welcome to your cdp climate change questionnaire 2019 c0 ......ptt exploration & production...

PTT Exploration & Production Public Company Limited CDP Climate Change Questionnaire 2019 Monday, August 5, 2019

1

Welcome to your CDP Climate Change

Questionnaire 2019

C0. Introduction

C0.1

(C0.1) Give a general description and introduction to your organization.

PTT Exploration and Production Public Company Limited (PTTEP), a Thai national petroleum

exploration and production organization, is a publicly listed company on the Thai stock

exchange, and a subsidiary of PTT Public Company Limited, Thailand’s national petroleum

company. PTTEP’s mission is to operate globally to provide reliable energy supply and

sustainable value to all stakeholders. Therefore, we set our vision to be an energy partner of

choice through competitive performance and innovation for long-term value creations.

In order to shape the behaviour and culture of the company in pursue of our vision, PTTEP’s

company values, “EP SPIRIT”, reflex key success factors and drivers of our business in which

PTTEP expects these values to be embedded into every PTTEP individual to generate our

corporate DNA of “Passion to Explore with Responsibility”.

PTTEP has worldwide operations of 40 projects in 11 countries as of December 2018.

The company is engaged in the exploration, extraction, production and development of

petroleum products. It produces crude oil, condensate, natural gas and liquefied petroleum gas

(LPG). The company is also engaged in petroleum-related businesses, such as jetty, bulk tanks

and warehouse management.

C0.2

(C0.2) State the start and end date of the year for which you are reporting data.

Start date End date Indicate if you are providing emissions data for past

reporting years

Row

1

January 1,

2018

December 31,

2018

No

C0.3

(C0.3) Select the countries/regions for which you will be supplying data.

Australia

Myanmar

Thailand


2

C0.4

(C0.4) Select the currency used for all financial information disclosed throughout your

response.

THB

C0.5

(C0.5) Select the option that describes the reporting boundary for which climate-

related impacts on your business are being reported. Note that this option should

align with your consolidation approach to your Scope 1 and Scope 2 greenhouse gas

inventory.

Operational control

C-OG0.7

(C-OG0.7) Which part of the oil and gas value chain and other areas does your

organization operate in?

Row 1

Oil and gas value chain

Upstream

Other divisions

C1. Governance

C1.1

(C1.1) Is there board-level oversight of climate-related issues within your

organization?

Yes

C1.1a

(C1.1a) Identify the position(s) (do not include any names) of the individual(s) on the

board with responsibility for climate-related issues.

Position of

individual(s)

Please explain

Director on

board

CEO is as member of Board of Directors (BoD) who direct company vision ,

mission, objective and strategy of business development including sustainability. As

a representative of BoD, CEO cascades company direction via top managements

through relevant management committees including Climate Change Committee


3

(CCC ) , Risk Management Committee (RMC), Sustainable Development (SD)

Committee, Climate Change Committee (CCC, currently integration with SD

Committee) , and Safety, Security, Health and Environment (SSHE) Council.

CEO adopt Climate related target as individual KPI and deployed through his

subordinates, where the performance are followed up on a quarterly basis. In

addition, Risk Management Committee which is a Board level committee regularly

assessed enterprise risks including the Climate related risks. Compliment to

operational related Climate target, the Board approved the Reforestation initiative

under the GHG Reduction and Offsetting roadmap.

C1.1b

(C1.1b) Provide further details on the board’s oversight of climate-related issues.

Frequency with

which climate-

related issues are

a scheduled

agenda item

Governance

mechanisms into

which climate-related

issues are integrated

Please explain

Scheduled – some

meetings

Reviewing and guiding

strategy


major plans of action


risk management

policies


annual budgets


business plans

Setting performance

objectives

Monitoring

implementation and

performance of

objectives

Overseeing major

capital expenditures,

acquisitions and

divestitures

Monitoring and

overseeing progress

against goals and

targets for addressing

climate-related issues

In order to moving towards our goal of Low-Carbon

footprint organization and ensuring achievement of

GHG reduction target, Climate related strategy and

relevant policy and plans of action, is oriented by our

Board of Director, will be at least quarterly reviewed

via company performance monitoring. The agenda for

the meeting will not be fixed for any issues, however

when the climate related issues e.g. climate strategy

and related business plan, acquisition and divestiture,

etc. are raised, such agenda. will be reserved. Hence

CEO and top management are responsible for

briefing the BoD on that matter. For example, external

parties require disclosure of PTTEP’s supplementary

data and information regarding climate related issues,

e.g. company performance and target, etc. apart from

published report, this issue will be brought to the BoD

meeting for review and consideration.


4

C1.2

(C1.2) Provide the highest management-level position(s) or committee(s) with

responsibility for climate-related issues.

Name of the

position(s) and/or

committee(s)

Responsibility Frequency of

reporting to the

board on climate-

related issues

Chief Executive

Officer (CEO)

Both assessing and managing climate-related risks

and opportunities

Quarterly

Other C-Suite

Officer, please

specify

SD and SSHE Council

Other, please specify

governance committee to oversee the management of safety, security, health and environment including climate related issues of PTTEP under the umbrella of SD Policy and SD Roadmap

Quarterly

C1.2a

(C1.2a) Describe where in the organizational structure this/these position(s) and/or

committees lie, what their associated responsibilities are, and how climate-related

issues are monitored (do not include the names of individuals).

Climate-related issues e.g. climate related strategy, relevant policy, risks and opportunities is

oriented by our Board of Director whose will be at least quarterly reviewed via company

performance review and monitoring. However, the related agenda will be additionally reserved

once the climate related issues e.g. climate strategy and related business plan, acquisition and

divestiture, etc. are raised. CEO and top management are responsible for briefing the BoD on

that matter. For example, external parties require disclosure of PTTEP’s supplementary data

and information regarding climate related issues, e.g. company performance and target, etc.

apart from published report, this issue will be brought to the BoD meeting for review and

consideration.

In addition, Risk Management Committee which is a Board level committee regularly assessed

enterprise risks including the Climate related risks. Compliment to operational related Climate

target, the Board approved the Reforestation initiative under the GHG Reduction roadmap for

Offset. Corporate Governance Board is in charge of annual budget, implementation progress

and performance monitoring oversight on a quarterly basis.

Sustanability Development (SD) and -Safety, Security, Health, Environment (SSHE) Council is

the highest governance committee to oversee safety, security, health and environment of

PTTEP under the umbrella of SD Policy and SD Roadmap and chaired by the Chief Executive

Officer (CEO). The Council consists of Executive and Senior Vice Presidents from diverse

backgrounds and functional groups and divisions to provide a balanced view on SD and SSHE

approach. To help the Council with the execution of SD and SSHE initiatives, there is a

Sustainable Development Working Team (SD Working Team) consisting of representatives


5

from multiple functions. The SD Working Team is responsible for defining strategy, roadmap,

key performance indicators, action plan, guidelines & tools; performance monitoring;

supervising compliance; and reporting to the Council. The Council meetings are held every

quarters to review and endorse SD and SSHE related issues, i.e. PTTEP GHG reduction target

and performance monitoring, energy efficiency roadmap and target, and DJSI achievement

plans.

PTTEP also supports the United Nations Sustainable Development Agenda. In 2017 all 17

Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) were reviewed by the Council. To ensure our

alignment with SDGs, our targets, strategies, roadmap development and implementation are

monitored against the SDGs. For an example of Goal 13: Climate action, we targeted to reduce

GHG emission intensity by at least 20% and 25% by 2020 and 2030 respectively compared to

the 2012 base year, reduce GHG emission by 220,500 tonnes of CO2e in 2018 and reduce

energy consumption intensity by 5% by 2020 compared to the 2012 base year. In 2018, we

have progress on our reduction of GHG emission intensity by 7.2%, reduction on GHG

emission by 269,412 tonnes of CO2e. However, the energy consumption intensity increased by

5% compared to the 2012 base year as a result of our field life matured and consumed more

energy for production. PTTEP keeps monitoring and improving our performance to achieve our

targets which also aligned with SDGs via the council.

C1.3

(C1.3) Do you provide incentives for the management of climate-related issues,

including the attainment of targets?

Yes

C1.3a

(C1.3a) Provide further details on the incentives provided for the management of

climate-related issues (do not include the names of individuals).

Who is entitled to benefit from these incentives?

