pre-dividend organic cash breakeven was around $100 per barrel. Since 2017, we need less than $30 per barrel to cover our organic CapEx. We achieve that through a combination of, first, constant discipline on spend on both OpEx and CapEx, second, by maximizing cash flow generation, by enhancing the operational efficiencies of all our assets, and by upgrading the portfolio through countercyclical M&A. As you know, we have a best-in-class upstream that generated large and sustainable cash, which is, by the way, partly non-cyclical. I will come back on that later. Our fundamental objective is to maintain the pre-dividend organic cash breakeven below $30 per barrel. At this level, we are more resilient to downturns in the environment. Of course, the low breakeven and the upgraded portfolio also increase our upside in a rising price environment.
We have clearly imposed a discipline to our CapEx, which has been trending down since 2015, while at the same time, we have delivered a very strong production growth. To summarize, we did more with less. Obviously, the discipline on CapEx goes hand in hand with strict economic criteria to sanction projects using a $50 a barrel oil price scenario. Since 2018, we have started to sanction again some projects in order to capture the benefit of industry-wide cost deflation. Our organic CapEx are increasing, but we intend to control them at around [$14 billion-$16 billion] per year, for years to come. Sustainability is also a matter of operational excellence. Total has been the fastest-growing major in part due to strong execution on major projects.
2018, 2019 startups include Egina FPSO in West African countries and in Brazil, representing around 600,000 barrels per day of capacity, plus 6 LNG trains. In Russia, in the U.S., in Australia, representing around 30 million tons a year of capacity. We are always exposed to cycles of volatility. We have to be good at what we control, like costs. You see here the significant progress we made over the cost reduction front since 2014. We have developed a strong cost-cutting culture at Total, we are keeping constant pressure, sorry, on OpEx. Compared to our 2014 base, we target cost saving of EUR 4.7 billion this year and more than EUR 5 billion next year. This is a company-wide effort. All the business segments contribute to this effort, even if a majority of cost saving comes from upstream.
It is important to point out that at the same time, we have been growing the company. We have achieved this by creating opportunities to leverage synergies. You have the example of the Maersk assets. We have been able to deliver quicker and greater synergies. We anticipate now deliveries of EUR 300 million per year of synergies coming from Maersk Oil assets, saving coming from, first, the merger of the two subsidiaries in the U.K., which includes a 30% staff reduction. The reduction incorporates overheads in Denmark and leveraging on our purchasing power. We improved at the same time efficiency across the group. We simplified our processes, our organization. With Total Global Services that was created three years ago, we have made sustainable improvements in efficiency by centralizing shared services for the group.
We are on track to deliver ambitious cost savings, thanks to TGS, of EUR 450 million last year to EUR 1 billion by 2020. Centralized purchasing is one of the most important aspects of TGS. It has consolidated and streamlined 30% of our procurement last year from 16% in 2015, and the target is 40% by next year. The cost reduction story is an important part of maintaining the low breakeven and preserving our financial strength. We will continue with it beyond 2020. We will maintain the pressure on costs going forward, and we have a new target for 2023 of EUR 1 billion of additional savings. That means that our target is to reduce operating costs by more than EUR 6 billion by 2023 compared to the basis. Again, this will be a company-wide effort.
For the upstream, as a result of this cost-cutting program and also the upgrade of the portfolio I mentioned before, we will be able to reduce the production costs per barrel by half between 2014 and today. In 2014, our CapEx was about $10 per barrel. It will be below $5.5 per barrel next year with a target of $5 per barrel. I think it's a good transition to the next slide. Part of this next generation of cost reduction will come from digitalization. Digitalization is one of the levers we will use more and more in coming years to improve performance and create value. We have successfully started the digital transformation in all segments at Total. Now we have the ambition to scale it up and to accelerate. Few examples of program that we have already implemented.
We have a partnership with Google for artificial intelligence on geoscience. We are working with Tata on Refinery 4.0 digital twin technology. To accelerate this digital transformation, we have made mid of this year the decision to create a digital factory at Total with about 300 dedicated engineers. This digital factory will be in place mid-2020. We are confident that through digital, we can capture significant savings on both OpEx and CapEx and step operational performance up to a new level of excellence. Digital will help us to increase the availability of our upstream and downstream assets. Ultimately will contribute to increased production and as a consequence, revenues. For our customer-facing businesses, such as E&P, marketing and services, digitalization can be used to expand the services to our customers and provide new services.
We estimate that by 2025, value creation from digitalization will be $1.5 billion a year, and the split will be $1 billion per year coming from upstream and $0.5 billion a year from midstream and downstream. This includes increasing revenues, improving availabilities, and reducing costs. We believe in the integrated model approach to achieve long-term success and sustainability in a volatile environment. Downstream plays an important role in ensuring stability across the highs and lows of market cycles. Our downstream provides a sustainable cash flow from a diversified portfolio, more or less 60% of the cash flow coming from non-cyclical businesses. Cash flow has been consistently strong over the 2015, 2018 periods, despite, by the way, $8 billion of asset sales. Our refining and chemicals have been restructured and upgraded, and as a consequence of that, the break-even for our European refineries is now below $20 per ton.
Marketing and services is largely non-cyclical with a unique position in Africa. We are successful in actively managing portfolio and developing marketing and services in growing markets. In addition, we are increasing the non-fuel sales, which further diversifies the revenue stream and strengthens sustainability. Finally, refining is ready for IMO 2020. Our refineries have been upgraded, and now they have reduced their high sulfur fuel oil output from 7 million ton a year in 2017 to 2 million-3 million ton now. Coming down to the balance sheets and the importance of financial strength to sustainability. We maintain a robust balance sheet to provide the group with a solid foundation and financial flexibilities, allowing us to weather lows and possibly act countercyclically on opportunities that might arise. Since 2016, we have the objective to maintain the gearing below 20%.
It gave us the flexibility to be agile and try, for example, the Maersk and Anadarko opportunities. In 2019, you observed increase in our gearing linked to the implementation of the famous IFRS 16 accounting rule. That means the capitalization of the leases in our balance sheets. As all our peers do not report the leases in our account the same way, you see on the right side of the slide the benchmark excluding leases. The bottom line is clear. Total continues to rank as one of the strongest major in terms of gearing. We are committed to maintaining a strong balance sheet. We target gearing below 20%, although, as we have said that before, there may be brief periods when gearing is above that level.
As the new CFO, I am convinced that financial strength is the foundation of long-term sustainability, particularly in our industry, which is marked by strong cycles. Our objective is to build and safeguard future flexibilities. I know there will be times where successful companies have to rely on a strong balance sheet. Finally, the benchmark is very clear. It shows that discipline of spend and operational excellence have positioned TotalEnergies at the forefront of the major oil peer group. As a result of consistent execution and delivery, we have increased production far faster than our peers. More important for the long term, this production growth, coupled with the underlying improvement in our portfolio, has driven the increase in cash flow. To the right, you can see that during first half 2019, we outpaced our peers in cash flow generation. Our assets are performing at the best-in-class level.
This is true for our downstream, but it's also true at the level of group, with a group OGE above 10%. That concludes my presentation, and I give the floor to Patrick. Thank you.
Good. Now we come into the 2 sections where we describe the strategy that's put in place for the future to build a sustainable, profitable company, and then the Outlook 2025. First section is about owning gas, our businesses, in E&P and Refining & Chemicals and Marketing & Services, which are traditional businesses. Be clear, they are still given the majority of our cash flows, and they are the core of the company. As we said for the last two, three years, our strategy is to build on our strengths. It is clear, its strengths are around the offshore, deepwater, the LNG, the petrochemicals, retail lubricants. We have developed a strong competence and expertise in this field, and we consider that this is a place where we are comfortable to invest.
It's also a matter of geography in Africa, in the Middle East, and North Africa, in North Sea, where we have built also strong positions. If we strongly believe that this is the right strategy in our oil and gas businesses, it's because this is where, again, we can leverage our competence in order to deliver value. Prior to rather than filling the gaps, we prefer to continue to build on this strategy. This is the reason why we are demonstrating that we have been able to be agile in seizing opportunities, because again, and there is a strong support of the board of directors, this strategy somewhere is less risky than trying to develop in new areas. The way this strategy has allowed us to build a very large portfolio of new profitable projects.
On this chart, on this map, you have around 30 projects, 30 different projects. Since 2018, if you remember, 2015, 2016, we were spending time to, I would say, work on the foundations, which have been described by Jean-Pierre in his presentation, breakeven, lower your breakevens, financial strength. 2017, we begin to be more active because we say we want to benefit from the low cycles. We need to put in place this counter cycle strategy. We have been active by Maersk Oil, by LNG. Beginning 2018, we say now it's time to sanction again new projects because we have special capital expenditures after the large projects which will be delivered. This is the main activity, the main target for Arnaud Breuillac and his team in E&P to sanction the projects. 12 projects have been sanctioned since beginning of 2018.
There is still some work to be done. We target six others for the next six months and 12 more in 2020, maybe some of them could go in the beginning of 2021. You have here the list of the projects. I will not comment on them. A lot of deepwater projects, logically in line with the strategy in Africa, in Brazil, in Gulf of Mexico, and also several LNG projects on which we'll come back during the presentation. Together, all these projects represent more than 800,000 barrels per day of new production, which will fuel the growth post-2023. You will see the impact on our production profile. On the top of these large projects, I would say we have what we call some short-cycle projects, on which we also have been active because it's a way to increase the short-term cash flows.
The payout is very less than two years. The IRR is about 20%. You have the examples here of Angola. These are brownfield projects, mainly in situ, which can be developed and produced from existing infrastructures. They are short cycle because of flexible CapEx. We can interrupt the drilling in case of, I would say, a drop of the oil price. It's also giving, of course, additional cash flows, which are welcome in the present time. All this activity of developing resources, of course, is taking place at a time where we are leveraging favorable supply chain. It's clear that the market is still favorable, and we consider we had already the opportunity to comment that, but it will remain like that for quite a long time. You see that we've seen a decrease in the cost of 30% in deep offshore or conventional offshore compared to 2014.
It happened in what we call international E&P business, where we are mainly focused. It's not the same situation in U.S. onshore, where you have quite a large activity. On the international E&P, in fact, it is that there is still some significant spare capacity. According to our statistics, around 40%. There is less competition, less activity, in fact, because a lot of U.S. E&P independents, which were working internationally before 2010, have refocused their businesses on the U.S. You have also a spare capacity because you have new contractors, and Chinese contractors are offering clearly a competitive alternative, like we've seen on Yamal in LNG and for offshore projects. We took the assumptions in the figures that we will present it to you, in particular CapEx program, that this type of environment will be maintained for the coming years.
In fact, if we are able to sanction the projects now, like we've done since 2018 and for the year to come, we will be able to lock in our CapEx, these favorable oil and gas costs, I would say, in our portfolio. In order to be sustainable, an oil and gas company need, of course, to renew our resource base, and we have two engines to do that. Exploration on one side, access to discovered resource on the other side through M&A. I begin by exploration, maybe it's new, reserved for today, but it's just to pay tribute to the teams. Under the leadership of Kevin McLachlan in 2015, we have launched a new exploration strategy.
We have been able to have access to a high-quality acreage around the world, and we have some interesting results, more than interesting results, sizable results, which will allow us to feed our future growth in post-2023 as well. In North Sea, with Glengorm this year, which is around 250 million barrels next to Gullane and Lyell in this part of the North Sea. We have made a new province discovery in South Africa, Brulpadda discovery, which will be followed by two new exploration wells next year in order to upgrade. We see the size of the resource which can be in this province. We have also made discoveries which are more in the Gulf of Mexico, Ballymore, which will be probably tied back to existing infrastructure in order to shorten the time to market.
Last but not least, recently, and I'm happy to, in Guyana, we have made our first two wells. It's a very prolific province. Some of our peers announced to have discovered more than $5 billion. We have been active in order to take some participations in all the licenses around these discoveries. The first two wells on the Orinduik license are positive. In Jethro and in Joe. Joe is, by the way, a play opener on a new geological layer in Pliocene level. It will be followed by another well before year-end and the Kanuku license. Next year, we should also drill in the Canje license operated by Exxon. I hope that they will continue the successful story in Guyana with us.
This is a promising start in this basin, which again, explorers are there, but also the business developers which have been able to capture these acreage are to be, I will say, complemented. The other engine to fuel our resource base is M&A. Quite clear that we have been quite active, but not only to acquire, also to divest. This chart is interesting. On the period 2015, 2020, including with the assumption that we'll close another acquisition, or some of them next year, some of them this year, we will have acquired around $30 billion of assets, but over the same period, we'll have divested $20 billion of assets. $10 billion of more acquisition than divestment. That, by the way, divided by six years, more or less $1.5 billion-$2 billion net acquisitions.
Most of the net acquisitions, let's be clear, are in the new energies, where clearly we are not divesting. We are building a portfolio. We have acquired EUR 6 billion. If you keep that in mind, the activity has been quite strong. It gave us access to 11 billion barrels of resource at less than EUR 2.5 per barrel. The fact that we have today this large portfolio, Arnaud is happy because he has 23 years of reserve life, it gave us room to continue to make a portfolio management, which means to divest assets which are either too small, so in terms of human resource allocation is not optimal, which have some high costs. We will continue to make this agility on both sides. We have announced that we want to divest EUR 25 billion in 2019, 2020. It's already on the way.
EUR 2 billion will be done before year-end. This activity, I think, is very important. In a large corporation like Total where we have 150 core assets. It's very important to permanently review our portfolio. The world is changing, our markets are changing. We need to adapt ourselves. We need to be flexible in order to avoid to become a dinosaur. 40% of the portfolio of upstream has moved, 40% of downstream. Cash flows are continuing to increase, which is a proof that we are elevating this portfolio, and at the same time, we are investing in new energies. Of course, I had the opportunity to comment during the call of the second quarter, end of July, why we have moved on this opportunity of acquiring the African assets of Anadarko.
Clearly, it's a very clear strategic fit, which was, by the way, the fundamental reason why we were able to move quickly with the board of director on this opportunity. It's LNG, it's Africa, it's deepwater, exactly fitting with the chart I showed you before about the fundamental strategy to build on our strength. Mozambique Area 1 is a one-of-a-kind asset. It's a giant, high-quality resource. It's a project which is de-risked. It's sanctioned, contract signed place. It's also de-risked, by the way, from a marketing point of view. I know people had some concerns, some questions about LNG exposure. This project is 90% sold under long-term contracts, which are largely oil-indexed, which is an advantage. The acquisition price, I heard you, that it was quite an interesting price, $150 million per percentage compared to $200 to $250 million on the same license in the past.
For this project, which is de-risked and marketed already. There is a high-quality resource, so more to come beyond the first two trains. Of course, the project team will focus on the execution of the project now, but there will be also another team which will work to be able to go beyond, to prepare the future as we have very large resource, more than 60 TCF. The first two trains mobilizing around 18 TCF. This project will contribute to future cash flow, EUR 1 billion per year by 2025 and beyond. In the portfolio, we have also other assets which are high quality, large resource base, like in Nigeria, the basin. Ghana is a growing deploy to asset. As you know, the combination of all the assets makes that beyond the acquisition cost. In fact, we will receive its cash positive.
The cash flow coming from Algeria and Ghana will more than cover the injection of CapEx in the Mozambique project. It's also, again, a source of additional profit. I'm sure that Laurent Vivier this afternoon will explain you that he's quite happy to have a position in East Africa to serve some Indian or East African customers, he will be able to optimize his portfolio with his position in Mozambique. Also oil traders, we have a quite a bit oil trading in Africa. We are the number 1 in trading oil in Africa. The fact that we have access to oil in Ghana are value for them. Where are we by the way? I will have the question. We are, of course, in the execution phase. It will be a staged occurring. We are on the verge to close Mozambique.
I will fly to Mozambique end of the week, and we should be able to close, if not this week, beginning of next week. Mozambique will be the first to come, which is important because the project has started, so we'll be on board with the project team immediately. Because there are different approval delays with the different regulations in different countries, Algeria will come and then Ghana. Probably the last two could be closed by end 2019, more probably beginning of 2020. In our strategy with oil and gas, of course, we have integration. The downstream is important. Refining & Chemicals, Bernard will come back. I will not give you many details, but I think our key pillars which are constant in this strategy, first one is to invest priorities to the large integrated platforms. We have five around the world.
They capture 70% of capital employed by 2025. The second axis is growing in petrochemicals, but petrochemicals on low-cost feedstock, which means, in fact, natural gas or ethane, propane, butane. It's a natural gas to material strategy. We leverage the global growth of the major market. It's also, to be clear, a strategy where we want to integrate. For the monomer capacities, ethylene, propylene, and the polymer capacities. Integration is key in petrochemicals. If you are long in monomers, you could face hard times like some of our peers today in the U.S. Integration is a permanent word in oil and gas value chain. The third pillar of refining and chemicals is to invest in the new low-carbon economy. Biofuels, bioplastics, recycling polymers, with the objective to recycle 40% of our polymers by 2040.
All of that is very important, and is a way for Refining & Chemicals to find some relays for future growth in the future in this low-carbon economy, and is part of the global sustainable strategy of the company, and definitely, Refining & Chemicals as our part of the sustainable future of the company, if we can continue to develop these three pillars. I have made something wrong. The more important information on this slide is that it's not just for investing, it's also for growing cash flows. Refining & Chemicals, you will see, will contribute to the growth of the cash flow between today and 2025, and EUR 1.5 billion will come mainly from the four large projects that Bernard and his teams are developing. I will not detail the projects. Bernard will come back on it.
