scholarly journals Woody Biomass Mobilization for Bioenergy in a Constrained Landscape: A Case Study from Cold Lake First Nations in Alberta, Canada

Energies ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (23) ◽  
pp. 6289
Author(s):  
Nicolas Mansuy ◽  
Diana Staley ◽  
Leila Taheriazad
Keyword(s):  
Natural Gas ◽  
First Nations ◽  
Oil And Gas ◽  
Cost Savings ◽  
Woody Biomass ◽  
Indigenous Communities ◽  
Ghg Mitigation ◽  
Oil And Gas Producers ◽  
Human Footprint ◽  
Cold Lake

Wood-based bioenergy systems developed and managed by Indigenous communities can improve their ability to thrive and grow economically and socially and improve their resource-based decision-making processes. In this study, we collaborated with Cold Lake First Nations (CLFN), a community located in Northern Alberta, Canada, to investigate the opportunities and challenges of biomass mobilization from different feedstocks. Based on remote sensing and ground data, harvest residue and fire residue feedstocks were identified within the boundaries of the community and inside a radius of 200 km at 18 and 39 oven-dry metric tonnes (odt)/ha, respectively. CLFN also received woody biomass from local oil and gas producers that operate in their traditional territory, which is estimated at 19,000 odt/year. Despite being abundant, the woody biomass is difficult to access due to the extensive human footprint that surrounds the area and constrains the landscape. In terms of greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation, the potential also appears limited because the community has access to natural gas at a competitive and stable price, unlike off-grid communities. In terms of cost savings, the low oil and gas prices make the biomass resources (pellets) less competitive to utilize than the natural gas that is available in the community.

Accelerating oil and gas investment and reserves by design

2018 ◽  
Vol 58 (2) ◽  
pp. 557
Author(s):  
Barry A. Goldstein
Keyword(s):  
Natural Gas ◽  
Fossil Fuels ◽  
Oil And Gas ◽  
South Australia ◽  
Land Access ◽  
Oil And Gas Exploration ◽  
Oil And Gas Producers ◽  
Crude Oil Prices ◽  
Exploration And Production ◽  
Oil And Gas Operations

Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence (Adams 1770). Some people unfamiliar with upstream petroleum operations, some enterprises keen to sustain uncontested land use, and some people against the use of fossil fuels have and will voice opposition to land access for oil and gas exploration and production. Social and economic concerns have also arisen with Australian domestic gas prices tending towards parity with netbacks from liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports. No doubt, natural gas, LNG and crude-oil prices will vary with local-to-international supply-side and demand-side competition. Hence, well run Australian oil and gas producers deploy stress-tested exploration, delineation and development budgets. With these challenges in mind, successive governments in South Australia have implemented leading-practice legislation, regulation, policies and programs to simultaneously gain and sustain trust with the public and investors with regard to land access for trustworthy oil and gas operations. South Australia’s most recent initiatives to foster reserve growth through welcomed investment in responsible oil and gas operations include the following: a Roundtable for Oil and Gas; evergreen answers to frequently asked questions, grouped retention licences that accelerate investment in the best of play trends; the Plan for ACcelerating Exploration (PACE) Gas Program; and the Oil and Gas Royalty Return Program. Intended and actual outcomes from these initiatives are addressed in this extended abstract.

Can a formalised model of co-production contribute to empowering indigenous communities in decisions about land use?

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan Gillies
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Cultural Heritage ◽  
First Nations ◽  
Oil And Gas ◽  
Indigenous Communities ◽  
Heritage Management ◽  
Cultural Heritage Management ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The Uk

Purpose Co-production has been used in public services in the UK areas such as mental health to improve the participation of service users in decisions made about the services traditionally provided for them and done to them. It has also been used in areas such as mental health and to address concerns about the quality of services provided to members of minority communities. Western Australia is currently passing legislation to address the issue of aboriginal cultural heritage management in the context of recent adverse incidents such as the incident where Rio Tinto was responsible for the destruction of the site. This paper aims to show how a formalised model of co-production can assist in the implementation of this legislation. Design/methodology/approach This paper considers how effective co-production has been within the domain of mental health services in the UK and then considers whether they are lessons that may be learnt in other contexts. It considers whether concepts from co-production have a role to play in ensuring that the legislation and its implementation are not seen as actions done to or on behalf of the aboriginal communities and if a more structured approach to coproduction can produce a model, which facilitates genuinely collaborative aboriginal heritage management. Findings The approach has facilitated the development of a model to monitor and improve collaboration within aboriginal cultural heritage management, which complements existing participatory approaches and enables businesses to demonstrate their legislatory compliance. Social implications The study offers an approach, which may be used globally to empower indigenous communities in decision-making in other contexts, such as deforestation in South America and oil and gas exploitation on Inuit and First Nations land in Canada. Originality/value The use of co-production concepts and capability modelling is novel in this space.

Main approaches to estimating the cost of shareholder equity of oil and gas producers

2020 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 685-697
Author(s):  
O.V. Shimko
Keyword(s):  
Oil And Gas ◽  
Oil Prices ◽  
Minimum Cost ◽  
Free Cash Flow ◽  
Annual Reports ◽  
Comparative Approach ◽  
Economic Activities ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
Oil And Gas Producers ◽  
The Cost

Subject. The study analyzes generally accepted approaches to assessing the value of companies on the basis of financial statement data of ExxonMobil, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, Occidental Petroleum, Devon Energy, Anadarko Petroleum, EOG Resources, Apache, Marathon Oil, Imperial Oil, Suncor Energy, Husky Energy, Canadian Natural Resources, Royal Dutch Shell, Gazprom, Rosneft, LUKOIL, and others, for 1999—2018. Objectives. The aim is to determine the specifics of using the methods of cost, DFC, and comparative approaches to assessing the value of share capital of oil and gas companies. Methods. The study employs methods of statistical analysis and generalization of materials of scientific articles and official annual reports on the results of financial and economic activities of the largest public oil and gas corporations. Results. Based on the results of a comprehensive analysis, I identified advantages and disadvantages of standard approaches to assessing the value of oil and gas producers. Conclusions. The paper describes pros and cons of the said approaches. For instance, the cost approach is acceptable for assessing the minimum cost of small companies in the industry. The DFC-based approach complicates the reliability of medium-term forecasts for oil prices due to fluctuations in oil prices inherent in the industry, on which the net profit and free cash flow of companies depend to a large extent. The comparative approach enables to quickly determine the range of possible value of the corporation based on transactions data and current market situation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document