Chief Executive Officer (CEO)

Types of incentives

Monetary reward

Activity incentivized

Emissions reduction target

Comment

PTTEP has short and medium term GHG emissions intensity reduction targets endorsed

by SD-SSHE Council Committee in which CEO acts as chairman. For the medium term

target, PTTEP aims to at least reduce 25% GHG intensity by 2030 relative to 2012 base

year covering all operating assets under our operational control.

Achievement of this target includes in sustainability dimension of company KPI such as


6

achievement of DJSI listed company in which our company is awarded for 5 consecutive

years. The company KPI was allocated at 5% to the DJSI achievement. This links to

salary increasing and bonus consideration of CEO.

Moreover, percentage of GHG emissions reduction has been set as SSHE KPI since

2013. As a corporate KPI, the target is cascaded to the functional group, the department

and the individual level of relevant employees and included in the individual balance

score card that influences bonus allocation.


All employees

Types of incentives

Monetary reward


Emissions reduction project

Comment

In addition to emissions reduction target, PTTEP also bestows awards upon those within

the company who have achieved excellence in the areas of innovation and performance

excellence:

1. Innovation Award - is a contest on innovative concepts or creative new ideas on work

process, technology and green practice to support PTTEP business in both technical

and non-technical areas.

2. Performance Excellence Award – is an award for employees (as an individual or a

team) to increase operational efficiency, operational excellence, and benefit to business

and society by submitting projects for the award competition through each functional

group. The criteria include benefits and revenue generated to the company, cost

savings, knowledge management and sharing, team collaboration effort across the

organization and promotes green practice (low carbon and low environmental impacts).

The team winner will all receive a monetary award for their achievements.


All employees

Types of incentives

Recognition (non-monetary)


Efficiency project

Comment

PTTEP Technical forum – is a non-monetary recognition for employees to build,

maintain and develop the highest possible standards in the company’s technical


7

capabilities and staff competencies; serve as an effective venue in sharing and

transferring petroleum industry knowledge, best practices and technical experience, and

to function as a challenging venue for PTTEP technical professionals to participate in

and gain experience from a world-class petroleum industry technical conference.


Buyers/purchasers

Types of incentives

Monetary reward


Environmental criteria included in purchases

Comment

PTTEP has in place the PTTEP Vendor Sustainable Code of Conduct which governs

the conduct of vendors on issues relating to their business operations and ethics,

human rights, occupational health and safety, as well as environmental expectations.

The company also developed a PTTEP Green Procurement Roadmap and set the goal

to increase the green procurement to 30% of total spending by 2022. To achieve this

goal, we developed the “Green Procurement Criteria” for each of the work categories,

which were then certified by the Thailand Environment Institute (TEI), and also

developed an approach to evaluate the environmental considerations of procurement

practices.

Procurement department as the company buyers/purchasers set KPI to allocated at 8%

to the achievement of 2018 green procurement related work. This links to salary

increasing and bonus consideration of VP and cascades to the individual level of

relevant employees and included in the individual balance score card that influences

bonus allocation.

In 2018, green procurement constituted 9% of total procurement value in 2018.

C2. Risks and opportunities

C2.1

(C2.1) Describe what your organization considers to be short-, medium- and long-term

horizons.

From (years) To (years) Comment

Short-term 1 5

Medium-term 6 15

Long-term 16 35


8

C2.2

(C2.2) Select the option that best describes how your organization's processes for

identifying, assessing, and managing climate-related issues are integrated into your

overall risk management.

Integrated into multi-disciplinary company-wide risk identification, assessment, and management

processes

C2.2a

(C2.2a) Select the options that best describe your organization's frequency and time

horizon for identifying and assessing climate-related risks.

Frequency

of

monitoring

How far into the

future are risks

considered?

Comment

Row

1

Six-monthly

or more

frequently

>6 years In 2013 a Climate Change Risk Assessment (CCRA) was

conducted for the time periods 2014 (short-term), 2020 and

2030. We incorporated the risks, opportunities and

mitigation measures into the company wide risk

management system known as the SAP GRC system to

analyze our climate change risks and update on our

mitigation progresses quarterly. In 2014, we extended our

risk assessment time horizons to 2015 (short-term), 2030

(medium-term) and 2050 (long-term). Risks are categorized

in three areas: physical, market and regulatory. The

preliminary climate change risk assessment, after

endorsement by the SD-SSHE Council has been included

into the Enterprise/Company-wide risk management

process.

C2.2b

(C2.2b) Provide further details on your organization’s process(es) for identifying and

assessing climate-related risks.

In the context that Thailand is committed to reduce GHG emissions by 20% by 2030, while the

end use of energy is accounted for more than 75% of national GHG Emission, the effects of

future regulatory and policy changes will inevitably land on the energy industry. With the

government’s determination to “head towards sustainable low carbon growth” stipulated in the

Thailand Climate Change Master Plan (2015-2050), this poses regulatory and compliance risks

for the sector to adapt in line with new regulations in the near future. The Alternative Energy

Development Plan in 2015-2036 is also set to increase 30% of alternative energy consumption,

which directly affects demands of non-renewable energy. This increasingly poses risks to the

existing market demand of fossil fuel, while promote more advanced low carbon and renewable

energy technologies. Today, the awareness of climate change impacts are stronger than ever,

society expects leading energy companies to adapt towards green economy at a faster pace.


9

The conventional perception of not-so-green oil and gas industry may also pose reputational

risks for companies who are slow to adapt to low carbon future. With this regard, PTTEP has

considered the climate change issues as corporate/enterprise risk and need to be assessed

and monitored carefully.

PTTEP has our own process to identify and assess climate related risks in which 3 key

business areas are involved, i.e. physical, market, and regulatory risk. The process also

indicates corresponding adaptation responses available to PTTEP to manage changes

associated with future climate change and provides PTTEP with a framework for continual

review and assessment as well as allows the cost of potential impacts and management

options to be integrated into business planning.

The risk assessment process adopted the PTTEP Corporate Risk Matrix as a basis to assess

the physical asset, regulatory and market risks. This ensured a consistency of risk allocation

during risk assessment processes. Risks identified in the 3 key areas were ranked according to

Likelihood (Score 1-4) and Consequence which is categorized into 5 levels of financial impact

based on PTTEP’s Risk Management Standard. The cost of potential impacts is divided into 5

categories dependent on impact level following to PTTEP risk matrix: <2, 2-20, 20-200, 200-

2,000, >2,000 MMUSD. The cost over than 20 MMUSD is defined as substantive impact.

C2.2c

(C2.2c) Which of the following risk types are considered in your organization's

climate-related risk assessments?

Relevance &

inclusion

Please explain

Current

regulation

Relevant,

always

included

Current regulation is classified as a Rregulatory related risks. Both

current and emerging regulation are one of the key business areas

under our climate risk assessment and management process. Many

current regulatory risk aspects are identified, assessed and managed

by our company, e.g. adoption of carbon price penalty/tax in

countries where we operate or invest such as Thailand, Myanmar,

and Australia, etc.

Emerging

regulation

Relevant,

always

included

Emerging regulation is classified as a regulatory related risks both

current and emerging regulation are one of the key business areas

under our climate risk assessment and management process. Many

emerging regulatory risk aspects are identified, assessed and

managed by our company, e.g. restrictions and increased regulation

of flaring activities, new developments required to sequester GHG

emissions, national adaptation framework development etc. in

countries where we operate or invest such as Thailand, Myanmar

and Australia, etc.


10

Technology Relevant,

always

included

Technology related risks are already integrating and merging with

the market risks assessment e.g. increase in alternative energy, and

decreased fossil fuel investment etc.

Legal Relevant,

always

included

Legal related risks are already considered integrating and merging

with the regulation risks assessment e.g. adoption of carbon price

penalty/tax in countries where we operate or invest such as Canada,

Australia and Algeria etc.

Market Relevant,

always

included

Market related risk aspects that included in the assessment are, e.g.,

adaptation of cap and trade regime, increase in alternative energy,

increase in insurance costs and decreased fossil fuel investment etc.

Reputation Relevant,

always

included

Reputation risk is integrated into market and regulatory related risk.