As you can see, all of each of them have a return on annual about 15%. Each of them are on low-cost feedstock. Each of them are integrating monomer and polymer capacities. I will let Bernard give you the details this afternoon on these projects. The other segment, of course, of downstream, the marketing and services business. Momar will also give you some details, but there we have also, I would say, a strategy which is clear in these three pillars in order to deliver non-cyclical cash flows. We like this business. First part is to continue to expand our retail activity in large, fast-growing markets, which means China, India, Brazil, Mexico, to say not the lowest, the smallest one. I should not forget Saudi Arabia and Angola.
We target to expand our number of stations by more than 4,000, but Momar will give you the details. Another pillar of it is to develop the non-fuel revenues. It's important. In a market like Europe, where we have like 4,000 retail stations, I have sometimes questions about the future. I can tell you that we are developing there, but only 30%, in fact, of the cash flow from the European network are coming from non-fuel revenues, and shops are very important and it's simple. We continue to develop it and to leverage this competence in other continents like Africa. We have the largest retail network, in fact, in Africa, not only for fuel, but globally speaking, compared to other businesses. We can leverage it by developing additional revenues.
The third pillar, like for Bernard, is to also grow in this low-carbon economy on low-carbon fuels. Clearly, we see trends where petroleum products maybe will be substituted in the future, even if it is a case of it will be decided as a society. There are new businesses like EV charging, and we have today around 20,000 EV charging points. We want to develop this business, not only in our retail network but beyond. We are also developing alternative fuels and natural gas for trucks or LNG for bunkering and hydrogen in the future. Momar will come back on all of that. The headline of the slide is that there, again, we invest and we grow our future cash flows, an increase of around EUR 500 million, EUR 600 million on the period, EUR 100 million per year from 2019 to 2025.
I will leave to Momo the task to comment this slide of the development of the networks. Thank you. This concludes the strategy for our, I would say, traditional oil and gas business. Now let's go to the other part, which is to invest in growing energy markets for a sustainable long term. It's mainly, of course, about LNG and electricity. I will not comment the left part of this chart. Philippe has done it already. We just insist on the consequence that we took for the strategy of Total. Taking climate change for us means there will be an evolution of the energy markets. We have to take that into account in our strategy. All projects, it was clearly developed that we focus on low breakeven in order to avoid, in case of lowering demand, a situation where we could be facing lower prices.
On the other side, there is a growth on the natural gas. The idea is not only to be a gas producer, LNG producer, but again, to develop the full value chain of natural gas. I will come back on it. Also to take the benefit from this growth of electricity demand to develop a profitable and sizable low-carbon electricity. Last but not least, to also invest in future businesses, new businesses which will arise in a low-carbon economy world with a carbon value. You will see businesses like CCS or nature-based solutions, which will have a low profitability. Let's embark into this presentation of strategy and first, what we call Integrated Gas, Renewables, and Power, which is the segment on which we report financially. There are three, I would say, pillars of the strategy.
I could have added a fourth one. Let's speak about the one in which we invest the most. Of course, first, global LNG, with the portfolio of Total will extend up to 50 million tonnes per year sale by 2025. I will come back. This afternoon, Philippe and Laurent will also detail it together with Arnaud. Second, in electricity in Europe, we have built a position. In Europe, we want to be a producer of electricity, and we are either from natural gas or from renewables and a distributor to the end customers. We are not a utility. I will explain you why. We want to be on both parts of the chain, including also the trading of electricity. I will comment it. The last part is renewables worldwide. As Henri told you, there is a clear growth of demand for electricity.
Renewables are the core of it, and we have the capacity to invest selectively in projects in order to be a renewable electricity producer to a wide scale. Globally speaking, on the period 2019-2025, the cash flow from all these businesses will grow by EUR 3.5 billion. It's a big part of the increase of the cash flows that we will show you, mainly, of course, coming from LNG, but the electricity part will also contribute. The other figure that it's a line of this strategy, that we will invest EUR 1.5 billion-EUR 2 billion in low-carbon electricity, which represents 10%, more or less, of our CapEx. LNG position, as you see, it's on one side, yes, we are growing our LNG sales by up to 50 million tonnes. Last year, it was around 20 million tonnes.
The 20 million tonnes contains 5 million tonnes, more or less, of spot. We didn't put spot sales on 2020, 2025. Obviously, Laurent will explain, we will do. It is difficult to plan. It depends on the market, but it's part of the activity, obviously. With these figures, we will be the second-largest player among the majors in the LNG activity business. As you can see, in fact, the portfolio that Laurent is in charge to optimize is 40 million tonnes in 2025 because 10 million tonnes are sold through the equity JVs of [Upstream] . Most important from my point of view is that you see that it's a multiplication by 2.5 of the cash flow between last year and 2025, going up from EUR 2 billion to around EUR 5.5 billion by 2025. In an environment which is around European gas, 5.5, and we are 2.5.
I'm not too optimistic. You know that we have many questions. We are being cautious in the way we appreciate the future cash flows of LNG business, but it's clear that it's a very contributive part of the delivery of cash flows we'll do in future years. I would like to make some zooms on three areas. First, Russia. I know that when we launched the Russia adventure in 2011, by acquiring a stake in Novatek, there were some doubts. We are spending money, what will be the cash out? Today, of course, it takes time. In our industry, everything is a little slow, but nine years after, we can show this slide where we will begin to deliver cash out of our Russian investments. Of course, Yamal LNG has been a success. Some of you have had the opportunity to visit the plant. We repeated it.
It was in the budget. It has been delivered one year in advance of the planning, and it works. The production is above the nameplate capacity, so beyond expectations. We are now in a new project on Arctic-2, with a different, by the way, concept. Arnaud will explain you that, why it's more efficient. The result from Total group is that we have invested EUR 6 billion in Novatek as shareholder. The value of all that is around EUR 12 today. On the cash out, we will grow our cash flow from Russia to around EUR 1 billion. This is the average on the period 2019, 2025. In fact, by end of the period, it's higher than that. Coming, of course, mainly from Yamal, for EUR 500, but also from the increased Novatek dividends, which is active.
As a shareholder, we encourage Novatek to increase the dividend, but no difficulty to do it. In fact, of course, this company has a growth profile which is really attractive. It will provide around EUR 1 billion of cash flows with Russian ventures for the coming years, and I think it's sizable. I would say it's a reward to the risk that we took by investing in the country. The second position we have built, I don't want to make any geopolitics here, but just to show the other side of the Atlantic is here in the U.S., where we have proved since the last two, three years, we have been quite active, of course, with Cameron coming from the ENGIE portfolio.
Cameron, this acquisition allows to develop an alliance with Sempra in North America, and in particular, the ambition not only to extend Cameron together, but also to build new LNG facilities on the Pacific Coast in Baja California, project called Energia Costa Azul. We have been also dynamic by seizing the opportunity to receive $800 million from Toshiba against 2 million tons of U.S. LNG, which in the large portfolio that Laurent Vivier will manage is a big share, but it's manageable by the Total teams. With $800 million, obviously, when you divide by 2 million tons per year over 20 years, I think it lowers the cost of LNG. It makes this LNG very competitive. At the end, by 2021, we will have 10 million ton per year of U.S. LNG and will be the largest exporter from U.S.
LNG by this time. It contributes, of course, to the increase of the cash flows. The last region I want to comment is Europe. Sometimes people ask us, what does it mean to develop an integrated strategy on natural gas? I think it's clearly there. It's just a demonstration that in Europe, as Arnaud told you, and Philippe will insist, you have domestic production decreasing. We have room for more LNG, and we have a pull strategy. It's a demand-pull strategy. By developing in Europe some portfolio of customers, either from marketing, we have around 3 million gas customers in Europe representing 8 million tons of LNG, or through our gas-fired power plants, which are feeding our electricity business, which will consume around 2 million tons of LNG, only 3 gigawatts. 3 gigawatts, we will have them beginning of next year.
This represents 10 million tons of LNG. We have the oil gas capacities. We have acquired them from Engie. Out of the oil gas capacities, which were not really used by Engie, in fact, will be used by our internal value chain, I would say, by our own consumers and consuming capacities. Of course, we have the LNG portfolio, so out of the 15 million tons, 10 million tons of LNG, which today are not long-term committed, Laurent will be able to direct them to Europe to feed this value chain. The idea beyond integrating and going down to customers is in order to be able to take the maximum value of LNG in our portfolio. Moving to electricity. Again, what do we want to do in electricity in Europe? Helle told you Europe has a liberalization.
It's a liberalized market, which means that you don't need to own, to control infrastructures. You don't need to be a utility to invest in that business. That is the main message today. Clearly, we do not intend at all to invest in any infrastructures, which have really a very low profitability, because we have free access, equal access. In each European country, the market is open now to these utilities having this equal access. There, we are building a business along the three activities which are generation, production, either from natural gas or renewables. I should also speak about energy storage, where we developed a business with Saft, a battery company. Also customers, end customers. Today we have around 3 to 3.5 million, 3.5 to 4 million electricity customers in France and Belgium.
We target to have eight by 2025, and to continue to grow this business. We have also, I mentioned, the strategy to develop some charge points for EV in the future. In the middle, you have a trading business. This is already a big activity in electricity trading, which is linked to our gas business. With more decentralized point of production, clearly there will be a new business about aggregating all these electricity productions and customers, and to optimize all that, and this will be additional sources of revenues. That's for Europe. Outside of Europe, clearly, we don't have the same approach. We want just to be a renewable generation producer or a generation producer, a renewable producer. It requires some investments.
We want, of course, to be able to give to our shareholder the same level of returns that we can have in our other businesses. I know that. We have made the chart to answer to many questions we have. It's clear that when you invest, the typical project, renewable project, ROI is around 6%, 7%. We will have different sources of revenues. You will develop it, and clearly, we have the capacity and the balance sheet to take the risk of development. You can, of course, put some place, some leverage on these projects because there is quite a high appetite. You can also farm down part of these projects when they are built.
You have many financial investors today who are looking to outdoor in order to have access to this type of long regulated assets, and are ready to pay in TD4 and TD5. In the end, we can operate and maintain them. When we add all these different flows of revenues for the equity that we inject, the target is to obtain 15%. We've done that in countries like Japan. We are on the way to do it in France with a portfolio that we have acquired last year from Direct Énergie . In fact, the business model is to be able to have a pipeline of projects, which we would like to be a pipeline of projects to divest 50% of them regularly in order to have a permanent set of cash flows coming from the divestment and to leverage your equity.
It's a capital light model in the end. You can see gross investments on 100% of around EUR 4 billion per year. If you made the math, you will find around EUR 600 million-EUR 800 million per year of capital invested in this business by Total. This is the way we want to build, develop this renewable portfolio worldwide. Last pieces of this presentation on the new energy, the low carbon economy, is that there are other areas, other businesses, which are today are very early stage, but on which we believe we should invest as well. These are what we call nature-based solution, what we call CCUS. These represent more or less, each of them, EUR 1 billion per year of investments. Either R&D and pilot projects on CCUS. We have pilot projects in Norway, in U.K., and we are studying others. Nature-based solutions.
It's building position for the future. In a world where a lot of people want to give value to carbon, these will become profitable businesses in the future. Don't see that as compensation. We don't try to compensate at all. We want to reduce our emission. We see that as investing in business which are linked to the evolution of the energy markets and to anticipate on the carbon pricing. We could have had on this slide as well, all that we do in storage, energy storage and batteries. It's also for us a way to develop a business, a profitable business on these new energy trends. Saft is working out. The business is a profitable business already, which will contribute more in the future.
All this strategy can be synthesized within one indicator, which is what we call this carbon intensity of the energy products sold to our customers. It's a sort of scope 3 indicator, which we introduced last year. We are not alone to manage it. The difference of scope 1 and 2, where we are clearly responsible of our operations. This one, we can achieve it if the society, if our customers are changing their behaviors. We are not car manufacturers. It's a car manufacturing industry which will change the pattern of the type of fuels which will be used by our customers.
Having said that, until 2030, we have a strategy, and it's of course, some of all what I developed this morning, which should help us, which will allow us to reach an ambition to lower the carbon intensity of this energy product we sell to our customers by 15%. You can see that between 2015 and 2018, we have already made 5%, we will continue to work in the various direction I gave you. Beyond 2030, it's more difficult to plan. I know that today there is a new trend to announce that everybody could be neutral in 2050. To be honest, maybe I'm too pragmatic, I would like Total to deliver until 2030 and to be judged on our capacity to deliver rather than just explaining that we can do something else and none of us will be there tomorrow, in 25 years.
Coming back to last part of the presentation, which is to summarize all what we said and to, as I told you, introduction, we have much better visibility on the roadmap until 2025, and I want so few slides to summarize it and that will be, I think, the key slide of the presentation at the end. First, the production. The production, of course, will follow our investments. We will continue to experience quite a high growth, more than 5% per year between 2018, 2021. The year to come, 2019, is around 8%, but 2020, 2021, we still have an interesting growth because projects are still ramping up because we made some few M&As, for example, the Anadarko M&A, even if we will sell some E&P assets. This is why the balance. This is a growth phase. Of course, there is no miracle.
2022, 2023, we'll see a form of plateau. It's a counterpart of the fact that in 2015, 2016, 2017, we didn't sanction new projects. In this industry, you have a 5-year timeline, we stabilize it. From 2023, we will experience another period of growth with all the projects I mentioned to you, which are being sanctioned, which will be about 3%, and mainly, of course, driven by LNG projects. We see this growth as well because we have quite a low decline in our production base. 50% of the production of TotalEnergies will be from long plateau with no decline, either LNG projects or these large concessions that we have in Abu Dhabi, in the Middle East, for example. Of course, it's an advantage for future production profile. What investment do we need to make this program?
We need, the guidance we give you today is EUR 16 billion-EUR 18 billion, which includes around EUR 1 billion-EUR 2 billion of net acquisition like before. That means the organic is around EUR 15 billion-EUR 16 billion. The previous guidance was EUR 15 billion, EUR 16 billion, honestly, the discipline is still is absolutely maintained. We confirm that we will be at the, as I said during the call, end of July, that from 2019, 2020, considering the Anadarko acquisition, will be at the high range of this guidance around EUR 18 billion as an average on both years. It will depend, of course, on the capacity to close the various deals that we have either on the acquisition side or on the divesting side. That's why we give you an average on both years.
2016, 2018, the discipline is maintained, and we spend this money, this capital and CapEx, spend it on exploration and exploitation for 55% of it. iGRP will cover around 25% of its CapEx, 15% in LNG projects and 10% in low-carbon electricity of $1.5 billion-$2 billion. 10%, 15%, 55%. Downstream, we maintain around EUR 3 billion of investments, which means 20% of the global CapEx. This production profile, this CapEx spend, results in a strong cash flow growth. During the presentation, I identified the main source of driving this growth of cash flows. The LNG, we mentioned the LNG. We mentioned also the downstream, EUR 2 billion, EUR 3.5 billion from iGRP. It will be more or less regular from 2019 to 2025.
We give you the chance for $60 per barrel and you have the assumption on the gas price that we use, $5.5 for Europe and $2.5 for U.S. This is quite an interesting growth of cash flow. We have also the sensitivity on the next two years, around $3.2 billion for 2019, 2020 on this chart. Just to illustrate the strategy, this graphic will give you also the split of the capital employed and the cash flow by 2025. You can see that clearly, we invest more in coming years in the growing markets, LNG and electricity, as we said. This will represent a split around 50% for E&P, 30% for iGRP, 20% for downstream capital employed. The cash flow by 2025 should be around 55%, 20%, 25%. iGRP, of course, is a growing segment.
The cash flow will begin to be delivered by 2025, and it will be cash positive, of course, largely because of LNG, and the other segments are taking place. This is, I would say, a chart which illustrates the way we move toward the sustainable long-term businesses step by step. What do we do with the cash flow, which is, of course, an important chart. This chart we presented to you in February 2018, there is no change of the priorities of cash flow allocation. The board of directors again reviews all these projections for 2025 and confirmed that the priority must be given to capital investments because we are able to generate opportunities with high returns. We speak about 15%. We have a target, and we are online with a target of 12% on return on equity.
We want to continue to be able to see the opportunities. We said that we have confirmed a framework of a $16-18 billion CapEx, which means organic CapEx as acquisition minus the divestments. Second priority is the dividend. Clearly, having discussed with many of our shareholders, they appreciate the dividend growth. We had the previous guidance on 10% over 3 years. You've seen the announcement. I will comment it after. There is a new guidance to accelerate the dividend growth considering the higher cash flow generation of the company. The third priority, as explained by Jean-Pierre, is to maintain a strong balance sheet and gearing under 20%. Under 20% is clearly a third pillar of cash flow allocation. Then share buybacks.
As we announced it in February 2018, we consider share buybacks as a way to split, to share the additional revenues that the company can generate, about EUR 60 per barrel, let's say. We are committed, and we, of course, will execute a EUR 5 billion program from 2018-2020. The first two years, we'll have buyback around EUR 3 billion, so we have EUR 2 billion to buy back next year. Beyond that, we will continue with the same policy to use share buybacks to share extra cash, about EUR 60 per barrel. When the board of directors has a thorough discussion about this perspective of cash flow growth, I would like first to remind you that when we speak about increasing sustainably the dividend in TotalEnergies, it's a long history. We have good, fair track record. Of course, it's in EUR per share.