An increasing focus on energy efficiency regulations and renewable

energy targets by government, as well as an increase in low carbon

based investment , is likely to drive further change in energy

demand. For example, “low carbon” supply chain initiative as well as

“low carbon” city and municipalities is identified as market risk which

may impact to company reputation in case our portfolio remains

focus on exploration, extraction, production and development of

petroleum products and not transform to low carbon or renewable

energy.

Acute

physical

Relevant,

always

included

The acute physical risks e.g. increases and decrease in precipitation,

increases and decrease in evaporation and humidity, tropical

cyclones, flooding and water availability are integrated in the

assessment by considered in term of the developed climate

variables. The acute physical risks could impact to our operations i.e.

the possibility of significant damage to infrastructure and long term

disruption to operations through changing cyclonic events and

seasonal periods as well as an accessibility to our facilities both

onshore and offshore.

Chronic

physical

Relevant,

always

included

The chronic physical risks e.g. increase or decrease of temperature,

are integrated in the assessment by considering in term of the

developed climate variables. The chronic physical risks could impact

to our operations i.e. disrupting infrastructure and operations through

efficiency loss or increased failure rates of equipment and

infrastructure due to changes in temperature and acidity for example.

Upstream Not relevant,

explanation

provided

The PTTEP’s major activities are related to oil and exploration and

production which is classified as an upstream business of oil and gas

industry. Therefore, upstream can be considered as non-material risk

of PTTEP.

Downstream Relevant,

always

included

Downstream related risks are already considered integrating and

merging with the regulation risks assessment e.g. carbon offset and

emission reduction regimes, increase in alternative energy and

decrease in fossil fuel investment etc.


11

C2.2d

(C2.2d) Describe your process(es) for managing climate-related risks and

opportunities.

PTTEP has operations in various countries. Some are subject, at a national level, to emission

caps associated with the Paris Agreement. Although regulations concerning climate change are

still developing, we do consider climate change risks & opportunities and financial implications

of operating and investing in carbon-constrained countries such as Canada, Australia, and

Algeria. On a company level the Environment Management Department is responsible for

implementing risk/opportunity assessment. The SD-SSHE Council approves the results of the

risk assessment and then the results are incorporated into the company wide (enterprise)

risk. It is the Environment Management Department’s responsibility to update the company-

wide mitigation plans on a quarterly basis. PTTEP evaluated its country-level risk profile by

performing a Climate Change Risk Assessment (CCRA) on all countries of its

operations. Climate change opportunities were also evaluated in the CCRA. Our risk profile

indicated that the company is not yet exposed to significant climate change related risks. Risks

and opportunities are also evaluated every five years or once new asset acquired and

monitored the mitigation quarterly via PTTEP’s SAP GRC system by corporate risk

management team and risk management committee. At asset level, PTTEP’s operations are

mainly located in Thailand and around the world. The nature of the E&P business facilities are

mainly composed of several wellheads in the same region, hence our asset-level risk

assessment is defined by region rather than individual facilities. PTTEP performed a CCRA to

evaluate both risks and opportunities at an asset level. Monitoring of the risk is done by the

Corporate Environment Management Department in conjunction with the asset group. For

example, when “swell impact on production and wellhead platforms” as a physical risk is

identified. The determination of likelihood (Rare, Unlikely, Possible, and Likely) and financial

impact (2 - 20, 20 - 200, 200 - 2,000, and >2,000 MMUSD) based on PTTEP’s internally

developed risk matrix is consequently assessed. As all assessed climate related risks of

PTTEP are under medium to low level, therefore, the actions is to maintain our existing

mitigation measures and performance. It is also required to closely monitor and re-assess once

any significant change occurred. For regulatory and market (financial) risks, 'increased

insurance costs & decreases fossil fuel investment’ as an example, the risk determination

process is similar to the physical risk. Changes to insurance costs and fossil fuel investment

could impact the industry and PTTEP, although the fossil fuel divestment is expected to have a

lesser impact on PTTEP. Increases in insurance costs are expected to impact PTTEP Thailand

offshore assets as well as Canada where insurance premium increases will have an impact on

overall revenue. We strive to bring all risks to the ALARP (as low as reasonably practicable)

threshold level. The identified risk and opportunities will be quarterly monitored as mentioned in

the above paragraph. For regulatory and market (financial) risks, “increased alternative energy

adoption’ as an example, the risk determination process is similar to the physical risk. In

addition, PTTEP has explored investment opportunities in potential new business to enhance

the company’s competitiveness and future sustainable growth. The opportunities considered is

also included the investment on renewable energy. PTTEP also has established new

organization to study transformation opportunity of our business including R&D section to

develop i.e. carbon high value products, carbon capture and utilization from waste/excess/flare

gases. One of their missions is focused on new business development and diversification.


12

C2.3

(C2.3) Have you identified any inherent climate-related risks with the potential to have

a substantive financial or strategic impact on your business?

Yes

C2.3a

(C2.3a) Provide details of risks identified with the potential to have a substantive

financial or strategic impact on your business.

Identifier

Risk 1

Where in the value chain does the risk driver occur?

Direct operations

Risk type

Transition risk

Primary climate-related risk driver

Policy and legal: Other

Type of financial impact

Increased operating costs (e.g., higher compliance costs, increased insurance

premiums)

Company- specific description

Our Mariana Oil Sands asset in Alberta is currently under PTTEP’s operational control

and in the exploration phase with the target of first steam within the next 5-10 years.

Therefore, the impact is mainly depend on emission during production phase which is

not yet clear and then considered as long-term and at low risk. Alberta’s current climate

change policy includes CAD $30/tonne tax on emissions over 100,000 tonnes of

greenhouse gas annually. There is a possibility that the limit of greenhouse gas

emissions may be lowered or the taxation amount to increase, leading to a higher

operating cost for PTTEP. For example, impact calculated at $30CAD/tonne with

400,000 tCO2/year emission, therefore, emissions over 100,000 tonnes = 300,000

tCO2/year which is eligible for tax at exchange rate $1CAD=23.5 THB, thus potential

financial impact = 211,500,000 THB

Time horizon

Long-term

Likelihood

Virtually certain

Magnitude of impact


13

Low

Are you able to provide a potential financial impact figure?

Yes, a single figure estimate

Potential financial impact figure (currency)

211,500,000

Potential financial impact figure – minimum (currency)

Potential financial impact figure – maximum (currency)

Explanation of financial impact figure

Impact calculated at $30CAD/tonne with 400,000 tCO2/year emission (emissions over

100,000 tonnes = 300,000 tCO2/year which is eligible for tax at exchange rate

$1CAD=23.5 THB, thus potential financial impact = 211,500,000 THB ), however,

unlikely to be implemented with preference for trading scheme.

Management method

PTTEP follows Company Risk Management Procedure to mitigate this risk. Apart from

using the carbon price in our Mariana economic model, PTTEP has included carbon

price policy into Environmental Management Standard to anticipate future tax burden

and reduce the tax liability. In 2018, we have continued studying on the potential

implementation and impact of carbon price to our operation. The mitigation schemes to

reduce GHG emission was evaluated to compare with paying of carbon tax by using

carbon pricing concept. For example, in case Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) is

implemented to be zero continuous flaring reduction, investment cost of this mitigation

will be of 30 MMUSD approx. (1 USD = 32 THB, then = 960,000,000 THB). In addition,

carbon tax risk included into organization risk management and green practice strategy

which dictates greenhouse gas reductions initiatives, energy efficiency improvement and

other carbon offsetting schemes into our operations.

Cost of management

960,000,000

Comment

Identifier

Risk 2


Direct operations

Risk type

Transition risk


14


Policy and legal: Other


Increased operating costs (e.g., higher compliance costs, increased insurance

premiums)


We considered impact of carbon taxes and cap and trade mechanisms, including

internal emissions reduction requirements in the future (expected not occur within 5

years). PTTEP is prepared to respond to a carbon emissions cap or a carbon emissions

market in Thailand which could be leading to a higher operating cost for PTTEP or

impact to our ability and strategy on diversification to renewable energy within the short

period.

Time horizon

Long-term

Likelihood

Very likely

Magnitude of impact

Low




360,000,000




Impact is calculated based on emission exceeding government ceiling. Estimated

amount of emission for Thailand assets is 1.8 million tCO2/year with carbon price of 200

THB per tCO2 emitted.

Management method

PTTEP wants to be proactive in engaging in the carbon market. For example, it has

already been involved in the creation of the Sao-Thien A (oil field) Flare Gas Recovery

and Utilization Project as a CDM project. Currently, PTTEP has been certified by

UNFCCC. We also keep on tracking of carbon tax scheme development with the

government by e.g. attend the meetings/workshops to be proactive in the government

directions and policies.

CDM Management at Sao Thien A is approximately 2 MM USD (60 MM THB) per year.


15

This is calculated based on the estimated lifting cost 0.014 MM THB/day which is

derived from i.e. production operations cost, facility maintenance & inspection cost and

well services, 1 USD = 32.31 THB

Cost of management

2,300,000,000

Comment

Identifier

Risk 3


Direct operations

Risk type

Physical risk


Acute: Increased severity of extreme weather events such as cyclones and floods


Reduced revenue from decreased production capacity (e.g., delayed planning

approvals, supply chain interruptions)


Swell impact on production and wellhead platforms from cyclonic events can be

occurred. Swell height increases associated with increased tropical cyclone severity

may exceed the current production platform design basis for offshore assets e.g. Arthit,

Bongkot and Zawtika. Following to swell projections, this event is not expected be

occurred before 2030. However, the swell height projections are reviewing every 2

years. In case that assessment of probability of the swell height will reach or exceeding

platform height, management of potential impact require shut down of operations and

jacking up of structures to increase height.

Time horizon

Long-term

Likelihood

Unlikely

Magnitude of impact

Medium-high




16


1,890,000,000




Based on assumption that Thailand offshore operations are disrupted 7 days, financial

impact is approx. 270 MMTHB/day (revenue generated from natural gas sales in 2018 is

of 3,089 MMUSD or 98,848 MMTHB or 270 million THB/day which mainly represent

production cost of offshore assets in 2018)

Management method

Currently, main platforms are designed to perform operations with swell projections

within tolerable limits and with contingency of having 1-2 meters greater than design

basis.

Following to swell projections, this event will not be occurred before 2030. However, the

swell height projections are reviewing every 2 years . Monitoring of the risk is done by

the Corporate Environment Management Department in conjunction with the asset

group. In case that assessment of probability of the swell height will reach or exceeding

platform height, management of potential impact require shut down of operations and

jacking up of structures to increase height.

Cost of management

7,000,000,000

Comment

Identifier

Risk 4


Direct operations

Risk type

Transition risk


Reputation: Stigmatization of sector


Reduction in capital availability


17


We consider potential risks which may impact our reputation and quantify it by potential

drop in share price basis points. Examples of past events that had a negative impact on

PTTEP’s share price was the accident at PTTEP’s Montara operations in production

phase. Other potential incidents that could affect PTTEP’s reputation include oil spills,

accidents and other major environmental disasters.

Time horizon

Medium-term

Likelihood

Likely

Magnitude of impact

Medium-high




516,000,000,000




In August 2009, PTTEP experienced an accident at its Montara operations in Australia.

This resulted in share price plunging down from THB 180 to a new low of 50 at the end

of 2009 with total 3,969,985,400 shares. The potential impact on PTTEP share price if

such incidents were to happen is anticipated to be at approximately 516,000,000,000 or

-70% of total share price.

Management method

Ensure to enhance brand image with good reputation in the eyes of stakeholders,

communities and the public, and educate the public on energy literacy. PTTEP will

continue to ensure the transparency of our sustainability performance through our

annual reports. Cost of management is estimated of 20 MMUSD or 660 MMTHB. This is

the current budget to improve PTTEP’s branding and image. It also includes media,

advertising and public relations as well as philanthropy, CSR and social investment

projects.

Cost of management

660,000,000

Comment


18

Identifier

Risk 5


Direct operations

Risk type

Transition risk


Market: Changing customer behavior


Reduced demand for goods and/or services due to shift in consumer preferences


Global trends focus more and more on climate change issues and their mitigations and

adaptation, leading to higher demand of other energy forms, i.e. renewable energy. This

global trend results to a changing in our end-user or customer behavior to focus more

on low carbon energy or renewable energy. This will reduce demand for our goods,

hydrocarbon energy, due to shift in consumer preferences.

Time horizon

Long-term

Likelihood

Likely

Magnitude of impact

Medium




700,000,000




700 MMTHB was estimated based on assumption that change to alternative fuels by

2050 likely to have a 10% impact on production demand.

Management method


19

Natural gas is as a transition fuel which can mitigate climate change impact by less

carbon emission than coals and other fossil fuels. PTTEP short term strategy is to

increase gas proportion of company portfolio by acquiring new investment in gas fields

such as Mozambique Rovuma Offshore Area 1 project which is large natural gas field

located offshore of Mozambique. In addition, PTTEP has established new organization

who is responsible for technology research & development. One of their missions is

focused on new business development and diversification. We are focusing on three

main businesses including

1) businesses in the natural gas value chain, such as gas turbine power plants (Gas to

Power) or LNG related businesses;

2) commercialization of technological innovation projects developed within PTTEP,

including Robotics and AI, and Predictive Maintenance; and

3) Renewable Energy.

For example, PTTEP is developing a project by using our waste stream like flare gas to

create new product, i.e. carbon high value product. For example, CO2 conversion to

high valued products, e.g. methanol, carbonate-based product, etc. is one of the on-

going projects. To develop and realize these projects until success of pilot unit, capital

investment of 15 MMUSD or 480MMTHB is required.

Cost of management

480,000,000

Comment

C2.4

(C2.4) Have you identified any climate-related opportunities with the potential to have

a substantive financial or strategic impact on your business?

Yes

C2.4a

(C2.4a) Provide details of opportunities identified with the potential to have a

substantive financial or strategic impact on your business.

Identifier

Opp1

Where in the value chain does the opportunity occur?

Direct operations

Opportunity type

Energy source


20

Primary climate-related opportunity driver

Participation in carbon market


Reputational benefits resulting in increased demand for goods/services

Company-specific description

With an expectation on the carbon trading system in Thailand in near future that will

result in the requirement of more carbon credits, PTTEP considers the opportunity to

develop more carbon credits e.g. initiated the Sao-Thien A oil field Flare Gas Recover

and Utilization Project as our first CDM project and also improve on our operations by

being more energy efficiency which also reduces our GHG emissions. Selling carbon

credits also provides extra revenue and also promotes PTTEP’s image as an energy

efficiency and environmentally conscientious company.

Time horizon

Long-term

Likelihood

Likely

Magnitude of impact

Medium-low




5,100,000




It was calculated based on annual operating cost at approximately 5.14 MMTHB from

for the Sao-Thien A oil field Flare Gas Recovery and Utilization Project.

Strategy to realize opportunity

The strategy to realize opportunity is to proactively engage in the carbon trading market.

For example, PTTEP initiated the Sao-Thien A oil field Flare Gas Recover and

Utilization Project as our first CDM project. The anticipated CERs from the project is

approximately 17,000 tCO2e/yr with T-VER CER price of 200 THB/tCO2e (over 8 years)

which is approximately 3.4 Million THB per year.

Cost to realize opportunity

3,400,000


21

Comment

Identifier

Opp2


Customer

Opportunity type

Products and services


Shift in consumer preferences


Better competitive position to reflect shifting consumer preferences, resulting in

increased revenues


Climate change may drive consumers towards higher consumption of natural gas to

replace fuels such as coal and lignite. Natural gas is a key fuel source in the transition

towards a low-carbon economy. PTTEP could gain more revenues from its natural gas

bias portfolio strategy which currently is 59 % by revenue.

Time horizon

Long-term

Likelihood

More likely than not

Magnitude of impact

High




98,848,000,000




3,089 MMUSD or 98,848 MMTHB. The financial implication is the revenue generated

from natural gas sales in 2018.


22


PTTEP continues to focus on natural gas exploration and production. Our portfolio

already has a natural gas bias, which currently is 59 % by revenue. In addition, the more

energy we save means the less fuel gas is needed, which results in more gas available

for sale. Our energy efficiency target, a 5% reduction by 2020 based on 2012 base year,

is part of the effort to reduce our fuel gas consumption. For example, the Arthit seawater

pump optimization resulted in savings of 78 MMSCF, and the Sirikit Heat Recovery

Steam Generator saved 166 MMSCF in 2018.

The annual cost is estimated by taking the total operating and capital expenses (at

3,614 MMUSD or 115,648 MMTHB) multiplied by the revenue proportion of natural gas

in PTTEP’s portfolio (59%).