The history of the dividend since 1982, it has never decreased. If we look even for the last 20 years, its average rules was around 6% in EUR. In USD terms, it was a little higher. It's clear that there was a strong period of appraisal of dividend between 2000 and 2008, then after it was lower. The board reconsidered all this policy, and it's comforted clearly by the capacity of the company to deliver strong cash flow like we've done in 2018, in 2019. So decided, has given itself a guidance of a dividend growth of 5%-6% per year. We will walk the talk, and with an immediate effect, next decision is to increase the next interim dividend for the third quarter of 2019 by 6%, so at EUR 0.68 per share instead of EUR 0.64 per share.
If we continue on the same rhythm for the fourth quarter, which is a high probability, I think, and that means that the dividend on the year 2019, because we already made two interim dividends, should be increased by 4.7%. The guidance will continue to be followed by the board. I know that for our shareholders, there is also a growing concern about ESG. We have a lot of questions. We read some articles. I would like to, again, I mention, of course, commitment to the E, the environment. I would like also on this share to remind you, but I think you all know that our commitment to ESG is quite recognized by a lot of rating agencies and the CDP on climate change and water security.
We have a grade at A minus, which is a very great for an oil and gas major, which has been attributed. There are other classifications which are important for some of you, and on which we are recognized. I will also insist that in fact, on the societal part of it, the societal part of ESG, the S, it's part of the DNA of the company. When we speak about investing more and more in Africa, for example, it's because we have a special way to work there. We have teams have a good relationship with all the stakeholders, local stakeholders. We create jobs in these countries, like in Nigeria, the Egina project, which has been delivered, by the way, with a budget 10% under the initial budget, which is a good result for the teams.
77% of the hours have been spent in Nigeria on this very large project. We did lots of specific know-how. We are supporting entrepreneurs in Africa through different ways. We are also investing in education. These favors are also a specific know-how, which means that we consider that we have a sustainable ESG commitment in this country. This is the end of this presentation, which was longer than previous years. Three voices, so maybe more details, but it's also once a year, so the right time to give you a review of the strategy. Clearly, we are also to assure those business models based on sustainability and profitability. We reduce our equity to invest in the growing markets, natural gas, energy, and low carbon electricity. We try maintaining on both.
On one side, we want to maintain a strong discipline and organic rate given balance sheet, because this is the way to cope with the volatility of the energy markets. Discipline also through our investment program, $16 billion per year, over 2019, 2023. Extending the cost saving program on OpEx and targeting $5 per barrel. All this giving that we have a strong visibility on the cash flow of $1 billion per year additional each year between 2019 and 2025, which gives us room, of course, to improve and increase sustainably. System is where the shareholder return, as I just explained to you. This is the end of the presentation. I thank you for the attention and will be ready together with Helle and with Jean-Pierre to answer to your questions. Thank you. Helle?
All right, time has come for the Q&A session. I will ask you to raise your hand and introduce yourself when you have questions, and there are some microphones that are going to be distributed. Okay, we have a question here.
Thank you. It's Jason Gammel with Jefferies. Appreciate the comments that you made at the end, Patrick, about growing shareholder returns. Back at the second quarter conference call, you did mention the target of around 40% of cash from operations potentially being used for shareholder returns. I just wanted to inquire whether that was still a target that you considered reasonable, and should we then think of buybacks as making up the gap between the dividend and reaching that 40% target?
Yeah. If you make the math, you will see that you are not far from the 40%. By the way, if we have 6% growth of dividends, it represent more than $500 million. Out of $1 billion, it's more than 40%. It's a trend there. All that is calculated, but it was expressed this guidance as a dividend growth, which is, I feel, more tangible for everybody, linked to the yield and et cetera, the valuation of the company rather than just a percentage of cash flow allocation.
All right. Here, please.
Thank you. This is Sam Margolin from Wolfe Research. On the CapEx for the next two years, as you mentioned, there's an offset between disposals and acquisitions, which includes Anadarko. Anadarko is a little bit higher than the disposal target. Just wondering if you could flesh out the underlying organic side of that CapEx. It might be going down a little bit to make up that offset or if it's just within the range because you hit the top of the range.
No, it is clear. I told you that at least two years, the CapEx level will be at an average of $18 billion. So it is a high end of the range, $16 billion-$18 billion, which means that you take the $3 billion, you divide by two, 1.5. That means that the organic is around 15, 16. So 15, around 15. So there is no impact. It is just the range that we gave you as a CapEx is taking into account this one. But again, we didn't try to match the $8 billion or $9 billion of acquisition by the $5 billion of sales. We introduced the $5 billion of sales because, as I said, we have a very large portfolio. It is part of the dynamic internally. We didn't make the deals of Anadarko to grow. We made it for the value, not for volume growth.
It gave us the opportunity to continue to high grade the portfolio by divesting part of the upstream portfolio. You will see some sales. We've done the North Sea. We have other to come. At the end, it's taking into account. There is no lower organic CapEx. The organic CapEx, which were I think around 14, will continue to go $14 billion-$15 billion. You are adding these additional, which means, by the way, that don't expect large acquisition by Total during the next two years.
All right. Question from Oswald.
Thank you very much. Oswald Clint of Bernstein. Two questions, first, I just wanted to talk about coping with volatile markets, and I know it's a six-year plan you're giving, I just wanted to focus in on 2020, please, if I could. You spoke about spare capacity rising in chemicals, I think on your exhibit in 2020, 2021. You talked about LNG markets not tightening until 2021, 2020 could still be soft. There is a lot of oil supply still coming next year from your own projects in Norway and Brazil. I just want to get an understanding. If the dividend steps up, you've a commitment to it, if 2020 happened to be a particularly weak macro environment, what steps would you take here to protect that commitment? You spoke about Angola tiebacks being cut back, what else?
Can you cut back elsewhere or do you just rest in terms of the balance sheet to pay the buyback, the EUR 2 billion buyback plus the dividend?
Of course. If we do that commitment today, not to extend you in six months, but we announce to it. Otherwise, it's clearly, we do it because we have the room and space in the balance sheet and the cash flow to do both. We intend to execute the buyback. I remind you the buyback is linked also to oil price since the beginning and to dividend growth. Dividend growth is a priority and will be done. Having said that, yes, you're right. We can have a visibility of the soft market, unless we have other events like the one which happened last year, last week in Saudi Arabia, which suddenly has a soft tension on the market. Okay, it's clear, but the fundamentals of the cash flow generations are strong enough to give us confidence that we can execute it.
2020, again, I think, and it was clearly the consideration by the board of director, because as I said, what we announce is sustainable. We don't do it just for coming back on it next year. Question from Irene.
Thank you. Irene Himona of Societe Generale. I had two questions please. Obviously, gas and LNG is a core part of the strategy of both growing and increasing sustainability. On slide 49, you give us your sensitivity to the oil price, making certain assumptions on gas pricing. I wonder if you can give us an insight of your gas price sensitivity in terms of either earnings or cash flow.
There is a special slide which is in the annex, because we knew we will have the question because we had the question, of course. Could you put the slide on the screen? It's in the annex, so you will have it, all of you. We did not comment it during the presentation because of dynamic of the presentation. You have the answer. Maybe Jean-Pierre will comment it.
Yes. In continuing our production, 50% oil, 50% gas. On the gas portion, more or less 60% is oil index, 25% linked to NBP. You see the sensitivity for EUR 1 per million BTU increase, representing EUR 300 million of additional cash. The balance, 5% linked to oil, so very small portion. The remaining 20%, sold on local markets. It's the case in Asia, in South America. Not very sensitive to gas price, international gas prices. All in all, our prediction is about 75% oil index. If you, of course, consider the oil production as well.
Thank you. My second question, a more general one. 10 days ago, we had the Saudi attack on very large infrastructure. I wonder how you, the leadership of Total, begin to think and analyze that event in terms of risks to you, because clearly you're a company of very, very large infrastructure around the world. Does it change how you look at risks?
The first point is that I gave instruction to be sure that we could have emergency plans for our people in the Middle East, because I'm a little afraid about reactions in that region. Even if there is a lot of political leaders trying to calm down. Honestly, it's a huge event and we've never seen such an attack. Even during in 1979, which was the worst year in the history of the Middle East during the Iraq-Iran war. We've never seen such destructions of oil facilities. It's a fact. I think this will be taken into account, as I said in my introduction, by the markets rather. There was the idea that perfect security of supply, it's not true. It's not the reality.
Having said that, my answer to you will be that, as always, one of the inconvenient disadvantage of a portfolio of TotalEnergies is that we have many countries in which we produce. Sometimes it's a disadvantage in term of allocation of human resources, We have a temptation to try to refocus our people on the main countries, On the other part, the fact that we have a large portfolio of countries, from this perspective, is a better advantage. We suffered already in TotalEnergies when we lost Yemen somewhere. We didn't lose it because it still moved oil and preserved, We had to face a situation where suddenly a large portfolio, If Yemen is coming back, my cash flow will grow by another EUR 1 billion. We did not anticipate Yemen coming back in these few years. We suffered it.
I think the answer to your question is, don't focus too much on one country and be careful not to overexpose a company to one specific location. Which, of course, the limit of that is that the large fields in this world are located where they are. I cannot move them. I have to face the situation. It's clear that this is the main question, the answer that I could have to your questions. All right. Another question on the left.
All right. Thank you. It's James Evans from Exane BNP Paribas. A couple of questions. Firstly, sorry to go back to the shareholder returns, one thing I want to ask about is about this evaluation of going higher on the dividends versus more buybacks. Obviously, over the last year, the conversation has sort of increased in volume around transition pressure. There's probably more talk about de-capitalization or not increasing the overall dividend burden too much in dollar terms. I think perhaps when we sat together in June in Paris, we surveyed the audience, there's a lot greater focus on buyback than before. Is that conversation evolving at board level, or do you sort of see maybe the change in the next few years coming with a greater focus towards buybacks versus dividends as maybe we get towards the middle of the decade?
I think we have spent a lot of time on this question. We also discussed with some large shareholders of Total. Each time I've asked a question, what they observe, they love the dividend. At the end, I know that some markets, including the U.S., have a trend today that is quite fashionable to increase buybacks. I observe that some of my peers are doing that. The board clearly does not want to overconstrain the company. Honestly, we are in a period of time where we have to invest for adapting the company to the new markets, and we prefer to keep that flexibility for the future. Having said that, and again, we consider share buyback as a tool to share additional revenue. If the price is going up again, $70, we'll have much more revenues. We will use the share buybacks.
They will not disappear. I think the discussion was clearly spent some time about what is the best tool, and at the end, we think that today, the appetite for investors is even larger for having direct cash. They like the cash flow coming in their portfolio rather than just the buyback is an indirect cash. It's an indirect return. We buy back, but then we have to eliminate. The share, the buyback, the dividend is a direct access to the cash flow. Also, it's quite simple. In a world where the money is not the value, cash has a value. This is the way that the board has discussed it. The second consideration, obviously, that is it a sustainable dividend? Because obviously, when we do that, we increase it. We increase by EUR 500 million per year.
By the way, we are planning at least half of it, the 3%. The answer was clearly when we look carefully to all these figures that we show you about the cash flow growth generation, that yes, it is sustainable, that we are very confident. The fact that, again, all the moves we have done, including the last one in Anadarko, has given us a strong visibility of this production profile. There is almost no notion over there. Projects are identified. It's a matter as for our teams to be able to deliver them, which of course is a challenge. As always, if we commit to something, that means that we have some margins to maneuver. Otherwise, we will not commit. I think we have this reputation. No, we constantly deliver on our objective.
If we do that today, it's because we will deliver on these objectives, we can sustain this growth of the dividend. I think, again, it's also a reflection of the board of directors of the valuation of the company, I would say. We think there is, by the way, like most of the people who follow Total, the average price, objective price today is around EUR 68 per share. We are at EUR 49. There is room for improving. I think I strongly believe that the future value of a company is discounted value of future cash flows or the dividend cash flows. It's a way to appreciate it. This is all this combination and the results of a work and discussion with our shareholders to decide what is a priority.
Again, we could have stayed today telling you we have announced a program February 18, we will execute it. It was when we saw all these cash flows coming back and being confirmed, we think it was the right time to accelerate this dividend growth in September 19 and not to wait another one year and a half. Okay. Thank you. We've got a question on the very left.
Thank you. Hi. It's Peter Low from Redburn. I just have a question on your commitment to reduce your scope one and two emissions to less than 40 million tons in 2025. How do you view spending in this area? Is this simply a cost to the business, or do these initiatives around energy efficiency and process electrification also contribute to your operating cost reductions that you've outlined in the presentation today?
Of course, it's not a pure cost.
That is the logic. In work, I have a strong belief that you progress on environmental matters if you make things economically. Energy efficiency, when you are in refineries, it's just lowering your burden, your costs, in fact. People are motivated. What we are telling them is that the return on it, you can take into account the cost of carbon, you can take into account the cost of energy in order to invest more efficiently in that one. Yes, it's clear. It has a return. It's not just a burden. Let's be clear. I think having said that, it's also a responsibility about the society. That's why we are calling for carbon value. We are advocating for that because it will be much easier for all of us.
We are using internally EUR 30 per ton and EUR 40 per ton in high price. EUR 30 per ton, I can tell you we have projects. Yesterday, I had a discussion with my colleague of a big company about LNG projects in the Far East. I told him we will implement CO2 injection because it's less than EUR 20 per ton. We will do it in this project. I have his support, by the way, even if the teams could discuss. I think it's important that we take actions on this one, and this is in our hand.
Okay. Question from on the line.
Thanks. It's Lydia Rainforth from Barclays. Two questions and one clarification if I could. Patrick, thank you for the visibility that you provided. Can I just check, on the dividend increase, that 5%-6%, is that all the way out to 2025, or is that just through the 2020 period?
No, it's clearly for coming years, it's written. For coming years, it means the board had given a guidance for coming years, so it's not a short-term one. No. The translation on immediate effect is to show you that we walk the talk. The board told me, we may do it immediately. No, it's clearly for coming years, not a one-year guidance.
Okay, thank you. Just the actual two questions. On the cash flow growth that you've outlined, if I run that math through, it looks like it's about 4% per year growth in cash flow, which is very similar to the level of production growth coming through. Given everything you outlined around the digitalization program, the Global Services, cost savings, I would've thought there'd have been more cash flow growth coming through. Is that just fair or is it just in terms of there's other cash flow leakage somewhere else? The second question is around the gas side, and clearly you were at the OGCI conference yesterday, and there is more and more pushback about gas being a low carbon fuel.
Is that something that you think that the industry is doing enough to address in terms of the methane emissions, and are you likely to get the policy support to deliver growth in gas production or that demand growth?
I was trying to check the figures. You said that cash flow growth is 4%, but the production growth from 2019 to 2025 is not 4%. You have a plateau during 2 years. You have 5% 3 years, 3% at the end. It makes more, 2%-3%. In fact, the math are okay. The cash flows are growing quicker than the production growth. Which we will have time to look at it, but frankly, no, I think overall it's quite consistent. Basically, as a cash flow growth that we announced, you've seen that we have taken a cautious assumption on the gas price. The gas price assumptions are quite cautious as well because of the development. Yes, methane. Methane, honestly, I think it's a clear point. There are 2 points there.
One is what we can do at the level of the major companies. Yesterday we had a presentation review of my colleagues of the Oil and Gas Climate Initiative, and clearly this group of leaders are committed, and we will reach 0.25%, which is very low, in fact. The question is more, how do we embark the full industry in that move? Remember that the methane emission is not only a matter of our own operation, it's also a matter of the full chain, and after maybe it's towards downstream, because emissions could come also from infrastructure, from distribution network in cities. We need on this part to work as well. It's a full approach that we should have, not just the upstream one, on which clearly we can move, but we have already made progress.
We continue to make progress, but it's only a small part of the full chain. Yes, it is clearly a priority, I think, for the gas industry. It is well-identified, and we are also investing quite a lot to better measure it, to be sure that we are not overstating these methane emissions globally. It's something which the gas industry has to answer. Honestly, again, look at continents like Europe. We are phasing out coal. We are phasing out nuclear. We want electricity, I think, in Europe. The system, honestly, I'm convinced that there is no way to make an energy system working without having a reliable source of supply, which is natural gas.
Yes, there will be more renewables, but we need energy storage, which today you don't know if you can. To face the seasonality of the demand for electricity, you don't do it just with batteries. It doesn't work. You need to have other ways. Because you have natural gas, you have to invest in this carbon, I would say, neutrality business. A continent like Europe, the future will be from natural gas and renewables. It cannot be only renewable. It doesn't work to face the seasonality of the demand, and energy storage technologies still have a lot to be developed, and we know that quite well with our sister companies in which we develop. There is something which of course we have to advocate for it, we have to demonstrate it, and methane is a challenge, but I'm convinced we can tackle it.
Okay. We have a question from.
Thanks. Hi, it's Henry Tarr from Berenberg. Just to come back on the cash flow. I think that sort of EUR 1 billion a year, the bulk of it is coming from Integrated Gas, net EUR 3.5 billion, then another EUR 2 billion from Downstream Refining & Chemicals and M&S. Does that imply sort of fairly limited growth in the Upstream cash flow portion despite the production growth that you're?
In the E&P, upstream discovery, LNG upstream. Be careful. In our way, we segment it IGRP, the LNG part of the group. The production of the LNG from upstream is going from 350,000 to 800,000. There is a big growth there. Which, by the way, is part of the stabilization of the low decline. This part is reallocated to IGRP, and it's clear that it is not growing that. Besides that's true that we have a profile which is quite stable in terms of cash flows. Again, if you eliminate LNG, this production is declining not by 4%, but by 5%, 6%, because LNG is contributing to. Having that stabilizing means somewhere growing by 5% the cash flows underlying assets.