68,232,000,000

Comment

Identifier

Opp3


Direct operations

Opportunity type

Products and services


Development of new products or services through R&D and innovation


Increased revenue through demand for lower emissions products and services


Oil and gas upstream business like PTTEP is to adapt and maintain organization during

climate change crisis of which fossil fuel production is a major cause.

PTTEP has established new organization to study transformation opportunity of our

business including R&D section to develop i.e. carbon high value products (e.g.

methanol, carbonate-based product, etc), carbon capture and utilization from

waste/excess/flare gases. One of their missions is focused on new business

development and diversification.

Time horizon

Long-term


23

Likelihood

Likely

Magnitude of impact

High




12,215,000,000




The financial impact was calculated by estimated revenue generated from potential low

carbon R&D products and services. However, total number cannot be provided in

detail since it is under our research and development phase


New business unit has been established to emphasize on business transformation

including technology development. PTTEP’s R&D division has studied many innovative

projects in which green practice is one of the key themes to be focused. For example,

CO2 conversion to high valued products, e.g. methanol, carbonate-based product, etc.

is one of the on-going projects. To develop and realize these projects until success of

pilot unit, PTTEP has allocated company budget of at least 3% of annual net profit or 15

MMUSD or 480MMTHB.


480,000,000

Comment

C2.5

(C2.5) Describe where and how the identified risks and opportunities have impacted

your business.

Impact Description

Products and

services

Not yet

impacted

Global trends focus more on climate change issues and their mitigations

and adaptation, leading to higher customer demand of other energy

forms, i.e. renewable energy, instead of fossil fuel. However, this is

expected to be occurred in more than next 10 years as natural gas

which is a kind of fossil fuel is still as a transition fuel which can mitigate


24

climate change impact by less carbon emission than coals and other

fossil fuels.

Supply chain

and/or value

chain

Not yet

impacted

Both physical and market risk may impact to company supply chain, e.g.

disruption to supply chain (product transportation) from water flooding

and sand storm. However, we do not expect this impact to occur within

10 years.

Adaptation

and mitigation

activities

Impacted According to global crisis on climate change as well as Intended

Nationally Determined Contributions (INDC) and Paris Agreement

PTTEP as an oil and gas exploration and production company will be

impacted by the climate change issues in case the adaptations and

mitigations are not implemented in advance. With this regard, PTTEP

aims to proactively reduce our GHG emission which is in line with

Thailand target by setting target to reduce 25% of GHG intensity by

2030 comparing to base year 2012. PTTEP has initiated and continually

implemented GHG reduction projects since 2013. These projects create

significant amount of not only cost saving but also revenue generation to

company.

Investment in

R&D

Impacted Due to global climate change situation leading to alternative energy

adoption, i.e. renewable energy, PTTEP as an oil and gas exploration

and production company will be impacted from this transition to low

carbon society in case new technologies and new business

opportunities are not developed for future trend. With this regard,

PTTEP has established Research and Technology Division since 2013

to deal with enhancing more production, exploration success and green

practice. One of the key objectives of new organization is to explore new

business opportunity including low carbon technology. PTTEP has

allocated company budget of at least 3% of annual net profit . It includes

new technologies and capability of the Company’s research and

development program.

Operations Not yet

impacted

The identified physical risks have potential to impact to PTTEP

operations, e.g. swell impact on production and wellhead platform, etc.

However, the design basis of existing operations is still valid, with

expected climate conditions. In some instances, changes to certain

variables by 2030 are within the design threshold.

Other, please

specify

Not

impacted

There is no more other risk and opportunity impacts to our business.

C2.6

(C2.6) Describe where and how the identified risks and opportunities have been

factored into your financial planning process.

Relevance Description


25

Revenues Not yet

impacted

The identified risks probably impact to PTTEP revenues. The

physical risks, e.g. cyclone, swell, flooding, etc. will impact on

operation reliability which shorten operating days resulting in

loss of revenue. In addition, market risk such as global trend on

low carbon product leads to change of customer behavior and

consequently would place a price on carbon emissions

impacting business revenue. However, we do not expect this

impact to occur within 10 years.

Operating costs Not yet

impacted

The identified risks probably impact to PTTEP operating costs.

The physical risks, e.g. cyclone, swell, flooding etc. will impact

on operating costs. In addition, regulatory risk such as

restrictions and increased regulation of flaring activities would

limit flaring activities and require PTTEP to manage gas through

sequestration or capture and reuse/on-sale and consequently

increase operating costs. However, we do not expect this impact

to occur within 10 years.

Capital

expenditures /

capital

allocation

Not yet

impacted

The identified risks probably impact to PTTEP capital

expenditures/capital allocation. The market risk such as

decreased in investment in fossil fuel based enterprises lead to

greater difficulties for PTTEP to finance new investments.

However, we do not expect this impact to occur within 10 years .

Acquisitions

and

divestments

Impacted for

some suppliers,

facilities, or

product lines

The identified risks impact to PTTEP acquisitions and

divestments. The market risk such as decrease in investment in

fossil fuel based enterprises while low carbon investment

initiative increases, impacts to PTTEP acquisitions and

divestments direction/decision. Prior to any acquisition and

divestment, PTTEP takes the climate related information e.g. its

objective, target, performance and relevant regulatory etc., as

part of SSHE Management System into consideration and

decision. However, the magnitude of impact still limit with low

significant due to potential impact from identified risks is not

expected to occur within 10 years

Access to

capital

Not yet

impacted

The identified risks probably impact to PTTEP access to capital.

The market risk such as decreased in investment in fossil fuel

based enterprises lead to greater difficulties for PTTEP to

access to capital. However, we do not expect this impact to

occur within 10 years .

Assets Not yet

impacted

The identified risks probably impact to PTTEP assets. The

physical risks such as humidity, acidity, extreme weather

conditions which may lead to, e.g. corrosion of infrastructure and

piping, reduced performance or degradation of

equipment/machine such as air cooler, electrical systems, power

and gas turbine, etc. will impact on assets value and resulting in

asset depreciation. In addition, market risk such as global trend


26

on low carbon product leads to change of customer behavior

and demand-side impacting hydrocarbon product price which

reflects to asset value. However, we do not expect this impact to

occur within 10 years.

Liabilities Not yet

impacted

The identified risks probably impact to PTTEP liability. The

physical risks such as humidity, acidity, extreme weather

conditions which may lead to, e.g. corrosion of infrastructure and

piping, reduced performance or degradation of

equipment/machine will impact on operations integrity and may

leading to leak, spill, or release of pollutants to the environment.

In addition, the regulatory risk such as restrictions and increased

regulation of flaring activities would limit flaring activities and

require PTTEP to manage gas through sequestration or capture

leading to liability risk from leak, damage, release of captured

carbon to the environment. However, we do not expect this

impact to occur within 10 years.

Other Not yet

impacted

There is no more other risk and opportunity to be factored into

our financial process.

C3. Business Strategy

C3.1

(C3.1) Are climate-related issues integrated into your business strategy?

Yes

C3.1a

(C3.1a) Does your organization use climate-related scenario analysis to inform your

business strategy?

Yes, qualitative and quantitative

C-AC3.1b/C-CE3.1b/C-CH3.1b/C-CO3.1b/C-EU3.1b/C-

FB3.1b/C-MM3.1b/C-OG3.1b/C-PF3.1b/C-ST3.1b/C-

TO3.1b/C-TS3.1b

(C-AC3.1b/C-CE3.1b/C-CH3.1b/C-CO3.1b/C-EU3.1b/C-FB3.1b/C-MM3.1b/C-OG3.1b/C-

PF3.1b/C-ST3.1b/C-TO3.1b/C-TS3.1b) Indicate whether your organization has

developed a low-carbon transition plan to support the long-term business strategy.

Yes


27

C3.1c

(C3.1c) Explain how climate-related issues are integrated into your business

objectives and strategy.

Starting from the top-influencing, climate-related issues are integrated into PTTEP business

objectives and strategy, vision and mission, policy, and work practices as describe below.

Vision: Energy Partner of Choice through competitive performance and innovation for long-

term value creation.

Mission: PTTEP operates globally to provide reliable energy supply and sustainable value to

all stakeholders.