That's great. Just secondly, on LNG. As you say, the bulk of your contracts now are oil price linked. As you go forward and sanction the new projects, do you see that oil price linkage holding through the next decade?
Sure. Is it?
I think you will have more on this this afternoon through the focus session on LNG. I invite you to ask again this afternoon if you didn't get the answer from Philippe and Laurent. I think you will.
Okay, thanks.
Very good. All right, we have a question here.
Hi, thanks. Dan Boyes, it's BMO Capital Markets. Just a question on your sustaining CapEx. I think clearly the dividend increase shows confidence in your portfolio. You have a low decline rate, as you highlighted. How should we think about, just given how volatile the commodity market is, the sustaining CapEx that you need for your current dividend?
The sustaining CapEx on the, we say, the E&P part is around $3 billion per year. 3 billion. Low growth. Of course, you have sustaining CapEx in Refining & Chemicals, which are around $500 or $500 million. Marketing & Services sustaining CapEx is very limited. I'm not sure we speak about the same sustaining CapEx, which means what we call to maintain just the existing base.
Yeah, I'm thinking of it from, you commented on about EUR 15 billion for E&P CapEx.
Yeah.
If you were not going to grow the dividend and we were in a downside volatility environment, just thinking about how much you could flex CapEx to still maintain your cash flow.
Yeah, it's another question. The fixed CapEx is different because part of the CapEx is committed to projects. It's a different approach, this one. I will come back to you with the right answer. I don't want to give you a wrong figure. I will come back to you before the end of the day with the answer to you.
Next in line.
Thanks. Jason Gabelman from Cowen. It seems like you're moving away from, and correct me if I'm wrong, EUR 1.5 billion repurchases at EUR 60 oil. It sounds like moving away from that guidance aligns with the macro view that you laid out there. You're seeing signs of underinvestment in the oil market. I'm wondering what exactly, what data points you're seeing that suggests this underinvestment going on in the market, because it seems like a lot of the investor community is worried about the opposite right now. Some of your peers are suggesting a similar evolution in the market where a few years down the road, you could see some undersupply. Thanks.
I'm not sure to have captured the question.
The question is.
Yeah, I think the fact that the industry has under invested is quite clear. By the way, what we see on Total's side on a micro level, and you see this plateau of production. It reflects the fact that in 2015, 2016, 2017, we were not sanctioning projects. I think the rest of the world are on my case. Of course, you have the U.S. shale oil impact, which has contributed today. I'm convinced that what we observe on our profile, which was limited, by the way, for Total because we have been active on some M&A activities which have, I would say, filled some holes of this profile. You will observe it at the industry level by 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024, the same impact.
Because, by the way, if we continue to see the growth profile of shale oil is beginning to slow down a little, you will see these impacts. There is no miracle in this industry. The fact that this industry did not sanction new projects in 2015, 2016, 2017, it was generally the case, not only for us, for most of the colleagues. We will find that impact five years after. It's an industry where you have an impact which is delayed, but which will appear. I'm convinced that this will come.
Yes. If you can unmute your phone.
Hi, Prashant Rao from Citigroup on behalf of Alastair Syme. I had a question I wanted to ask specific on the upstream. Your Brazilian portfolio. You'd said earlier about no big acquisitions. I just wanted to get a sense of your strategy for exposure in Brazil, and especially in the context of this fourth quarter of 2019, we're going to see several
Licensing auctions coming up. Any color there as to how you think about your exposure and how it fits into this whole portfolio? Thanks.
I would say, first, we have been the early mover on Brazil. We made a deal, a large deal, with Petrobras in 2016, acquiring a position in the Iara field, becoming operator in Lapa. By the way, we've done it in good financial conditions because we are the early mover. First point. Since we have been quiet on the exploration wells, and frankly, because spending a huge amount of bonus for exploration, which is out of I'm not sure to share with you that some peers have followed. I know that some of them have spent a lot of money. They discover a lot of CO2. You have CO2 risk in exploring in Brazil, it's well-known.
Between spending big amount of money on bonus on exploration and having access to already discovered resource where you have the data, I prefer to spend my money on the second one rather than the first one. Exploration, you create value, which compensates the risk that you take because it's a risk when it's exploration. You don't know what you will find. Across the Brazilian basin, I can tell you between Lula, between Jupiter, between Libra, you have different fluids, and you observe very different. All geologists have a theory, and they try to tell us, "This, you don't go there, you have CO2." To be honest with you, I have one disappointment along the last two years to have captured one license. The rest, we have no regret.
Coming to the [Tual], because it's your question, this is a main question of economic conditions. We are in Total, we have a chance, we have been active on opportunities. We have a large resource base, so we are not obliged to do a deal, to participate if we don't consider that the economic conditions are satisfactory. We are observing, and we are calculating, working on different opportunities. We already mentioned that as we are partner of Iara, there is one of the offshore field, which is called Atapu, which is in the vicinity of Iara. Obviously, our teams are working on it. Otherwise, they not do a job. At the end of the day, we'll see exactly what are the conditions. Honestly, it's complex to understand because it's a very smart mechanism.
I don't know how many economists and engineers have worked on that. You have to pay a bonus, which is announced on state, but then you have to negotiate with Petrobras about the way to equalize all that, and so this negotiation is going on, and maybe it will depend on the results of this negotiation. Clearly, I would say if the basic price assumptions behind it are $70 plus, this will be a problem for companies. Okay. Pascal. I think that's the last question that I see in the room.
Sorry, I always like to ask two, I left my last one to the end. Just on your digital factory, that's the new data today, the EUR 1.5 billion out to 2025. I think as you described it, you spoke about availability improvements. I wanted to get a sense of what is the availability currently in upstream, downstream. What are you trying to get that to? I guess you also said returning capital employed is so high because your assets are already performing quite well. What's the uplift here that you're expecting to deliver the EUR 1.5 billion, please?
I think I will give the floor to Arnaud and Bernard, because this digital factory came from them. They came to us, and from Bernard, it came from the people. We may have been a little slow, like always, in Total during the last, but in fact, there are many proof of concepts around the company which have been developed. They came to us in last spring telling us, "Okay, now, we need to scale up and to accelerate." By the way, I think that we propose you to make, in February, a field trip in Aberdeen, because we have a lot of things to show you in Aberdeen about what is happening on the ground. Culzean has started, and it is the first digital field that I really see in the company. I was there two or three weeks ago, and I've been impressed.
I think it's good to see that. Teams are working on ready cases, business case, where they can show you the concrete answer. I will leave the floor to Arnaud and to Bernard because they are behind all these digital factories, and they are the motivators. Please.
Just to answer quickly on this very big subject. We believe there is a huge field for improvement, in fact, in our industry, and we want, of course, to capture that. On the E&P side, Patrick was speaking about Culzean and how, as a smart hub, we can really lever all of the information that is available in real time between the onshore and the offshore, and maybe support by [T-Shaped], mobilizing teams. Today, we did see some benefits on availability. We've already got some successful, actually, small digital programs on cyclical wells in order that we close the well a bit earlier so that we can restart them faster, and it translates into getting more of our existing assets, which has been a trend in the last year. You know, we've increased our availability overall activity for about 89% where we were in
To 93% now. We want to, of course, maintain that performance and potential to go higher. There are also some very positive aspects coming on cost and indeed also on capital. It's not just going to be OpEx, it's going to be also on CapEx. Just to scratch the surface, it's a very important subject.
Thank you, Arnaud. For Refining & Chemicals, just a few figures maybe I could share with you. This is utilization rate of RC. In 2014, it was 81, 2016, 87, and 2018, 92%. That's in the fact book. It shows that we have very significantly already improved our utilization rate in RC through operational excellence, through also some asset management. Now to go to the next step, we need to, of course, jump into the digital world. This is where the idea came first last year to launch Refinery 4.0 in India with Tata together, where we have around 30 people working on cases, use cases to improve the availability. We want now to go one step further with Arnaud together as well, through this digital factory.
The idea being to work on some very practical cases around assets availability to be able to detect perhaps any kind of root signal which would help us prevent some shutdowns, typically. We have, to copy E&P, for example, invested in [Smartphuse] in Normandy, where you can live or real-time monitor assets in the U.S., Carling, for example. These are all these kind of projects we are now working on. As Patrick said, the target is really for downstream, not just for refining chemical, but for all of the downstream to generate EUR 500 million of savings by 2025. We are on track, as you see.
Right. It's saving, it's additional value as well. It's a sum of some. Again, I think it's sizable. When the teams told us we are able to generate at least EUR 1 billion, we have pushed them a little more, of course, because when people come to you, EUR 1 billion, you ask for more. Otherwise, you don't do the job. We defined it clearly, but it's also, by the way, for me, we have been very stringent in the way we manage our human resources. We did not make any layoff plan, but we did not recruit during two, three years. We are back to the level where we were. Now it's time to invest in human resources, in the fields that we feel important for the future.
Making this effort to attract young talents in our industry, in the company, through this digital technology, I think has also attractive values. People are asking us, how do you continue to attract people to come to oil and gas companies? If we offer them the capacity, and they discover this industry through these new technologies. I strongly believe it's true also for Momar in marketing. You can generate more than you would like in electricity. Direct Energie, all the business we do with B2C is a lot of digital tools. When I spoke about aggregation platforms, it's just a word. Behind the aggregation platform, we have today a team of 20 people, 20 digital guys who are working in order to optimize all the flows coming from various producers and customers. It's a way to attract young talents to our companies.
When we will embark them in our companies, I'm sure they will be convinced that they can participate to developing the energy of the future. It's also why. We said, okay, at the executive committee level, it's worth to invest, and let's make attractive for other new talents coming in the company. It's also a way, by the way, to adapt the way we manage and to new ways. These guys, these young people, they want to have maybe less vertical management rules and more horizontal ones. Let's engage in this future. Attractiveness of the company also is important today in this world.
All right. As I don't see any other hands raised, I think that closes this first part of the presentation this morning. I'm sure there is a lunch which is going to be served, and we'll resume at 2:40 P.M. this afternoon. Hello. We're going to resume our day. Please be seated. We start with the presentation on LNG with Philippe, with Arnaud, and with Laurent. Leave the floor to Philippe Sauquet.
[Andrea], good afternoon to you. We will be free to try to explain to you what are the attractiveness of the energy market for Total, and how we are going to generate value in this challenging business. I start by the energy market. The first, of course, feature of the market is growth. What is important is that the growth is not, I would say, LNG growth. The growth is coming from gas. What we have seen over the last years was a very robust growth of gas demand, 4% per year between 2015 and 2018. As you see on this chart, we continue to anticipate growing gas demand minimum of 2% per year up to 2030.
Drivers are clear, known to you, the coal to gas switch, including in power gen, be it for economical reason, such as in the U.S., for regulatory environment, for environmental reason in China, or for both such as in Europe. The fact that the gas is growing is giving much more depth to the growth of LNG being the most dynamic part of the market. We are commenting this morning, 9% of growth between 2015 and 2018. This growth for us will continue to be a very high growth as markets will continue to benefit from large and cheap reserves and discoveries of gas very far from them in Middle East, Russia, Australia, Africa, or U.S. Another important message of this slide is that Asia is clearly the key market driving the growth.
It's true for gas, 50% of incremental gas between 2018 and 2030 will come from Asia, and 70% of the incremental LNG demand will come from Asia. High growth, Asia is one key, and this is, of course, driving the attractiveness of the market. An area of course, of concern to all of you and of course to us, is the drop in gas prices. As you see on this slide, the gas prices have dropped. First of all, the LNG prices spot have dropped after the warm winter of 2018-19, and the start-up of newly commissioned facilities, Australia, Russia, and U.S. The nice thing and what is giving us trust in the future is that gas and energy demand have reacted to these low prices. As you see, the forward markets are anticipating a price recovery in Europe and Asia as of 2020.
We are currently around EUR 4 for the European spot price, around EUR 6 for JKM, the spot price in Asia. For the coming year, the forward markets are giving more than $6 per million BTU, which is not, I would say, the highest level that we have known historically, but we know that this is a cyclical market. What we believe is that the bottom of the cycle is now. On the chart, which is on the right side that Helle showed this morning, what we see for the 2023, 2024 horizon is that beyond the new start of the liquefaction that are today under construction, the liquefaction capacity is not enough to avoid some market tightening beyond 2021, even in a demand scenario that will be less dynamic than what we have seen recently.
You see that we have indicated in terms of gas demand a bracket between, let's say, 5% and 9%, 9% being, once again, what we have had during the last three years. This trend also in the energy market that are also of interest, I showed you the forward curve on the spot energy price in Asia. Two, three years ago, you could have questioned the economic relevance of the spot market. Since then, we have seen it growing and spot had captured, for example, roughly one-third of physical market, twice of spot indices, JKM for Asia or spot gas Europe for Europe. This is making the LNG market more attractive. Of course, don't be misunderstanding me. We like, we love, there are still a large portion of the sales that are done through long-term contracts that are oil-indexed.
What is clear as well is that the market and the buyers need some flexibility, and the global suppliers such as TotalEnergies can benefit from the spot market to optimize and balance their flow safely through better hedging on forward markets that are more and more liquid. You should consider that this is positive for the development of the market. What is also one key feature of the market is Asia, as I said, and we see strong growth in many countries around South Asia, which will be contributing to the growth. Clearly, we have identified two key markets for the future, which are, of course, the two giants, China and India. Both are confronted to the growth of their energy needs for very large population. You know that.
They are also confronted to the same need to decrease their high dependency on coal today for air quality, maybe tomorrow for climate. Both have defined ambitious, short-term targets for increasing, nearly doubling to 50% the share of gas in their energy mix. Both are investing in infrastructures. You have known that since many years in China, but it is starting also in India. Both are taking measures to stimulate market growth through higher competition and liberalization, including, once again, in India with the city gas distribution. Clearly, both of these markets could be a real game changer, much beyond our own forecast, and they could speed up the energy growth much beyond in 2030. Europe. Europe is also an important market, but maybe in terms of quantity as far as gas demand is concerned.
You see that on this chart, even if the gas demand has grown in Europe by 11% since three years, Europe for us is not a gas market where we anticipate real further growth. We would like to be wrong. This is how we see the market. I will anticipate a decline. Gas has clearly for us a role to play to complement the intermittent renewables that will represent more or less 40% of the power mix in 2030. I mean only intermittent renewables, solar plus wind, 30% of the power mix in 2030. At this time, nuclear and coal will have started to be phased out in many countries or several countries in Europe, including Germany and Belgium. What will drive growth for LNG is domestic gas production, which is to decline.
We are foreseeing decline of 60 million ton between 2015 and 2030. You've seen that now the decision is definitive about Groningen will have to stop in 2022. We don't see any pipe import going, there is still room for LNG to fill the gap, which will mean that 2030 LNG market in Europe about 100 million ton. This is not neutral at all in the global LNG market attractiveness for global LNG players such as Total. We have regas capacity to import LNG. Actually, when demand in Asia is seasonally low, we can reroute, of course, LNG to Europe. When the demand is high in Asia, we can reroute our LNG to Asia. Europe being a kind of swing market for all the global players such as Total.
Very difficult exercise anticipating the future because, of course, when the prices are low such as today and we see oversupply, you can legitimately have question about how long the oversupply will last. By experience, like in any commodity, there is a cycle. The nice thing about gas and LNG is that the growth is taking care about the cycle. I don't want to be too helpful to Bernard, but when you have an overcapacity in refining, you have it forever. When you have overcapacity for a growing market such as petrochemicals or such as LNG, there is one moment where the growth will have eaten the overcapacity. This is why we are remaining optimistic about the supply-demand balance for LNG.
You see on this chart, we have introduced two scenario of demand, low five, high seven after the low five, high nine of the first half of 2022 to 2024. This, of course, will be impacted by the prices. We'll see clearly higher demand when the prices are low and the opposite when the prices are high. When you compare this demand needs with the forecast of the liquefaction capacity, which are, in fact, the bar, you see that we have a kind of a basis of 460 million tons that are the assets that are either already operating or that are under construction that will be operating starting 2024 onward. You see that there is clearly beyond 2024, there is a need for new projects.
There is a need for new FIDs to be taken in 2020 in order to be supplying the additional demand starting 2024 and beyond. At the same time, we have to acknowledge that there is not enough room for all the projects that are under study, especially in a low-demand scenario. In the current environment with these low prices, we should know very soon if promoters and bankers that are willing to launch IPP projects without favorable long-term contracts are really ready to spend the money. On our side, strategy is always the same, like for any kind of commodity. We want to focus on developing low breakeven projects because they are the most robust that will be profitable even in the low phases of the cycle.
On this chart, which is not made by Total, it is a publication by Wood Mackenzie of the competitiveness of different LNG projects that are either under construction or that are just being contemplated for FIDs. When you see those different projects, you can rank them into different categories. On the left side, you see under $5 per million BTU in the current environment delivered in Asia, brownfield of existing giant plants, Nigeria, Qatar, of course, the most competitive. After, between let's say $5-$6 delivered, you see the greenfield giant projects, world-class, Russia, Mozambique, another example. In the same range, you have also the brownfield U.S. project. If you go a bit further, $7-$8 delivered, you have the U.S. greenfield. More than $8, you have the greenfield of the North American Pacific Coast.
As you see in red, the projects that are the ones that Total today is contemplating to develop. You see that all of these projects are really in the, I would say, the safe part of this curve, and this is why we remain optimistic about the profitability of our future business. I will leave the floor now to Arnaud so that he can enter the view a bit in more detail about those nice projects that we are today developing. Arnaud, I leave the floor.
Thank you, Philippe. The objective in my presentation is to focus on Total's key LNG projects in the portfolio. Actually, this slide is a bird's view of Afungi, which is the future onshore location of Mozambique LNG facilities in the northeast of the country, which is about 30 to 40 kilometers west of the field offshore. I'll come back onto that. LNG production will take a growing share in the group's production from 14% in 2018 to more than 22% by 2025. Obviously, speaking from 400,000 barrels per day to 800,000 barrels per day equivalent. The next wave of projects are coming from key supply basins in U.S., Russia, Africa, Middle East, and Asia.
These new projects will contribute, as illustrated on the right part of the chart, and you've already seen this morning, to the visibility of group cash flows growth and iGRP CFFO 4 will be growing 2.5 times from $2.1 billion to more than $5 billion by 2025. We are set to grow our production with highly competitive projects in all of the key producing basins. Today, we are shareholders in 27 trains in 12 LNG plants, which represent 25% of the global production of LNG. By 2025, we will have 30 million tons of equity production in 38 trains in 15 LNG plants that will represent one-third of the LNG global production. Let's focus on different projects, starting with the expansion of Nigeria LNG, which is a good example of the quality of the projects we have in our portfolio.
This is a low-cost opportunity with a brand-new 4.2 million ton train. This will be the train 7 and an additional liquefaction unit to develop the existing train, adding 3 million tons per year of capacity. Together, this project will add more than 7 million tons of very competitive LNG to the existing 22 million ton LNG plant. FID is expected by the end of 2019, with first oil production by the end of 2023. The low cost, approximately EUR 700 per ton, is secured with a letter of intent already issued to the main EPC contractor. Total contribution to the additional gas supply to the plant will come from the nearby Uma field, which is located in shallow waters about 20 kilometers southeast of the LNG facilities.
With 1.4 TCF of gas in an excellent reservoir with very good characteristics, this field, in fact, will be developed with only four wells using a cost-effective well-to-shore concept. The cost of LNG delivered to Asia will be less than $3.5 per MMBtu. This project will generate around $200 million per year at $60 per barrel from 2024. Let's go now to another large project, which is Arctic LNG 2. Building on the strength of our partnership with Novatek and capitalizing on Yamal LNG experience, we are targeting developing costs 40% below that of Yamal on this project. One of the main features is the gravity-based structural design. There will be one structure for each of the three 6.6 million ton per year train. This solution will enable to have more work done on the yard and less work done in the harsh Arctic environment.
Moreover, instead of pile-banging the plant as we've done on Yamal LNG with 15,000 piles, in fact, the gravity-based structure will be sunk on the border of the Ob estuary and in Arctic conditions, where you have a river. In fact, you have straight down. We are not in the permafrost, and so we are benefiting from this particular feature. The project FID was taken on September 5th, and first production is expected by the end of 2023. Leveraging on new upstream costs, this 19.8 million ton per year project is expected to deliver more than 7 billion barrels of oil equivalent of reserves and is ranking very well in the main curve of our LNG projects, with cost delivered in Asia below $3.5 per MBtu.
There will be also synergies for shipping with Yamal LNG carrier, as we will be able to pool the fleet and reduce the number of new Arctic-class ice-strengthened ships to build. Finally, new transshipment terminals located in Murmansk and Kamchatka will ensure optimal use of the fleet and proximity with the growing markets in Asia and Europe. We expect CFFO to be around $350 million per year at $60 per barrel from 2024. Of course, the U.S. is well-positioned to supply low-cost LNG, and we have been actively expanding our position through a strong partnership with Sempra. First, with our entry into the 13.5 million ton per year Cameron LNG train 1+2, which was part of our acquisition of NRG business.
Train one started early June. We have lifted our first LNG cargo by the end of June of this year. Train two and three are due to start up next year. Second, we have signed an agreement with Sempra to enter into ECA LNG, a competitive brownfield project on the Pacific coast in Baja, California, with a 3.5 million ton train to be sanctioned at the turn of 2019. This project will be fed with low-cost gas supplied from the Permian and is ideally located to supply Asian markets. Total has an offtake agreement for 1 million ton per year. Altogether, the equity production from these two projects, Cameron LNG and ECA LNG, will amount to 3.5 million ton by 2025. Both these projects have the potential to be expanded further at very competitive costs. Now let me move to Mozambique LNG.
With the acquisition of Anadarko African assets, we have been able to access to 26.5% operating interest in Mozambique Area One. This giant gas resource is estimated at more than 60 TCF of gas, with a gas composition that is very well adapted to liquefaction. Considering the excellent reservoir characteristics, we expect high productivity per well, with more than 30,000 barrel of oil equivalent per day from each well and a cost-effective 40-kilometer subsea tieback to shore development scheme. Mozambique LNG 12.9 million ton project was sanctioned last June, and we developed 18 TCF with two LNG trains of 6.4 million ton each and a startup planned in 2024. The liquefaction costs are competitive at less than $150 per ton, and synergies are expected by sharing onshore facilities with Area Four Rovuma LNG project.
As we have mentioned this morning, 90% of the volumes of Mozambique LNG train 1 and 2 have been sold under oil-indexed long-term contracts. Delivered costs are also about $3 per billion BTU to Asia. We expect from this project more than $1 billion of CFFO at $60 per barrel by 2025. Considering the massive gas resource yet to be developed. Studies for train 3 and 4 have already started, More synergies are expected with areas for future development phases. Now let's move. We will continue with our tour into the Pacific basin, where we are moving ahead with Papua LNG project, which benefits again from a new offshore and continent-based resource with high productivity per well, again, around $30,000 equivalent per day. A new LNG brownfield cost coming from synergies with the existing PNG LNG facilities operated by Exxon.
The two new 2.7 million ton per year trains for Papua LNG will be built within the existing LNG plant of PNG LNG at Caution Bay near Port Moresby. These two trains will be built together with a third train dedicated to PNG redevelopment. This, combined with low shipping costs, you have less than half a dollar per MBTU shipping cost to Asia, means that the delivery cost of LNG to Asia will be there again, less than $3.5 per MBTU, and CFFO on this project are expected to be around $300 million per year from 2025. The fees studies are about to be launched, and FID is planned in 2021. I would like to add that the market environment is very favorable to launch new LNG projects.
First, I would like to underline that most of the projects that we have presented today have already been decided, and therefore, the EPC contracts have already been awarded, and we have secured the cost. Even for a project like Papua LNG, we see that after the sharp decrease of cost in 2014 and more stability, of course, since 2016 for Equator and offshore development cost, we have a situation with spare capacity, about 40% on yards and rigs, for example. This is due to the fact that a lot of the independent E&P companies have been focusing on unconventional in the U.S. Also we see new competition coming on the market, for example, from Chinese yards, which are proven to be very performing in recent projects like Yamal LNG, with 300,000 ton of modules built over seven yards.
The issue on this chart is that for an LNG project, about 75% of the costs are non-LNG specific. Therefore, the impact of a potentially renewed activity in LNG projects will not impact significantly the cost increase. In closing my presentation, I would like to restate Total's commitment to reducing its CO2 emissions by developing less CO2-intensive technical solutions. For LNG, the main contributor, as illustrated on the left side of the chart for CO2 emission, are the liquefaction process and the shipping. On the liquefaction process, we are working on improving process and operational efficiency with an objective to reduce CO2 emissions by 10% through several design optimization, such as air inlet cooling or better recovery of energy losses.
We are also aiming at reducing CO2 emission by 15% by using higher efficiency turbines. We can go up to 50% reduction in emission by using a really simple approach on the grid with potentially renewable energy sources. On shipping, the size of our portfolio allows us to optimize the LNG transportation. This will be detailed by Laurent in the next presentation, which at the end, of course, is reducing our overall CO2 emission. We've taken major steps to improve vesselizations, for example, with the membrane technology and fuel consumption of LNG carriers with new propulsion, two-stroke engines, combined with optimum usage of the boil-off gas. In summary, we expect 15% reduction of the CO2 emission associated with shipping by 2025 compared to 2017.
This concludes my presentation on our portfolio of high-quality LNG projects, which will represent 40 million ton of equity production of LNG by 2025. Now I will hand over to Laurent, who will get you through our LNG portfolio. Thank you.
Good afternoon. Following Arnaud's presentation, we move a bit downstream on this LNG value chain. Just to describe how building a more global, a bigger LNG portfolio, more integrated, will allow us to capture the market development that Philippe has been describing. The LNG department has been busy in the past year since the acquisition of the Engie LNG portfolio. Toshiba, just to name a few, a few FIDs in Mozambique and Arctic-2, plus some downstream elements that I will highlight. It gives a picture of a global and integrated portfolio. Firstly, we are global because we are now positioned in all major hubs, starting from the historical ones like the Middle East or West Africa, to the ones which are currently developing.
We have Australia, Russia, and the U.S., of course, and the future hubs which will develop, which will complement our position, which is East Africa. We are able, through this global presence, to arbitrage between the different basins. I think it can be exemplified by the Mozambique project, which is exactly at equal distance between Asian destinations and European destinations, allowing us, for existing and for the trains to come as well, to make a nice arbitrage between those two markets. This global footprint also makes us more resilient. For example, we are able to overcome local force majeure or geopolitical risks as they exist today. Through diversity of supply, we are able to offer clients safety of supply through the size of our portfolio. The portfolio is global, increasingly so, and we are as well an integrated player.
We have a 13 million tons of equity production, which is scheduled to come in 2025 as described by Arnaud. We have as well a shipping fleet of 20 vessels. We have five vessels under construction and a very low charter party rate, which I think have reached the bottom. We are able to capture this opportunity with ordering the vessels. They are as well best in class in terms of technology, allowing us, as Arnaud was talking about, GHG emissions, as well to have the lowest cost possible. We have decreased in the past 10 years a standard return trip from the Gulf of Mexico to Asia from roughly $2.5 per BTU to $1.6 per BTU.
We are integrated as well with our 20 million tons per annum regasification capacity, which is secured for Europe, which is guaranteeing access to an important market, as Philippe was describing, and securing access to this market for our future LNG projects. We are developing our downstream presence through new long-term contracts, I will describe them afterwards, and as well demand creation through investment in import infrastructure. As shown to you, before the growth of the portfolio, through the development mostly of our upstream project, will allow us to reach a size of 15 million tons in 2025. When you combine this growth for the period 2020 to 2025, it's roughly 8% annual growth, which is in line with the market growth, allowing us to maintain our market share in the LNG market. This portfolio will change in terms of structure.
It will change as shown to you right here. We have an increasing share of this portfolio, which will come from our own liquefaction facilities, from quantities that we are purchasing from liquefaction facilities where we are a shareholder. This share will increase at the expense of purchases from third parties. Third parties will decrease not only in relative terms but as well as in absolute terms. They were bringing a lot of the flexibility in our portfolio at the beginning. Now the sheer size of it will make it less necessary. As well, we have a constant share at the bottom, which is the development of equity, JV sales to third parties, i.e., liquefaction plants which are selling directly to third parties without going through our trading portfolio. This is a result of historical contracts which have been negotiated in the past.
It's as well the arrival, for example, of Mozambique. As we were saying, the entirety of the production, 90% of it, had been sold already to third parties. Talking about now the flexibilities in our portfolio. This current portfolio is designed to have a safe physical balance between supply and demand together with flexibility. On the right of the slide, you have a bar which shows for the year 2020 the structure of the supply that we have in our trading portfolio. You have fixed European quantities which are delivered to us in Europe, which are feeding our regasification capacity. We have fixed Asian volumes which are delivered and securing part of our existing long-term contracts in the area. You have 60% of the supply portfolio which remains flexible.
Therefore, we start from a physically balanced portfolio where in 2020, each single cargo which is reaching our portfolio has got a physical home which is secured, either through regas or long-term contracts. We are able afterwards to add additional margin through this flexibility, through this optionality, by optimizing the destination of the cargoes according to the price signals of the different markets. It follows exactly what we've been describing to you last year. In fact, the increased commoditization of the market is offering a lot of opportunities to portfolio players like this with the visibility and more credibility to a JKM market, for example, in Asia. We are able, with the flexibility that we have in our portfolio, to monetize the optionality of LNG cargoes.
This flexibility, as shown on the left, is not only preserved, but increased inside of our portfolio, with flexible supply reaching around 80% in the coming five years. This flexibility, it has to be noted, is not only coming from volumes which are coming free of destination on an FOB basis, for example, in the U.S., but they are coming from increasingly flexible terms that we're able to get from our own projects and our own E&P production. Talking about price references and price balance. We have preserved an oil x LNG on the volume going through the LNG portfolio. As you see on the supply side, we have equity production, which is reaching our portfolio. Of course, group level, we are not exposed to prices, just to cost of production.
We have additional quantities which are being secured on the three main references which are used in the energy market, which are oil-based price references, mostly Brent, European gas hub prices, which are increasingly TTF replacing NBP, and Henry Hub. Looking at the balance between the sales which have been contracted and the purchases, we see that we have reduced by half our exposure to Henry Hub by reselling roughly 50% of the quantity we are buying on Henry Hub on a similar Henry Hub formula. We are balanced, and we are neutral in terms of European gas hubs.
The 80%, which is remaining in our sales structure, are equally spread between oil-related price formula, which is maintaining a long position against our supply, and volumes which will be optimized according to spot markets which are prevailing at the moment, optimizing the destination, able to go into regas contracts for the best prevailing market conditions. The portfolio of long-term contracts is resilient in the current price environment. What you see on the right, we have only a limited share of quantities which are exposed to price reviews, the price reviews will only take place in 2022 and beyond. In a market, as shown by Philippe, which will be with the most favorable supply and demand balance. Our portfolio increase will be fed in the future, as shown by Arnaud, by the future projects, which will increase the share of volumes coming from our own liquefaction plants.
We have used as well external growth, and the most notable step has been the purchase of the Engie LNG portfolio. We closed the operation one year ago. It is time to show you two different synergies which we have been able to achieve. Firstly, on the left, on the shipping side, we have modeled as per our existing portfolio, the shipping requirements of the total portfolio on its own in terms of number of days of shipping which are required to transport the quantities. We have modeled an Engie portfolio on its own, and we have compared it to a joint portfolio. What you see is that we are able to save roughly 27% of the number of days which are required to transport quantities, which at the current size of our portfolio is an equivalent of roughly five vessels.
Those gains of 20% that we've shown are coming from lower shipping requirement, possibility to capture additional arbitrage between different basins, and as well, a better fit between the vessels which are used for each transportation, playing on the diversity of vessels which is now within our fleet. On the right, it was mentioned this morning when we were talking about regasification, the integration along the chain allows a better usage of the regas capacity in Europe. What you have in the blue area is a range, 2017, 2018, of the usage of regasification capacity in Northwest Europe. It really is below 25%. The market shift, which has redirected cargos to the European market, plus our trading expertise, have allowed us since the beginning of the year to utilize the regas capacity at more than 65%, which is 10% more than the industry average.
Growing our portfolio on the supply means we're also growing the portfolio on the sale side. We are continuing our policy and our strategy to do this through three different ways. Firstly, regasification capacity, as we've shown to you before, as well, in a more classical way, doing long-term sale contracts. We've done so this year with two new counterparties, which are joining the LNG world, Guanghui in China and Taipower in Taiwan, under very favorable terms. It must be said that it is through the size of our portfolio, the flexibility that it can bring, the seasonality of delivery, that we were able to match some very specific requirements from those buyers.
We have as well secured a contract with CMA CGM for the delivery of LNG for bunkering, which is an investment, which is a development very important for us in the creation of this new market and new outlet for LNG for the future. The third way that we are using beyond regasification, long-term contract, is demand creation through investment in downstream infrastructure. We have been selected and awarded by the Republic of Benin the development of import facilities through an FSRU in order to replace fuel oil by natural gas in existing and future CCGTs in the country. We are continuing our partnership with AES in the Caribbean Islands, mostly in the Dominican Republic, through development step by step and replacement of, once again, fuel oil by natural gas for power generation, creating a potential of 1 million ton per year of outlet for LNG.
We have as well partnered with Adani through the development of import infrastructure in Dhamra terminal in order to create an import terminal on the east coast of India and working with them in the development of demand downstream of this terminal. As a conclusion, we are strengthening our number 2 position on the global LNG market and growing our portfolio to 50 million tons in 2025. We are increasing the purchase from our own projects of the group where we are shareholder, securing the next wave of projects in key supply basins, whether U.S., Russia, Qatar, Oceania, and Mozambique. We are confident that a large portfolio gives opportunities for economies of scale and optimizations, and all of this contributes to the visibility of the group cash flow growth, with iGRP growing from $2.1 billion to $5.4 billion from the year 2020 to 2025. Thank you very much.
All right, time has come for the Q&A session. Please.
Thanks. It's Jason Gammel with Jefferies. You've had quite a big increase now in the LNG volumes you'll be shipping from the U.S. Gulf Coast. I was trying to get an idea of the margin that you're able to generate on that. Are we talking about, you're buying Henry Hub, you're paying a reservation fee, you're paying for shipping regas. What type of price would you need, let's say, in Europe, to be able to achieve positive margins?