SD Policy, Guideline, and Strategy

The Sustainable Development (SD) GROWTH policy elaborates on doing business sustainably

by being a high performing, responsible, ethical and value creating organization. The SD

Guideline is composed of three parts: business, wider society, and environment, and includes a

guideline on Green Practice, in which low carbon organization is one of the targets.

SSHE Policy

PTTEP places SSHE as a core value and adheres to safe operating standards to ensure

operational and process safety, the health of everybody involved in our operations and

communities in which we operate, environmental protection in all stages of the business life

cycle, and security of our people and assets. Regarding climate change, PTTEP commits to

reduce greenhouse gas emissions aligning with a pathway to a low carbon future.

In addition, the SD Roadmap serves as a company strategy towards sustainability by including

Green Practice Roadmap, Business Strategic Roadmap and Wider Society Roadmap.

Green Practice Roadmap and Elements in the SD Guideline include targets and expectations

on the following topics: Climate Change, Energy Efficiency, Water Related Management,

Releases to the Environment, Biodiversity, Waste Management, Environmental Impact

Management, Decommissioning, Green Supply Chain: Green Procurement, Green Logistics,

and Green Technology.

Aspects of climate change that have influenced business strategy: PTTEP's vision to adopt

Green Practices has resulted in a development of Green Practice Roadmap which was

approved by the SSHE-SD Council. The Low Carbon Roadmap - part of the Green Practice

Roadmap - aims to reduce and offset GHG emissions from our operations via various

initiatives. This is also expanding into international areas where there are climate change

regulatory risks involved, such as carbon tax; and to create competitive edge. PTTEP has set

both medium term (2030), short term (2020) and annual targets on climate change to reduce

GHG emissions. Thus, the business strategy has been changed to be more focus on doing

business responsibly by mitigating environmental impacts, reducing our GHG emissions from

operations, aspiring to become a low carbon organization, as well as continuous monitoring of

risks arising from climate change.

PTTEP’s climate change risk assessment covers reputational, market, regulatory, physical

risks, and opportunities to develop into a green business. The period of assessment are

covered three parts: 2014-2015 (short term), 2030 (medium term) and 2050 (long term).


28

For short term strategy, the most important components that have been influenced by climate

change include the following:

- Operational practices : include the adaptation of SD Guideline & Green Practices in PTTEP’s

operations.

- Business Communication : PTTEP focuses on adopting green office, green meeting &

trainings, and communication of our green practice to all stakeholders.

- CSR strategies & voluntary programs to focus more on contributing to our low carbon target

and practices, e.g. reforestation, energy efficiency programs awareness building for internal

and external stakeholders. PTTEP also established the short term target setting of 20%

intensity emission reduction by 2020 compared with 2012 as base year. Moreover, PTTEP has

set an annual emissions reduction target as of 2018 at 220,500 tCO2e.

For medium term strategy, the most important components that have been influenced by

climate change include the following:

- Change in company's vision, mission, corporate values, and brand identity

- Change in long term business strategies to focus more on low carbon operations

opportunities, e.g. elimination of continuous flare gas in new significant assets & acquisitions,

carbon credits opportunities, future operational concepts and designs on facilities to reduce

GHG emissions.

- Due to climate change risks &opportunities, we aim to find opportunities to diversify our

portfolio, e.g. more natural gas, and research into low carbon technologies to prepare ourselves

for the next 20 - 50 years.

- Incorporate new technologies into operating processes and studies for new technologies to

help reduce GHG emissions and improve energy efficiency in operations and offices.

- Knowledge Management &Technology - has been influenced by climate change to study

more on new innovations and technologies to reduce GHG emissions, removals (Carbon

Sinks), and energy efficiency practices to be implemented in the company.PTTEP also

established the medium term target setting of 25% intensity emission reduction by 2030 from

2012 base year.

Strategic Advantage

In terms of strategic advantage, PTTEP is presented with an overview of the world’s energy

outlook and potential preparations for future global trends and environmental changes, e.g.

regulatory changes, physical risks and market risks. We have also seen our potential

opportunities resulting from climate change, e.g. seek new opportunities to invest in renewable

energy to promote alternative energy during the phase of changing energy sources to low

carbon society, innovation development on high-value products from carbon capture and

utilization.

We are also certified our first batch of carbon credits under the CDM in 2015. Our strategic

advantages include integration of management of carbon emissions into core business

strategies, climate change-thinking framework into investment opportunities to encourage

performance improvements; managing carbon emissions and; protecting business assets from

climate change impacts to achieve sustainability and in effect, creating strong shareholder

returns. Additionally, by moving into countries without well-developed climate change policies


29

PTTEP has the potential to set itself up as an example for that country to develop greener

policies.

The most substantial business decisions made. While Thailand operational emissions would

not be subject to direct regulation in the foreseeable future, we may experience increased costs

if direct carbon taxes or mandatory emission caps are imposed. For these reasons, we became

involved with T-VER development since 2013 and initiated a project under CDM since 2015.

We remain committed to managing climate change risks and direct opportunities to improve

energy efficiency and reduce carbon footprint from our business.

C3.1d

(C3.1d) Provide details of your organization’s use of climate-related scenario analysis.

Climate-

related

scenarios

Details

Other, please

specify

The PTTEP climate adaptation assessment is focused on evaluating risks to

PTTEP’s operational control assets according to current climate projections for 2015

(short-term), 2030 (medium-term) and 2050 (long-term) across a series of climate

variables. To undertake the study a number of data sources were utilized, i.e. KNMI

Climate Explorer, Climate Wizard, UNEP Global Risk Data Platform, Aqueduct, and

IPCC Fifth Assessment Report, representing a cross section of the latest scientific

peer reviewed data available. The range in potential outcome reflects the degree of

uncertainty between RCP and IPCC GCMs (General Circulation Models) and using a

multi-model assemble base on either RCP 4.5 or RCP8.5. This includes variables

such as mean temperature and precipitation, ocean acidity, mean evaporation and

humidity as well as extreme events such as tropical cyclones and wild fires. A

number of risks and potential management options were identified in relation to

extreme events that are currently uncertain with respect to the expected magnitude of

change in 2030 and 2050. The projection for 2030 and 2050 dates provides an

indication of changes that is likely to coincide with the PTTEP end of production in

several assets and impact future assets in exploration or yet to be identified. The

risks were assessed in 3 key areas of business: physical, regulatory and market

risks. The results of conducted scenario analysis revealed that no risk to operational

assets from the existing climate condition in 2015. Moreover, changes to certain

climate variables by 2030 are with in the design threshold. However, the asset design

is insufficient with respect to the predicted changes in 2050.

The preliminary climate change risk assessment with mitigation plan, after

endorsement by the SD -SSHE Council has been included into the

Enterprise/Company-wide risk management process. For Enterprise Risk

Management System, PTTEP uses the SAP program to integrate, assess, analyze,

monitor, and report all risks into the enterprise risk where it can be monitored,


30

followed up the mitigation progress by the risk holders, and also by the company’s

central risk functions.

The direct influence of the scenario analysis results, for example, is in term of

integration of the result into the company climate related goal and targets, e.g. our

roadmap to become the low-carbon footprint organization, more ambitious target of

GHG emission intensity reduction at least 25% by 2030 relatively to 2012 base year,

5% Energy intensity reduction by 2020 relatively to 2012 base year. This is also

directly influenced our business objectives and strategy to explore investment

opportunities in potential new business to enhance the company's competitiveness

and future sustainable growth. This included an increase in natural gas bias and

renewable energy portfolio. The identified scenarios are also applied in PTTEP

Climate Change Risk Assessment.

C-AC3.1e/C-CE3.1e/C-CH3.1e/C-CO3.1e/C-EU3.1e/C-

FB3.1e/C-MM3.1e/C-OG3.1e/C-PF3.1e/C-ST3.1e/C-TO3.1e/C-

TS3.1e

(C-AC3.1e/C-CE3.1e/C-CH3.1e/C-CO3.1e/C-EU3.1e/C-FB3.1e/C-MM3.1e/C-OG3.1e/C-

PF3.1e/C-ST3.1e/C-TO3.1e/C-TS3.1e) Disclose details of your organization’s low-

carbon transition plan.

As upstream oil and gas sector, PTTEP’s mission is to provide reliable energy supply and

sustainable value to all stakeholders. A key energy source produced from PTTEP operation is

natural gas which is defined as cleaner energy compared to coal for electricity production.