I think the contracts are more fixed than we thought. One thing which is not public and which cannot be achieved by others is the level of optimization that you can do to those volumes and the monetization that you can have of the flexibility and the optionality, which is embedded in those contracts. As you know, those contracts are free of destination, where we take delivery at the loading port with a free destination worldwide. You have to pay some liquefaction fees. Patrick was talking about the Toshiba contract, which is a lump sum payment, which decreases quite substantially the cost of the liquefaction, the tolling cost. Above EUR 100, you are roughly at, I would say, EUR 6 delivered into Europe.
What we add through optimization with our trading portfolio, the platforms that we've been able to develop, our trading expertise as well, that I have described, we are roughly able to do close to EUR 1 per MTu of extra margin through optimization and capturing the extrinsic value of those contracts.
Yes, question out there.
Yeah. Hi, James Evans at Exane BNP Paribas. A couple of questions. Firstly, I know you talked about some fantastic low-cost LNG projects, but they were a lot lower than what was on the Wood Mackenzie numbers. Could you just help us, I guess, correct the difference a little bit? The second question is about all of these future projects you've got at Golar, you've got PNG, Nigeria, you've not even mentioned Qatar, Mexico, Tellurian, Cameron. What's the contracting strategy here? Do the lowest-cost projects go without long-term contracts, or should we just be thinking about a portfolio-type approach now that's more progressive?
Okay, Patrick.
Just to answer the first question, it's not the same, because you may have seen that on the WoodMac chart, the benchmark is done on the price of LNG that you need in Asia to have a 10% rate of return. We are speaking about the delivered cost. In fact, it's a cost of production to Asia, so it's not the same metrics. On top of that, this is our number that we are showing to you. Whereas WoodMac, they are numbers, so there may be some differences as well.
On the contracting strategy, in fact, I would say on a case-by-case basis. You have projects such as the front of the PNG, where we see a very high interest of buyers that are, I would say, our traditional long-term buyers in Asia that are expressing their interest. It's clear that if they agree to give us a level of price, which is, I would say, attractive to us, we will go for it. If not, we can clearly keep a part of this volume on the portfolio. We do that on a case-by-case basis.
Yeah.
Hi, it's Sam Margolin from Wolfe Research. Thanks for that distinction about the delivered cost versus the cost curve of the project. I think when you talk to investors, with respect to the recency bias of the current LNG market, the prevailing view is that, you have this wave of supply at very low cost, half cycle, marginal pricing, and in our experience, the cost curve isn't something that helps you out in a commodity business. The question is, if we're stuck in this oversupply environment in LNG for longer than expected, it was mentioned that there's a whole list of potential projects that you have that aren't captured in the slide deck here. What is the flexibility of the LNG initiative broadly?
How much is driven by your view of the returns versus being compelled to manage your carbon footprint or any other factors at work here?
We haven't been repeating any project that will lower our carbon footprint. Yes, it has an impact today because the carbon footprint of This is less than the overall mix of product that we are selling, but this is clearly a driver for us. We will do that on a purely economical ground. Once again, of course, we see low prices today. This will be a key indicator for some projects today, but cannot contemplate to make profit on the basis of the prices that we see as of today. As for us, all the projects that we are considering are beating the threshold of the project of the 20 that we have. You see this morning, in a shipping environment, we use prices EUR 5.5 million BTU gas price in Europe. The front month today is already at EUR 6.26-EUR 6.4.
For the project in the U.S., this is not enough to make money.
Okay. Just a quick follow-up on the pricing chart that you have, the open position that's not set on an index to any underlying commodity. Can you just walk us through the mechanics of how you optimize it? Is it different spot price conditions in different regions that you're watching, or is it something else that there's a predictive element to it, or are you moving things around between the contracts?
What you have on this graph on the right in terms of the sales is what is already contracted and fixed. There is a part which is going into Europe, and the whole point of the flexibility of the portfolio is to be able to remove those cargoes away from Europe to better destinations. That's exactly what it's saying, and it's quite clear. It's about capturing, at the time, the best LNG price available on the market. It can be Europe, but if we can generate some additional margin, it will be Latin America, it will be some projects that we have in Africa, it can be Asia. Those are the quantities which are free of destination, not contracted yet into long-term contracts.
Yeah, Laurent.
Thank you. Philippe, actually, as you told us before, I think that because of your scale, your size, you make about $1 for MMBtu because of this optimization. That's generally a good rule of number. Is that still the right number? Is this 0.2 here on shipping that we hear about today, the 0.25 and the lower shipping cost, are those additional to that old number you gave us? Are you actually doing a little bit better than that number? Secondly, I just wonder about the derivative market in the JKM, the Platts market. Are you now using that to express a view if you think winter's going to be soft, you can lock that in and get rid of your cargoes over time and not having to dump them within soft markets. Thank you.
Well, I'll give you a firm figure. You get $1 per million BTU as an average of what we are doing on our flexible volumes. There are times where it is much more when you have a sharp increase of the spread between Europe and Asia, for example, in winter. Clearly, we are making much more than $1 per million BTU. In summer, it is just better. $1 per million BTU, yes, is a good average.
Do you want to answer that?
The saving is a kind of a one-off that we're showing you in terms of dimension of the fleet. It's not into the optimization of the cargoes. We get optimization, yes, in terms of optimization through physical trades of assets. You are saying in terms of JKM, we have an increasing visibility now on JKM, which allows us to have visibility, I would say, on the coming two years. It hasn't expanded extremely quickly. We were maybe one or two years ago, where I would have talked to you about maybe a six-month visibility. The volumes have increased. We are participating in this. We are trying, in fact, to create as well a paper market for shippings. We've done the first paper shipping trade in LNG in the month of June. Trying to boost this market as well.
The whole point for us is that as we have flexible portfolio and we are able to monetize the optionality within this portfolio, the more tools we have in order to hedge at some point a situation and be apart from this situation, the better it is. We are using, yes, JKM in order, from time to according to market view, just to see what's going to happen in the months to come.
One example from that, there was the attack on Saudi for the oil price we have seen, but the gas prices as well. As we have our U.S. cargoes position mainly on Europe. In one day, the European gas price went up by 8%. The JKM price in Asia went up by 38%. It's a kind of movement that you can really look when you are paper market such as the JKM, for one example.
Okay. A question here, Vivier.
Thanks. Two questions, if I could. Just very quickly back to Oswald's question around the idea of optimizations and shipping those. The idea that you brought that down by 27% is quite impressive. Is there more that you can do as, based on an absolute standpoint, but as you get bigger, is there an advantage of scale that as you get bigger allows those optimization opportunities to be more open to that lane down? MBTU goes up over time with the scale in terms of optimization. Then the second one was on the GHG emissions and what is 60 kilograms per CO2 per barrel of equivalent. It's a 15% reduction in the shipping savings. Does that upstream number go down to 50, or is there an upstream number around that?
I can start with shipping optimization. Clearly, there is a one-off, as I was saying, about putting together two portfolios which have, when they are separated, have these extra requirements in terms of shipping. I would say it is a one-off, and I do feel that the numbers you're seeing are pretty optimized, and I think we've done our job right. The next step is definitely with the industry. It is the development of a stock market in the industry, which will help to gain the next level in terms of CG, which is absolutely necessary for the LNG industry. We know that when you look at it, the fleet worldwide of LNG vessels is typically sub-optimal. There's a lot of vessels crossing each other.
It is by the development of stock markets and the right pricing now from the gas market being given in the Atlantic basin and in Asia, that the tankers will be able to be rerouted and optimized at the global and industry level. Just try to answer your question on the GHG emission. Remember that you saw in the chart the 60 kilograms of CO2 per BOE is taken as a scope one and two for typical LNG production, it is to have the split of what are the main contributors on average. We are trying with these examples to identify some points, we are working on each part really to find where we can save, considering indeed that we have our own journey on the shipping, you see the way we are going.
Likewise, on the liquefaction process, that can really, if we take an example of Papua LNG. Papua LNG has native CO2, about 20% in the gas composition, there that will be a bit outside of the liquefaction. For this specific project, we will have, of course, a higher potential CO2 emission if we are not to inject the gas. Of course, for this one, we can justify to spend the extra money to do the injection of CO2 within the field.
Irene?
Thank you. Irene from Société Générale. On slide 10, you show us that LNG gas production grows from 14%-22% of the Total by 2025. If we think about gas in Total, not just LNG, but natural gas, which is currently around half your production, what does it grow to by 2025, please?
I don't have the exact number, but I think it grows. We are clearly above 50%, we will probably be at around 55% or something like that. Our balance of gas versus oil is definitely moving towards gas. Of course, LNG is the main driving force in here. We will have to find the exact number to give you the result for 2025.
Yes.
Hi, thank you, sir. Henry Tarr from Berenberg. Two questions. One on LNG costs. You said at the moment, costs remain extremely low to sanction some of these projects. We have seen a record number of LNG projects sanctioned this year in terms of capacity, and there's a limited number of contractors who are capable of doing this type of work. How confident are you that when you come to do Nigeria and PNG, that costs are going to remain stable given the back of growth we've seen to some of these companies over the past 12 months?
As I told you, in fact, for the Nigeria LNG Train 7, which is an initial train and an expansion, we already locked in the contract, and we are at $700 per ton, which is quite competitive. Likewise for Arctic LNG 2, which has already been awarded, and Mozambique LNG. Those very large projects are already locked in with the current parameters. What we are trying to illustrate on this slide is that the fact that moving forward for the next project, say, Papua LNG, we still consider that a vast majority of the costs are going to be in a very favorable market because there is still enough capacity available. When it comes to contractors who have the specific LNG competency, okay, we may be exposed to liquefaction, but it can only be on 25% of the first total cost of the project.
It's quite a magnifying impact.
Just on LNG bunkering, what do you see is the opportunity there, and how should we think about that as a growth opportunity over the next five years?
I'm not sure that we have no information to give you on that because the ones that are driving are our competitors. Clearly, we have seen some startling interest in LNG for bunkering, and this might be a very significant game-changer for LNG. I think that the rule of thumb, the book going through today is an equivalent of more than 200 million tons of energy. If the civilian part of the fleet switched to LNG, it would be a nice addition to LNG market. Laurent will come back on that.
Yes. One question here.
Yeah. Hey, thanks. Jason Gabelman from Cowen. You showed the resource from the Mozambique asset, it looks like there's a lot of capacity for growth beyond train 3 and 4. What's the optimal size or the maximum size for that asset? Secondly, just on your demand growth outlook, LNG at 5% a year. I noticed on slide five it looks like European gas pricing for stayed flat. I'm wondering if that low end contemplates Nord Stream 2 coming online and other things like potential for Japan to increase nuclear capacity, or restart some new nuclear plants, I should say. Is that 5% kind of a firmer, lower end of the group? Thanks.
On the first question regarding Mozambique, it is clear that with 60 TCF, there is the potential to have six trains, maybe more, but at least six trains. We are working on train three and four. The master plan I was showing this artist view of the Afungi location, can accommodate in fact all the trains from not only area 1 but area 4, and there is some margin for expansion. The master plan, if you prefer, of the facility is designed to accommodate a bit like Papara. There is a huge area which would actually be fenced. There will be an estate, there will be some accommodation facilities. It is a very large area, which is about 40 km by 30 km by 15 km. It is a huge area that provides all of the necessary space for a number of trains.
When it comes to the resource, you can do the math by yourself. You see 18 TCF is a true system for million ton train, 60 TCF is estimated today. As regards to the demand for Europe, no, we don't see a real room for pipe import growing, we feel pretty much confident with the figure that we gave you for the LNG import growing up to 100 million tons. Japan, yes, we have of course, a scenario which includes nuclear restart. Nuclear restart is happening today. It has been a long way for the Japanese government to restart some of the fleet. We have a scenario with not all of the power plants nuclear restarted, of course, but a significant part, yes.
The question for gas is more the uncertainty about coal competition, because we have seen that it might be surprising at the time when we are speaking to see Japan opening new coal-fired power plant at a time where we are speaking about carbon neutrality.
Yes. Question from Kate.
Hi, it's Kate Festuk, HSBC. Just a couple of questions for me. Firstly, a significant portion of your LNG sales is still oil-linked. Could you perhaps talk about the trends you're seeing on the oil slopes embedded in those long-term contracts? We're hearing slopes for recent contracts have been in the low double digits, and that's quite a long way down from the mid-teens, which we used to see in the past. Any comment on that would be great. Secondly, Laurent, you highlighted the high utilization rates of Total's European regas terminals versus the industry average. Why is that a good thing, given that Europe is currently the sink for global LNG, and that's where LNG utilizations are currently the lowest? Thank you.
Firstly, markets in Asia are fused mostly in oil-related, with most of the buyers still insisting on oil-related contracts. We are, as you are saying, not at the mid teens as was the case before. The market can be estimated in not a manner at roughly 11.5% today. What you have on average, what you are able to do, and that's what we are trying to do, is escape from vendors, thanks to the overall industry asking for plain vanilla deals, which are basically flat deliveries without any optionality, where we can offer something from our portfolio, which is coming from seasonality, flexibility, and usually you are able to beat those markets, those prevailing market conditions, and trying to sell a bit better. That's what we are trying to do in Asia in the contracts we've done and that we are discussing.
You are talking about the high utilization rates in Europe. Firstly, we are pretty happy when they are utilized and when they are utilized at increased rates. You could argue that, of course, Europe is a sink. It is true that when cargoes are coming to Europe, it is at the time the best market. Be it. What is important for us and what we wanted to show is that we are able to create extra flows by spot trade or buying from third parties because you saw that.
Sometimes we're having 100% utilization rate, so parties who wanted to go to European market could not have access. We were able to monetize our existing capacity and bring in some additional value.
Okay, I don't see any other questions in the room. I think we're going to stop here. We're perfectly on schedule. We'll resume at a quarter to 4:00, 4:15. Thank you. All right. Hello. I'm going to ask you to take your seats. We're going to resume. We're finishing the day with this downstream presentation with Bernard and Momar. Bernard first.
Thank you, Ladislas. Good evening. As Patrick mentioned this morning, petrochemicals is one of the core areas of TotalEnergies. What I intend to do in the next 20 to 25 minutes is to show you how petrochemicals will contribute by 2025 to TotalEnergies sustainability targets in terms of cash flow generation, of course, but also in terms of CO2 emissions. Let's first move to our strategy. A quick reminder. Patrick touched on this already this morning. Let's see how petrochemicals fits into this strategy. As you know, strategy is about building differentiation. To be different, you need to make choices. This is what we have done in refining and chemicals. We have made very clear choices. The very first one is integration, obviously. We want to play the integration between refining and chemicals, that is the backbone of the branch.
It means that we focus most of our capital allocation and developments on our large integrated platforms in the world. We have six of them. It means that by 2025, these platforms will represent more than 70% of the capital we employ. Of course, we keep working on the operational excellence, and I will come back on this one. First choice, integration. The second choice we have made clearly is to grow in petrochemicals, not in refining. Why have we chosen petrochemicals? It's very simple. It's a growing market, and it's a market where we want to leverage two key differentiating factors. The first one, of course, is it comes from gas, so from low feedstocks, ethane, propane, butane. Of course, the second lever we want to activate is we want to be balanced in terms of capacity between monomers and polymers.
I will come back on this one in a few minutes. The third choice we have made, it's of course, to grow and invest in low-carbon solutions. here again, by leveraging two key differentiating factors, re-bio, biofuels, biopolymers, of course, and secondly, lever the circular economy, which we see as a growth opportunity and which is key, of course, in the years to come to grow our petrochemical business. I will come back on this one in the course of the presentation as well. You see the strategy is clear. It's now a matter of execution, obviously. You will see in the next few slides that we are progressing well in terms of execution. of course, all of this will translate into an additional cash flow generation of EUR 1.5 billion by 2025.
Let's now move into petchem and see where we plan to invest in this market. Let's first look at the petchem market from a demand standpoint. What you see on the left-hand side, that's a growing market. It grows by 3% a year. It has been the case in the past few years. We see it, of course, also in the years to come. Why is that? It's very obvious. It's because it's driven, of course, by demographics and growing world population. The emergence of the middle class, of course, and also all the bigger trends around the lightweight materials, being more energy efficient in the transportation industry to reduce the CO2 emissions. All of that drives the growth in plastics and polymers.
Of course, we see also, and I will come back on this during the presentation, we see also a business opportunity, notably in the field of recycling, which is a growing trend in petrochemicals. 3% a year, a good business to be in terms of growth, I would say, thanks to the strong fundamentals. Of course, if we look at the market today, what do we see? We see, of course, a short-term imbalance because new capacity are coming on stream in the U.S. Gulf Coast, in Asia. In the U.S. Gulf Coast, all based on ethane. In Asia, based on naphtha. All these investments in the U.S. Gulf Coast have started up in 2017, in the first wave, 2017, 2020. I would say the bulk of it is now almost behind us.
All of this weighs on the supply and at the same time, on the demand side, we see the slowdown, notably linked to the trade war between China and the U.S. This is not too much a matter of concern for us because most of our projects are going to start post-2020. You will see in the next few slides that our large major projects are starting out post-2020, which means that in terms of timing, it's pretty favorable. It's post first wave. They will all rely on strong fundamentals, and I will repeat these fundamentals once again. Low-cost feedstock, competitive CapEx by leveraging our platforms and balancing our capacity between monomers and polymers. A good market to be in in terms of growth. Is it profitable? How can you be profitable in petrochemicals?