PTTEP aims to increase company gas/oil ratio from 65% to 70% by investing more in gas field,

e.g. Mozambique Rovuma Offshore Area 1 Project, etc. In addition, we have studied many

R&D projects including low carbon projects e.g. high valuable product from waste gas,

renewable energy production, and energy storage, etc. which potentially are the new venture of

company.

C4. Targets and performance

C4.1

(C4.1) Did you have an emissions target that was active in the reporting year?

Intensity target

C4.1b

(C4.1b) Provide details of your emissions intensity target(s) and progress made

against those target(s).

Target reference number


31

Int 1

Scope

Scope 1+2 (location-based)

% emissions in Scope

100

Targeted % reduction from base year

25

Metric


tonne CO2e per 1000 tonne of product

Base year

2012

Start year

2017

Normalized base year emissions covered by target (metric tons CO2e)

5,041,074

Target year

2030

Is this a science-based target?

Yes, we consider this a science-based target, but this target has not been approved as

science-based by the Science Based Targets initiative

% of target achieved

28.8

Target status

Underway

Please explain

In early 2017, PTTEP has established medium term GHG intensity reduction target by

25% in 2030 compared with 2012 base year. This target covering 100% all operating

assets under PTTEP operational control is complied with 2 degrees Celsius scenario for

energy sector identified by International Energy Agency (IEA). In addition, in 2050

PTTEP intends to implement zero continuous flare policy as committed in SD guideline.

% change anticipated in absolute Scope 1+2 emissions

-47

% change anticipated in absolute Scope 3 emissions

0


32

Target reference number

Int 2

Scope

Scope 3: Processing of sold products

% emissions in Scope

71

Targeted % reduction from base year

20

Metric


tonne CO2e per 1000 barell oil equivalent

Base year

2012

Start year

2018

Normalized base year emissions covered by target (metric tons CO2e)

3,167,000

Target year

2030

Is this a science-based target?

Yes, we consider this a science-based target, but this target has not been approved as

science-based by the Science Based Targets initiative

% of target achieved

66

Target status

New

Please explain

PTTEP’s sole customer for natural gas product is PTT which has set new target in 2018

to reduce GHG intensity emission at 20% by 2030 from 2012 as base year. Therefore,

this target is also cascaded to PTTEP natural gas product sold to PTT.

PTTEP natural gas supplied to PTT was contributed at approx. 27% (as of 2018) of total

gas , therefore, the normalized base year emissions covered by target calculated at

27% of total 2012 base year emission at 11,730,000 tonneCO2e or equal to 3,167,000

tonneCO2e .

% change anticipated in absolute Scope 1+2 emissions


33

0

% change anticipated in absolute Scope 3 emissions

1.3

C4.2

(C4.2) Provide details of other key climate-related targets not already reported in

question C4.1/a/b.

Target

Energy usage

KPI – Metric numerator

Target set by GJ

KPI – Metric denominator (intensity targets only)

Target set by 5% reduction in intensity (GJ/tonne production)

Base year

2012

Start year

2013

Target year

2020

KPI in baseline year

1.42

KPI in target year

1.34

% achieved in reporting year

0

Target Status

Underway

Please explain

Due to our field matured, the energy consumption for operation relatively increase when

compared to base year.

Part of emissions target

the Energy Usage target is part of an emissions reduction target (INT#2)

Is this target part of an overarching initiative?

No, it's not part of an overarching initiative


34

C-OG4.2a

(C-OG4.2a) If you do not have a methane-specific emissions reduction target for your

oil and gas activities or do not incorporate methane into your target(s) reported in

C4.2 please explain why not and forecast how your methane emissions will change

over the next five years.

Methane emission reduction target is included in greenhouse emission reduction target

provided in C4.1b (Int 2) as the dominant greenhouse gas from PTTEP operation (composition

of our gas production consist methane more than 90% ). PTTEP target to reduct GHG intensity

emission by 25% within 2030 comparing to 2012 base year also resultsw in methane

emission reduction.

C4.3

(C4.3) Did you have emissions reduction initiatives that were active within the

reporting year? Note that this can include those in the planning and/or

implementation phases.

Yes

C4.3a

(C4.3a) Identify the total number of initiatives at each stage of development, and for

those in the implementation stages, the estimated CO2e savings.

Number of

initiatives

Total estimated annual CO2e savings in metric

tonnes CO2e (only for rows marked *)

Under investigation 1 100,000

To be implemented* 4 29,500

Implementation

commenced*

0 0

Implemented* 10 269,476

Not to be implemented 0 0

C4.3b

(C4.3b) Provide details on the initiatives implemented in the reporting year in the table

below.

Initiative type

Process emissions reductions

Description of initiative

Changes in operations


35

Estimated annual CO2e savings (metric tonnes CO2e)

44,291

Scope

Scope 1

Voluntary/Mandatory

Voluntary

Annual monetary savings (unit currency – as specified in C0.4)

35,865,728

Investment required (unit currency – as specified in C0.4)

60,831,000

Payback period

1-3 years

Estimated lifetime of the initiative

6-10 years

Comment

PTTEP aims to reduce continuous flaring as much as possible. Continuous flaring is

accounted under scope 1 emissions. Since 2012 The Sao-Thien A Oil Field Flare Gas

Recovery and Utilization Project in Sukhothai, Thailand has been implemented, the

development of recovering and utilizing the associated gas emitted from Sao-Thien A oil

field. In the absence of the proposed project, the associated gas would have been flared

resulting in the release of GHG to the atmosphere. Investment required was calculated

using the values from the project’s PDD from the UNFCCC CDM website. The total

investment required was calculated by multiplying the operating cost by the lifetime of

the initiative, this value was then combined with the capital investment value to derive

the total investment required. Investment required was USD 1.88 M and was converted

using a rate of 32.31 THB per USD.

Initiative type

Energy efficiency: Processes


Heat recovery


10,559

Scope

Scope 1

Voluntary/Mandatory

Voluntary


36


35,997,000


61,389,000

Payback period

1-3 years


3-5 years

Comment

In 2014, PTTEP installed Heat Recovery Steam Generator (HRSG) in Sirikit oil field, to

recover waste heat from compressors and utilize in steam boiler. In 2018, 10,559 tonnes

CO2 equivalent of GHG reduction was achieved. Investment required was USD 1.9 M

and was converted using a rate of 32.31 THB per USD.

Initiative type



New equipment


25,497

Scope

Scope 1

Voluntary/Mandatory

Voluntary


86,864,902


698,542,200

Payback period

4 - 10 years


11-15 years

Comment

Trunk flow line project aims to reduce flaring at remote station of Sirikit Oilfield by

transporting excess gas through pipelines to be consolidated and reused at the main


37

production facilities. The project started to operate in the 4th quarter of 2016. Investment

required was USD 21.62 M and was converted using a rate of 32.31 THB per USD.

Initiative type





141,284

Scope

Scope 1

Voluntary/Mandatory

Voluntary


514,939,035


323,100,000

Payback period

<1 year


6-10 years

Comment

Flash Gas Recovery Unit Project at Greater Bongkot South, Thailand -Emissions

reductions at the Flash Gas Recovery Unit fall under scope 1 emissions since the FGRU

is owned by PTTEP. Emissions reductions at the FGRU were voluntary. The flash gas

recovery unit project commenced in 2014. It recovers gas from condensate production

and puts it back into the gas production process which would otherwise be flared. In

2018, the recovery is equivalent to reduction of 141,284 tCO2e of GHG emissions.

Investment required was USD 10M and was converted using a rate of 32.31THB per

USD.

Initiative type

Low-carbon energy installation



Hybrid Wind Turbine & Solar Power System


38


1

Scope

Scope 2 (location-based)

Voluntary/Mandatory

Voluntary


6,297


500,000

Payback period

>25 years


11-15 years

Comment

Since 2017, PTTEP initiated a project to supply an alternative energy to our operation in

Wat Tan-B wellsite and Bung-Pra depot by installing the Hybrid Wind Turbine & Solar

Power Generation System. This initiative can reduce the power demand from national

grid by 2099 kWh/year and can reduce CO2 emission at approx. 1.02 tCO2e/year.