We need to understand the main drivers of the petrochemical market. If I had to summarize in one sentence, I would say it's about feedstock. It's clearly about feedstock. You see on the left-hand side that the main polymer feedstocks are largely oil derived, notably naphtha, and that will remain. If you look at all the new capacity, notably in China, which are about to start up, they are all naphtha-based and some in the Middle East as well. This correlation to oil will stay for the polymer feedstock. Now, if you look at the right-hand side and you look at the feedstock price, what do you see? You see a strong discount of ethane compared to naphtha. It's true also for LPGs, by the way.
Just keep also in mind that ethane is also used as a fuel, which gives also an additional upside in terms of economics. To make it simple, when you put the two parts of the slide together, what do you see? You see that the oil-based crackers are the price-setter for polymers. In other words, polymers prices are correlated to oil price. At the same time, you see that gas-based feedstocks are completely discounted compared to oil. In other words, the ethane-based crackers have a structural advantage compared to naphtha-based crackers. In other words, the higher the oil price, the better off the ethane crackers are compared to naphtha-based cracker. It explains why we are focusing our development on these low-cost feedstocks derived from natural gas, ethane, and LPGs.
When we look at the competitiveness, we of course think about feedstock, but we have also to think about the assets, of course. What I would like to show you on this slide is how we work, what we do to improve our asset base, notably in Europe. It started up in 2013. You see on this map that we have done a lot since 2013, and we keep doing a lot. In terms of crackers today, we have crackers which are flexible and cracker which can crack up to 60% of low-cost feedstocks, which really gives them a strong competitiveness. You see also that in terms of portfolio, we keep working around our polymer sites. We have recently announced the shutdown of a polystyrene site in Spain in 2019.
We are consolidating these volumes in Canada, which will be the largest polystyrene site in Europe, a very competitive site. We have announced also the shutdown of the polypropylene line, a community propylene line in Suresnes. We keep working on our asset base in Europe. Of course, we keep also working on our operational excellence. We mentioned this morning all the plans around the cost saving. We mentioned this morning all the plans around the digital acceleration plan. All of this will, of course, further contribute to improving our cost base in petrochemicals. You see that we have done a lot in terms of feedstock or our competitiveness, but we want also to improve our cash flows by investing, and investing, of course, in high returns projects. You have on this chart these projects, and we will detail them in the coming slides.
Keep in mind that they all, of course, rely or stick to our three basics. We leverage our platforms, we play the low-cost feedstock, and we try and we manage to be balanced between the monomer and the polymer capacities. Let's start with the U.S. You see in the U.S. that we have, of course, a very nice base, very profitable, $1 billion of cash flows from operations last year. A very profitable base. Why is that? It's because we have, of course, very good assets. World-class assets you see on the left-hand side. A world-class platform in Port Arthur. Refinery integrated with a cracker, where we own 40%. In La Porte, we have the largest polypropylene site in the U.S. with a very significant market share. We are number three, 10% market share.
In Carville, the largest polystyrene plant in the U.S. as well, with a very strong market share, 30%. In Bayport, Texas, we will have by 2021, a very nice site, fully integrated with a new ethane cracker, 1 million tons of ethylene, 1 million tons of polyethylene. Here again, a very significant asset. Nice assets, as you see. There is more than that. I think something key to keep in mind is that these assets are all integrated in terms of monomers and polymers. All the molecules, ethylene, propylene we produce in Port Arthur, are sold to internal use into the group. All the polyethylene, all the ethylene that will be transformed into polyethylene in Bayport in 2021 will be produced in-house. In Carville, we are fully integrated. All the styrene we produce is transformed into polystyrene and the same with ethylene used for polystyrene.
That's true for 50% of what we produce in La Porte. So you understand by having this full integration, monomer, polymer, we reduce or it's immune against the market cyclicality, and we are not exposed to, like some of our peers, to some length of the molecules you may have, and which are today sold at very low prices. The first project we are looking at is our project in Bayport. You know about it. It's a joint venture in partnership with Borealis and Nova Chemicals, 50/50. We are investing a 1 million ton ethane cracker. It's a really competitive cracker. It's the second cheapest cracker on the U.S. Gulf Coast. When you do the math, the ethylene cost comes at $17 per ton, which is extremely competitive.
We reach very low level because we are, of course, benefiting from the integration with refinery, with existing cracker in VTP, and that help us reduce our CapEx level. This project is well on track. It's already 70% completed, with a startup date in 2021. Post first wave. We also invest in a new polyethylene line, 1 million ton of polyethylene by 2021. Here again, fully integrated with a cracker. We target is by 2021 as well, post first wave. You see it's a very nice combination. Total brings in this joint venture the integration upstream and the synergies with the platform. Our partner, Borealis, will bring the technology of the best kind. With Novar, we partner with Novar, and we will be the number four in the U.S., thanks to a strong market presence. It's a very good project.
Once again, we are well on track to start it up in 2021. Second large project is Korea. In Korea you know we have in Daesan a very nice platform, a joint venture with Hanwha, 50/50. It's been a tremendous success story. You see it on the screen. Here again, $1 billion of cash flows from operations in 2018 and even before. It's one of the kind of assets we like a lot. Best-in-class. Energy, best-in-class energy efficiency. It's really the kind of assets where you want to invest more, and this is exactly what we are doing. Since three years, we have put close to $1.3 billion of CapEx in Daesan to increase the cracking capacity by 40%. We have done it by increasing the cracking capacity and propane. Propane coming from the U.S. Here again, to benefit from the low-cost feedstocks.
To stick also to one of our principles, which is to balance monomer and polymers. Downstream from the cracker, we have also increased our polyethylene and polypropylene lines capacity by 50% to 60%. That we have today a well-balanced system and extremely competitive in terms of fixed cost and of course, in terms of CapEx, because we leverage the existing platform. We are so happy with the event that we, of course, are evaluating new opportunities, notably around the new gas cracker, which will again, benefit from the platform synergies. Third large project, Saudi Arabia. You know this joint venture with Saudi Aramco. Here again, it's been a tremendous success story. It's a magic number, but $1 billion of cash flow from operations on average since 2015. We started up in 2014, 400,000 barrels a day of capacity.
It has been able to make 10% in 2018. We are now targeting four hundred eight hundred seven barrels by 2024. You see it's extremely profitable to add this opportunity to the project. This refinery is one of the best in the world. It's a top quartile refinery, excellent availability. Zero fuel, which positions this refinery very well for the post-IMO 2020 environment. A large part of the yield owned at the mini slate, which is also an upside in the post-IMO 2020 environment. Honestly, a very nice asset and an asset that we want to further integrate downstream with the petrochemical concept. Just for the record, SATORP stands for, as you probably know, Saudi Aramco Total Refining Petrochemical, the R is for refining and the P for petrochemical.
You see that the R has been a success, is there, and now, of course, we have the T, the second phase of this project, which is to build a downstream complex around petrochemicals. This project is a giant project, $5.5 billion of CapEx. 1.5 million ton cracker, it's a mixed cracker. It's going to be one of the largest one in the world with 1.5 million tons a year. More than 50% of the fixed stock will be based on low-cost feedstocks, which fully comply with our strategy. We have a downstream from the cracker, 1 million tons of PE as well. Again, to rebalance more and more polymers. It's currently on the FEED phase. We aimed by 2021 to have sanctioned the FID. It's a good project. Well in fact, we started by 2024.
You see the return, which is of course a very decent return, more than 15% of IRR. More than figures, the best maybe proof that this project is attractive, is that we are able to attract partners downstream from the project. You see that, for example, INEOS has joined the project, has committed to spend $2 billion downstream on specialty chemicals and that's serving the composite and talent fibers industry. We have also a Korean partner joining. We are having more and more third parties coming and joining the project because they see the benefit of all this integrated platform. Now let's have a look at recycling. When we say and when we explain our strategy in polymers, we are often questioned about recycling, because most of people tend to think that recycling is a threat.
If it tries to put so much money in petrochemicals, when you see this trend and this trend which could take share from the growth. We don't share this vision, obviously. Why is that? If you look at the left-hand side, you will understand straight away. You see that the market growth, as we said. You see that the recycling part of this market grows as well. You see that the virgin part is also growing. Basically, we have two segments, the virgin polymers and the recycling polymers, which both enjoy a steady growth. You know, we like segments which are growing, and we see this more as a business opportunity than as a threat. We want to catch this growth in recycling. To catch this growth, of course, we are taking a certain number of actions, which I will detail.
First, we have set ourselves an ambition, which is by 2030, 30% of our polymers recycled. How we will achieve this target? We will achieve this target by investing, of course, organically in the field of mechanical and chemical recycling, through acquisitions, as we have done recently with Synova. By working also with all the stakeholders along the value chain, because we are talking about a circular economy, so it means you have to involve the waste collectors, and you have to involve the brand owners, of course. That's why we're a founding member of the Alliance to End Plastic Waste, which is an alliance of 30 large multinationals, taking initiatives all along value chain to accelerate, let's say, the circular economy.
Last but not least, which may sound a little bit contradictory, but we support the ban of single-use plastic because we think that in our industry, when the management of end of life, the fact that you find all these plastics into the oceans is not acceptable and that could impair the way we do our business. Last but not least, of course, bioplastic, which is a niche, but it's a growing niche. Double-digit growth. It's a niche where we are the market position, notably in a biosource polymer made out of sugar cane. We have a new plant in Thailand, which is in the ramp-up phase, 75,000 tons a year of production. It's a nice business, and it's a business which also will help address this single-use plastic ban, because when you have a biodegradable polymer, you may bring a solution to this challenge.
As you've seen, since we met last year in New York, a lot has progressed. Of course, our major projects are doing well, progressing well. We are also tackling very actively the circular economy issues, but not so much on the agenda last year, if you remember. This is something where we really want to be extremely proactive, and we are, once again, giving ourself this ambition of 30% of recycled plastic by 2030. You see the left-hand side, our cash flow generation. It's solid, and it's going to grow by EUR 1.5 billion by 2025, as we said. How we will achieve this? We will achieve this by once again sticking to our basics, which is the integration, leveraging the sector and the low fixed cost, ethane and propane retail, and of course, doing the integration between monomers and polymers.
At the same time, you see that we will keep a very strong capital discipline, EUR 1.5 billion of CapEx in average a year or more. It's going to be, I would say, our guideline, and we stick to this. By spending this EUR 1.5 billion a year, we'll be able to generate this cash flow improvement. We also want to bring a contribution to the group's CO2 reduction. You see it on the right-hand side. It's critical because Refining & Chemicals represent 60% of the CO2 emission of the group. I know you said this morning, EUR 42 million in 2018. You see that we are 50% of it. It's clear that Refining & Chemicals has a key contribution to bring to this target. We have been able to do it for the last few years. You see it on the chart.
We have reduced very significantly our CO2 emissions over the last three years, and we will keep reducing it even if we keep growing. Patrick mentioned this morning, this new cracker, 1.5 million ton of CO2, which will be coming with the new cracker. In spite of that, we will be able to further reduce our CO2 emissions by 2025. Thank you. Bernard?
For Marketing & Services, the strategy consists in first capturing growth in dynamic geographies, developing business non-fuel retail activities, and building a strong offer on low-carbon fuels. With that, we will deliver the EUR 100 million CFFO additional per year till 2025. We are going to grow aggressively in large emerging markets, namely China, India, Mexico, Brazil, and Saudi Arabia. We will be building on existing retail network non-fuel sales, shop, food, and services. This non-fuel part would represent 40% of our retail CFFO by 2025 in Europe. In Africa, where market is still growing, we are going to increase our market share to reach 18%. We are going to leverage our presence there. Second point. Third point, we grow our low-carbon business. In this, today we have 15,000 charging points we are operating. We ambition to have 150,000 charging points we'll be operating come 2025.
We are going to develop our business of natural gas for transport, not only bunker ships like Laure and Philippe have said earlier that on natural gas for vehicles too on the roads, both in Europe and in the U.S. Today I will zoom on just some points. First, what we are going to do in those large energy markets. Second, what are we going to do in Europe, non-fuel revenues, how are we going to improve the non-fuel revenues? Third, how are we going to leverage our position in Africa? Fourth, the multi-energy offer we are going to have for the market. Sorry. In large, this slide has been presented by Patrick earlier, and I'm going just to comment where we are going to be here on these five big markets.
The five big markets, if you assemble them, they represent 25% of the fuel sales worldwide, in five markets. These markets are markets where the consumption per capita, per car is increasing. We ambition to have between 4,000 and 5,000 service stations in these five countries, in addition to our 14 existing thousand service stations. We are going to do that through mainly franchise models, which are very light in terms of CapEx. In Mexico, for example, we partner with Grupo Red. They have built a group of dealers. They have 250 service stations. They've created JV with us where we are going to bring our expertise, ours them, and they are bringing their assets. In Brazil, we acquired a company called Zema, with more than 200 service stations and counting, and the additional stations we are going to have would be franchise service stations.
There, too, that will be quite light in terms of CapEx. In Saudi Arabia, it's a different story. There we've partnered with Saudi Aramco. We've acquired a network of service stations. Half of the service stations will be branded Aramco, and the other half will be branded Total, and we will be the one bringing the expertise. That's what we are going to do, basically increasing the number of service stations with a very light CapEx model. Because financing is not an issue today at the cost of equity. In Europe, where the market in terms of the volumes is quite flat, we are going to leverage our position in Western Europe. There's one domain where the market is just flat or decreasing. That is the domain of transport of goods in Europe. That market is increasing by between 0.5%-0.9% per year.
We are quite strong in that segment because we have truck stops in our service stations, our main service stations. In addition to the TotalEnergies service stations, we have a subsidiary called AS24, which is dedicated to that sort of business that is growing. We are present in that segment of transport of goods trucks in Europe, and that market will be increasing. The second thing we are going to do in Europe is to develop our business in shop, food, and services. There's one thing quite particular. When you think about shops in Europe, we are leader in France, and one thing in France that makes France quite different from other countries is that because the retailers, pretty early in the early 1980s, became our competitors on fuel, we had to develop our own expertise in shops.
Therefore, we capture more value in the shop business than other countries. That business will continue to grow. First, shop, the food stuff, and then in addition to our card offer now, we are moving to mobility services, which means that when you buy a fuel card, you're not only buying a fuel card, but there are a lot of services associated. For example, it allows you to pay your toll fees on the highways in Europe, and that is generating quite some revenues. We have 3 million card holders today, and we are doing 300 million transactions a year. Half of the volumes we are selling now in retail in Europe are sold to fleet owners, actually, to card holders. Those are buying, in addition to fuel, other services. In Africa, we are the big retailer.
In Africa, if you take all sorts of retail business in Africa, Total is the one with the largest number of shops in Africa, under one single brand. We have no competition in terms of demand, in terms of number of sites in Africa. We have 2,600 shops there, 200 restaurants, and our stations in Africa, if you visit a TotalEnergies station in Africa, it's a really one-stop shop. That's the place where you not only go for fuel, but that is a place that is open 24/7. That's the place where, for example, you can buy insurance. If you have your car, you go in, you call it a TotalEnergies station, and you can buy insurance, or you can subscribe for, if you want a TV subscription, you can get there and get it. We are selling a lot of services.
Places that are open 24/7, that most of the time are lit, that are quite secure. We are leveraging on that because we are participating in the need serving of technology in Africa. All those things you hear about South Africa. We've launched, for example, we have a company where we are one of the investors. It started, they have a TouchPoint. They have today close to 10,000 merchants that are using their services in our stations. Just one slide on where we are going in Brazil, one on these emerging markets. We ambition to have 1,000 service stations by 2025. We made the acquisition of a company called Zema. One thing that is interesting about Brazil, of course, is the percentage of bio you have on the fuels in Brazil. Even on diesel, you have 10% bio in diesel.
You have in excess of 30% bio in gasoline. Today we have 280 stations. We ambition to reach 1,000 service stations, either by acquisition or because we have, in Brazil, you have 40% of the service stations that are what they call white pumps, means that they are non-branded, and those, of course, with quality of your service, you can attract them and transform them into TotalEnergies stations. There we see a lot of potential with, again, very low CapEx. On the electromobility that in question I've heard of the launch. What are we doing on electromobility? We target to have 10% market share in this business in Western Europe come 2025. The main markets being France, Germany, Belgium, Netherlands. To be a leader in B2B and B2Government business there. To do that, we've already taken major steps.
One year ago, we made the acquisition of a company called G2m obility. G2 Mobility is the leader in France in B2Government business, and to B2B business. This summer, in June, we installed the first high power charging in service stations in France and in the Netherlands. This summer again, we won a contract. Netherlands is at the forefront in terms of electromobility in Europe, and we won the contract to install charging points in the Greater Amsterdam this summer, and we're going to install 10,000 charging points, and we are going to operate in further for the Greater Amsterdam region. We've already taken major steps there. Our aim is to operate, to multiply by 10 the number of charging points we are operating today from 15,000 to 150,000.
In addition to that, in our own service stations, we aim to have high power charging points each 150 kilometers in Western Europe, in the E5, which means that come 2025, we are going to have more than 1,000 high power charging points in our network in Europe. Give access to our customers to the maximum of, in terms of charging points, operate the maximum number of charging points, and have those customers coming in our service stations because we'll be able to deliver to them this high-speed charging. Natural gas. We are the leader in Europe in natural gas. We made the acquisition of a company called PitPoint in 2017. That is a Dutch company, 1 of the 3 NGV players in Europe. Today we have more than 150 stations under our operations operated by PitPoint, selling natural gas for vehicles.
We ambition to have 500 of them come 2025. Our goal in Europe is to have 15% minimum market share. That is pretty close to our market share on main fuels in Europe. In the U.S. We have got essentially in the middle of natural gas in the U.S. Clean Energy Fuels, we acquired that participation in 2018. The volumes are growing. The intention is to reach more than one million ton in 2025. On hydrogen, we are looking at that because we see it as probably. I told you earlier that we are quite a major player in transport of goods. Hydrogen will play a major role in the future. We are part of a JV in Europe called H2 Mobility. That JV has 75 service stations today. Out of the 75 service stations combined, there are 20 service stations that are under the Total brand.
On LNG, today, maybe I'm starting answer the question that was asked. Today, the market of LNG is 0.4, 0.5 million tons today. With IMO, our view of the market is that in 2020, we are going to see probably that market double, getting to 0.9-1 million tons. The first movers in that, we are seeing that with one of our clients who is fine with this, one of the early movers, CMA CGM. The first movers will be the container. Those ones, the ship-carrying containers will be the first movers because of the volumes they are consuming are quite high. That market, you can say it's a market of between 80-100 million tons.
Thinking that that market, when you move to IMO 2020, you are going to have 10% of that market that will do LNG is quite reasonable, considering that CMA CGM only will account for 0.6 million ton, because they are the early movers. At the very beginning, we are going to have a big market share of that business because we will be servicing the company that is the first mover. Our ambition there is to reach between 10%-15% market share in 2025. We see the market, and that is what is coming from when we compare our figures to Wood Mackenzie figures and to the GM figures. That is what is coming. Talking of a market of roughly 10 million tons in 2025, out of which we ambition to do 1 million-1.5 million.
Bernard said earlier that we already secure 0.6 million tons with CMA CGM. With that, we think that we'll be able to reach the 10% market share. In addition to the business, we are having these additional things in the cruise. In conclusion, energy is a significant and sustainable source of cash flow for the group. We will continue to deliver the EUR 100 million of adjustment CFFO per year, and we are on track to generate more than EUR 3 billion of CFFO in 2025. We are going to continue on our legacy business and on the growth areas, we are going to leverage on large energy markets, midstream business in Europe, position in Africa, and alternative energy. With that, we are confident that we'll deliver this. Thank you.
All right. We have a last round of Q&A for Bernard and Momar. Yes.
Jason. Thanks. Jason Gammel with Jefferies. I may diverge a little bit from the primary topics and ask about refining. You talked a little bit about IMO, but specifically, how are you positioning for a post-IMO environment? I know you already have very low fuel oil yield. You have very high middle distillate yield, but are you trying to position for a low sulfur fuel oil market, and are you already starting to move compliant fuels out into storage right now for 100 days from now?
There are actually two dimensions in your question. There is the refinery system. Are we ready? As on the supply chain and distribution side, are we capable of supplying compliant ships? I will leave the floor to Momar on the second dimension. Maybe a reminder on the IMO, where we stand in terms of the, I was going to say years to turn. What we have done, just as a reminder, you saw on the left-hand side where we were in 2017, seven million tons of high sulfur fuel oil, and we are by 2020, between two and three million tons. The way we have achieved this, once again, has been threefold. First, in Antwerp, our refinery in Belgium, through a large investment we have made to convert fuel oil into distillates.
We have been able to reduce this length by around 1.5 million tons. It has been completed by the end of 2017, early 2018. In Port Arthur, we have 55 million barrels of recovery, as you know, so there was some spare capacity. We have, of course, taken advantage of this spare capacity to optimize globally our system. Once again, it's half a million tons of fuel oil, which has been able to be turned into coke. The last point, which is the largest part, by the way, 2 million tons. We have been able to do something pretty smart and with a very low CapEx, is to just invest in storage capacity to be able to segregate the new sulfur vacuum residue from the high sulfur vacuum residue. Before, there was no value of differentiating that severity because there was no price differential.
Today, the market value, of course, low sulfur is still compared to high sulfur is still. By doing this segregation, once again, with a very low CapEx, we have been able to give some value at this stream, and once again, reduce by 2 million tons a year our length. You see at the end of the day, we have a yield now, which is well below 5%, which basically says that we don't have a very significant exposure to the high sulfur fuel oil.
Well, that's for now. Sorry, the supply.
On the supply, like I said, the market today is 0.5 million tons. What we are seeing today is a lot of interest from ship owners about LNG, when to take decisions. Of course, we are going to leverage the first on our position on the supply side of what lies there. We don't have barges. We ordered other barges. We have one barge in Singapore, but New York, we are going to have two barges in Europe, and we are working on China and in the Middle East. We consider the new vessels that will be coming will be, again, for the container vessels, the bulk of them will be LNG. We consider that in 2025 only, that's when we see, because it takes a longer time to convert.
That's when you're going to see the shift in terms of the bunker vessels and the bulk carrier ships, that they will come in only in 2025. For now, the first movers will be, of course, the cruise vessels. Those are already there. The ferries, and then the container vessels. There is some consensus, the market going to 10 million tons in 2025, and then from there, increasing significantly to 2030.
Are you actually marketing a low sulfur fuel oil compliance bunker fuel? Will you just be manufacturing middle distillates and clearing that product as they go up?
Can you take it again?
Yeah. Are you marketing a compliance low sulfur fuel oil bunker fuel currently?
Not presently, we are. We are offering to our customers all products. [Bunker] is capable of supplying these goods and also the diesel. We offer the variety of products to our customers, either LNG or low sulfur diesel.
All right. We have a question from Lydia here.
Thank you. I have two questions again. On the petrochemical side, you talk, I think about 60% of the business being low-cost feedstock by 2025. I'm still not 100% or entirely sure what happens to the other 40% in terms of how do you deal with the part that isn't low cost. The second one was on the marketing side. If I look at that EUR 100 million uplift in cash flow and the idea that you want to open more than 4,000 stations, I'm finding it's about EUR 25,000 in cash flow per station. I was just wondering how that compared to, or how the cash flow from those new stations compares to the existing cash flow per station.
On the first question, yes, 60% of feed stocks we will process by 2025 will be low cost. Mainly gas-based, it's same propane and butane, and the 40% is going to be mainly Naphtha, because today, actually in Europe, we have Naphtha-based workers with some downstream derivatives which are linked to Naphtha. It's going to be, I would say, nice balance, and we will have a completely flexible setup in Europe from that standpoint. Today, it's exactly the contrary around. Today, we are 60% Naphtha, 40% low C4, and by 2025, it's going to be exactly the other way around.
On the EUR 100 million, we are going to generate 50%-55% of the EUR 100 million will be coming from retail business, not only fuel sales, but the non-fuel sales, too. 55% will come from retail, 30% will come from lubricants. I didn't mention our lubricant business, but that's part of the biggest business. That is a business where we're going to, especially, the volumes in lubricants are quite flat, even some areas going down, but the unit margins are growing. There we are going to generate 30%, and the rest, 15%, are what we call specialty products, which we sell of bitumen and other products. That's how. The 55%, you have the impact of the new sites, but you have the impact of non-fuel sales, too.
Question from Irene.
Thank you. I had three questions, actually. First one, on Petrochemicals. I think you referred to the current down cycle as short-term, or you expect it to be short-term. Some of your peers are talking about previous cycles lasting a very long time. My question is, obviously, we have six years to go to 2025, but if or when you risk your target CFFO of EUR 5 million for perhaps a longer duration down cycle, what sort of numbers, what range do you come up with? I had two questions, if I may, on the marketing side. First of all, a few years ago, you had mentioned in a similar event that in Africa, the banking system is very undeveloped, and there are no ATMs, and you aspired to use your service stations to provide that. Is that included in your plan for non-fuel?
Is that still happening? The second question on the non-fuel growth strategy, obviously, your peers are doing exactly the same thing. Clearly, selling food or insurance is not necessarily your area of expertise. I wonder, when you think about the risks or the threats surrounding that strategy, what are they? Thank you.
Maybe I'm going to answer the first question. Of course, we have learned the number, Irene, as you may guess. We didn't see, just to give you some order of magnitude. If you take the U.S. Gulf Coast, for example, under the 2017 to 2025. This period of time we are looking at. Today, we have 13, 14 million tons of new capacity coming in the eight years to come, the 2017 to 2025. 13, 14 million tons of actual capacity. That's basically four years of growth. If you say the market grows by 3% a year, it's three to four million tons a year. Basically, that's three, four years of growth, and it's completely absorbed. From that standpoint, the additional capacity over eight years for this time, I would say not so much concern. It's more, as I explained, a matter of phasing.
You have this short term of course, peak and then that will rebalance. That's our initial base. Then, of course, you have the Naphtha world, which is mainly the additional capacity coming on the eastern part of the world. That's mainly Asia, China. That's all Naphtha. First, it's not all aimed at producing polyethylene, because of course, there are other derivatives. Here again, these are not the most competitive crackers in the world. In years to come, if what you say were to be true, the cycle lasting longer, these crackers will be the, I suppose, I think the ones being the most impacted, suffering the most. Regardless of this simple math, the answer is very simple. We stick once again to our three basics, which give us very strong base to weather any cycle.
The first thing is that we bet on the low C4s. You have seen that they are completely disconnected to Naphtha. There is a notion, as we said today, that will stay for years to come. This advantage will stay. The second thing, of course, is we have, thanks to our downstream investments, low CapEx, because we leverage our platforms, which give us also very competitive CapEx. The first thing, of course, as explained, is to balance more and more the olefins. If you stick to these three rules, the cycle may last one more year or two. It doesn't matter so much, because you will be in a very strong position. That's our view.
The assumption that we are taking on petrochemical are very conservative. Behind the figures. We are very conservative because we experienced so long down cycles during years that we have to keep that in mind. The figures are quite solid from this perspective.
Yes. We have one question here.
One more time? Sorry.
Yes, it's on, too.
Three years ago, we mentioned that, and actually, that is happening today. We invested in two startup companies to accompany the process. One is we invested, and the system they are using is called Touchpoint. They have today 6,000 merchants that are active in that platform. They have 143 different services, be it to buy insurance, to make mobile payments, to make payments of bills, electricity bills. That is working today already, and we hold 31% of that company. There's another company we've invested in that is called Reason. Just to tell you what they are doing, I was in Africa some weeks ago, and they've won a contract in one of the countries in West Africa, and they are in charge of paying the scholarships. The government goes through the system to pay the scholarships to students.
The amount is being transferred by phone, so that students can have access to that, because some of the students are in rural areas where they don't have access to banking systems. That is already working, and we are part of the system, and that's part of the mainstream what we do in Africa. On the mainstream business in Europe, yes, all our competitors are doing that. I think we've developed through time expertise on that. Second, we have the outlets. To sell these things, you need outlets, and we have 6,000 outlets in Western Europe. They are stage 4 on the Total service stations. If you take cars, we are looking permanently at business with cars, not only in our service stations, but we are partnering now with parking units to bring that service in the parking.
Every time we are looking at ways to increase our business, and of course, going digital, for example, at the moment, and that's part of the things we are going to be in the Refinery 4.0. How are you going to manage risk management in terms of coverage? That might be minor, but very important to make sure that if you bring your car at five o'clock today, you can take the car, because you've already secured a slot prior to calling the service station.
All right. Now we have the question here.
Jason Gabelman from Cowen. Since Patrick mentioned it, I guess I'll ask, what is the underlying chain margin assumptions that you're using for this kind of EUR 1.5 billion of capital growth to 2025? Is this year, which has not been so strong for chem, a good year to benchmark against? Just to follow up on the IMO 2020 slide, there's a portion of crude flexibility that you point out between You have the ability to switch between high sulfur and low sulfur crude. What's kind of a level of that throughout your portfolio, and where do the prices need to go for that to be economic for you to do in terms of the low sulfur, high sulfur spreads? Thanks.
The first question is going to be pretty fast to answer. I'm not sure we're going to give you the margin, the underlying assumption. That will be for another time. On the flexibility between high sulfur and low sulfur, maybe we could put back the slide that I will show, because you saw that we have 1 million tons to play with low sulfur, high sulfur crude flexibility, which will depend actually on the spread between low sulfur fuel oil and gasoline. When you have low sulfur straight-runs, typically, you may decide to give up the stream either to gasoline or to FCC or to do a low sulfur fuel oil. It really depends on the spread. It really depends on the market conditions.
For a given month, you may think it's more economical to give up the stream to have FCC, in other words, to do a low sulfur oil, and we want to keep this flexibility also with high sulfur. That's why it's clearly something we pilot, but that's obviously the job of a refiner, to pilot the refinery and to try in the linear program to optimize the margin and win on the best cracks.
Sorry. Just in terms of up volumes, in order of magnitude, is there any indication of maybe the hundreds of thousands, tens of thousands?
No.
All right. Thanks.
We are talking about 1 million ton. Just keep in mind it's not very material, no.
Any other questions? Yes, please.
Hi, it's Henry Tarr from Berenberg. Two questions. Just to come back on the franchise retail stations versus the equity, I guess. What do the economics of franchise look versus owning your own retail in terms of CapEx, the value per station, and the returns profile of the two? That would be helpful. Then you're entering Brazil on the retail side as well. Have you any interest in going upstream to biofuels in the country?
Look, the franchise model works like this. Today, you invest 25% of what you would invest in company-owned service stations. The source of revenues are for a brand fee, because you're bringing your brand. Margins on the supplied products, because we insist to be the one supplying fuels. Because you have an issue of the value of your brand, and you don't want to dilute the value of your brand by selling adulterated fuels. It's very important that you are involved in the supply of fuels. There you have margins. Of course, my card system is a proprietary system. If a third party wants to use it, of course, there's a fee to be paid. In terms of capital you need to compare to the CapEx, it's similar to company-owned service stations, basically. Because you have different streams of revenues.
Biofuel.
Sorry. The biofuels in Belgium, we do not intend to buy 100%. If the question is, are you going to buy biofuel? No, that's not our intention. What we intend to do is, when looking at opportunities of growth, we give more incline to make acquisition of companies where the percentage of biofuels are the highest. Because in Belgium, you have difference depending on the states.
The question was, does this mean do you want to invest in biofuel production?
In production.
That's for you, Bernard.
It was mentioned in Belgium, biofuel production.
Okay, answer is no.
No. Okay.
All right. One question here.
Yeah. Hi, James at Exane BNP Paribas. Again, just one for you, Bernard. I know that the presentation is about growth, but I want to ask about refining, and particularly as we get into the middle of the next decade, and we think about the challenges to the European refining system. Have you got any plans around either this divestment or repurposing of some of those refinery assets that are the means that maybe is not talked about today that we should be thinking about?
First, we have done a lot already. If you remember, since 2010, I think we reduced our capacity by more than 20%, which is by far more than the average of industry in Europe. I would say a lot has been done to reposition our system. There is still a large investment to do in Dunkerque. This is a refinery where we still have some grading to do and to put this refinery, I would say, at the target of the EUR 20 breaking-even point. After all, though, we think that yes, there will be more capacity coming. That's true. We see it, and we just need to stick to what has been our success so far, which is to focus on what we control. Which means we will keep improving our availability as we have done in the past, and working on the energy efficiency.
That's all what I can tell you when it comes to that subject.
It was about how do you phase out your refining business in Europe? What is your phased-out plan of refining business?
In Europe.
In Europe.
Okay.
The answer is transforming that into bio-
Into a bio-refinery.
Like we've done in Belgium.
Like we did in Belgium. Okay. Any other questions?
Yes. Here we are.
Thanks. Just one more for me. Can we just talk about the digitalization, perhaps something from both of you in terms of what you're seeing there, that EUR 500 million, and just give some examples around that? Thank you.
Okay. The assets were already starting to move. For example, I'm just going to give you one example. We developed a system. When you are an owner of a chain of shops in Europe, your pain point is where my sellers are. The issue is that you have your shops and you have a number of sellers across Europe. The question is, at any given time, you want to know where your seller is. We developed a system. We are selling to shop owners, fleet owners, that allow them to locate a device that is costing EUR 6 a device. They're able to see where the seller is and to optimize the usage of the seller. That's one thing. I mentioned earlier the issue of load management for cars. That is a pain point.
For me, the main pain points for me, for the movement of the cars, always is that you come to the service stations and you see the queue. You have to take the queue for 20 minutes. When we started working on a system whereby at 5:00, I book for 6:15 at seat 8. At 6:15, I pay in advance, of course, because I don't want no-show. At 6:15, you are there. And within Total Risk management, if it goes at 6:00, you can have a discount. If you come on a Saturday or Sunday, you pay the high price. All these types of things we are developing now, we are quite enthusiastic about that. We are doing that on sales of heating shields. That's already in place today in France.
If you want to order a heating shield from Total, you go into our system, depending on if you want to be delivered within 24 hours or within a shorter time, in two hours time, you pay a different price. Already in place.
You said that refining a large part is just to do, of course, with margin optimization. In the typical process today, you got some crude, you put that into your [LP program], you run it, you process your crude. At the end of the day, you end up with a mass balance and some yield, and you see the gap between what you were supposed to get and what you got. That simple. You keep adapting your model for the next month, and you run it again and again and again. With digital, even if you suggest that maybe digital, you will be able to do it in real-time, which means you can really optimize your units as they process the crude, and you don't need to run it once right afterwards.
The more you run it, the more you learn, and the more you will be able to adapt it real-time. At CTT, the kind of process we are working on, which means, of course, a very significant amount of money because it has to do with margin, as an example.
Okay, I do not see any other arms being raised, so that's going to close this session. I want to thank you all for your attention during the day and tell you that you're invited for dinner. That's going to take place at Bobby Van's, just two minutes walking distance from here on 25 Broad Street. Thank you. Actually, it's 5:45.