Initiative type

Energy efficiency: Processes


Process optimization


5,914

Scope

Scope 1

Voluntary/Mandatory

Voluntary


14,943,977


0

Payback period


39

<1 year


3-5 years

Comment

Optimization of sea water pump operation, PTTEP implemented the measure

summarized from the studies at Arthit Production platform by shutting down some of the

sea water pumps used to generate cooling water for other machines. No investment,

optimize operation and process condition required.

Initiative type



Solar PV


0.3

Scope


Voluntary/Mandatory

Voluntary


1,971


45,000

Payback period

21-25 years


3-5 years

Comment

Since 2018, PTTEP initiated a project to supply an alternative energy to lighting system

for guardhouse at wellsites by installing the LED lighting system supplied by solar cell.

This initiative can reduce the power demand from national grid by 657 kWh/year and

can reduce CO2 emission at approx. 0.32 tCO2e/year.

Initiative type


Energy efficiency: marine logistic management


40



40,718

Scope

Scope 1

Voluntary/Mandatory

Voluntary


78,659,306


904,680,000

Payback period

11-15 years


6-10 years

Comment

Emissions reductions for the marine transportation fleet were under scope 1 emissions

since all transportation involved was owned by PTTEP. In 2015, the company

expanded the New Marine Vessel project by increasing the efficiency of marine

transportation in the Gulf of Thailand. As a result, in 2018 the average fuel consumption

of each vessel has been reduced compared to 2012. Overall, PTTEP could reduce GHG

emission reductions of 40,718 tCO2e per year. Annual monetary savings in the original

currency was 1.4 MMUSD. Investment required was 28 MMUSD. These were converted

using a rate of 32.31 THB per USD.

Initiative type

Energy efficiency: Building services


Lighting


63

Scope


Voluntary/Mandatory

Voluntary


41


131,000


750,000

Payback period

4 - 10 years


3-5 years

Comment

In 2015 PTTEP has started to replace the lighting system with LED for the Songkla

Petroleum Support Base to improve the energy consumption efficiency. This project has

carried until present and has registered under the Low Emission Support Scheme

(LESS) of Thailand Greenhouse Gas Management Organization (Public Organization)

or TGO. From 2015-2018, it is certified that this project could save CO2 emission at

approx. 63 tCO2e/year. The investment required for LED lighting replacement is

approx. 750,000 THB/year. Annual monetary savings is 131,000 THB.

Initiative type





1,149

Scope

Scope 1

Voluntary/Mandatory

Voluntary


915,000


16,155,000

Payback period

4 - 10 years


6-10 years

Comment


42

In mid 2018, PTTEP installed the gas ejector in Sirikit Oil Field to recover the low

pressure flare and return it back into the gas production process which would be

otherwise be flared. The cost for gas ejector installation is approx. USD 0.5 M and was

converted using a rate of 32.31. The recovery is of 17.9 MMSCF/year or equivalent to

reduction of 1,149 tCO2e of GHG emission.

Initiative type



Solar PV


268.67

Scope


Voluntary/Mandatory

Voluntary


800,000


7,000,000

Payback period

4 - 10 years


21-30 years

Comment

In August 2018, PSB Songkhla installed the solar cell rooftop mainly on the office

buildings to improve electrical efficiency and reduce environmental impact. The solar

cell on the rooftop of Office Buildings can distribute 181.04 kWh for 3-story

commercial/office buildings.

C4.3c

(C4.3c) What methods do you use to drive investment in emissions reduction

activities?

Method Comment

Dedicated

budget for

In order to achieve our vision of being an energy partner of choice through

competitive performance and innovation for long-term value creation, this target has


43

energy

efficiency

been included in the long term business strategy, and dedicated budgets for energy

efficiency are included in the corporate budget. We have also publicly disclosed our

intentions of reducing and offsetting our GHG emissions in which this serves as a

long term public commitment which drives initial investments into projects that can

reduce and offset GHG.

In addition, development of low carbon product are in PTTEP research &

development plan.

Other In order to achieve our vision of being an energy partner of choice through

competitive performance and innovation for long-term value creation , this target

has been included in the long term business strategy. The company wide target as

well as the key performance indicators are set. By incorporating into the long term

business strategy to become part of our company vision, investment budgets for

GHG emissions reductions and offsets are dedicated for this purpose. We have

also publicly disclosed our intentions of reducing and offsetting our GHG emissions

in which this serves as a long term public commitment which drives initial

investments into projects that can reduce and offset GHG. The company KPI is

then cascaded down to each individual employee, where monetary incentives such

as bonuses, monetary recognitions and awards are given to employees with the

best GHG emissions reduction project implementations and results.

C4.5

(C4.5) Do you classify any of your existing goods and/or services as low-carbon

products or do they enable a third party to avoid GHG emissions?

Yes

C4.5a

(C4.5a) Provide details of your products and/or services that you classify as low-

carbon products or that enable a third party to avoid GHG emissions.

Level of aggregation

Company-wide

Description of product/Group of products

The use of natural gas instead of coal to generate electricity and as other power

sources.

Natural gas is a major source of electricity generation through the use of gas turbines

and steam turbines. Most grid peaking power plants and some off-grid engine-

generators use natural gas. Particularly high efficiencies can be achieved through

combining gas turbines with a steam turbine in combined cycle mode. Natural gas burns

more cleanly than other Hydrocarbon fuels, such as oil and coal, and produces less


44

carbon dioxide per unit of energy released. For an equivalent amount of heat, burning

natural gas produces about 30% less carbon dioxide than burning petroleum and about

45% less than burning coal. Combined cycle power generation using natural gas is thus

the cleanest source of power available using hydrocarbon fuels and this technology is

widely used wherever gas can be obtained at a reasonable cost.

The PTT GHG Tool allows the input of fuel data in terms of mass or volume only,

therefore volume of gasoline and mass of lignite were converted from the energy value

of the natural gas sold in 2016 using NCV values. The volume of gasoline and mass of

lignite values were input into the tool as well as the volume of total natural gas sales.

Avoided emissions were simply calculated by subtracting the high value of emissions

with the emissions for natural gas combustion.

Emission factors:

1.Emissions include carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide

2.Fuel volume/mass was converted in the PTT GHG Tool in energy values using NCV

values from “Electric Power In Thailand, Department of Alternative Energy Development

and Efficiency, Ministry of Energy, DEDE (2010).”

3.Emission factors for stationary combustion lignite came from “2006 IPCC Guidelines

for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories” developed by the Intergovernmental Panel on

Climate Change (IPCC) Vol.2 Ch.2 Table 2.2

4.Emission factors for mobile combustion of gasoline came from “2006 IPCC Guidelines

for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories” developed by the Intergovernmental Panel on

Climate Change (IPCC) Vol. 2 Ch. 1 table 1.4

5.GWP from IPCC AR4 (100 years)

http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/ch2s2-10-2.html

Are these low-carbon product(s) or do they enable avoided emissions?

Low-carbon product and avoided emissions

Taxonomy, project or methodology used to classify product(s) as low-carbon

or to calculate avoided emissions


Subtract with avoided emission

% revenue from low carbon product(s) in the reporting year

59

Comment

In addition to natural gas as low carbon product, PTTEP has also planned to invest in

Climate Related RD&T amount of at least 3% of annual net profit.

Climate Related RD&T, including new technologies and capability of the Company’s

research and development program, is developed to be in line with the Company’s

growth strategy. The Capability and Technology Development Roadmap was created as

well as research on technology to support business growth in 3 areas which are focused


45

to increase exploration success, enhance more production, and develop green practice.

C-OG4.6

(C-OG4.6) Describe your organization’s efforts to reduce methane emissions from

your activities.

Since 2013 until present, PTTEP has developed and continued our own methane leak

detection and repairing program for both onshore and offshore operating assets in Thailand,

Myanmar and Australia. The methane leak mitigation and action plan is developed for each

assets to reduce methane emission.

In 2015, PTTEP, through our parent company PTT Group, participates in the CCAC Oil & Gas

Methane Partnership. The CCAC Oil & Gas Methane Partnership is designed to help

participating oil & gas companies better understand and systematically manage their methane

emissions – and to help them demonstrate their systematic management to stakeholders. It is

the result of an extensive consultation with oil and gas companies and industry groups,

institutional investors and NGOs. The aim was to create a mechanism robust enough to meet

the needs of stakeholders and implementable by companies. PTTEP has participated in a task

force to develop and review the Technical Guidance Document on methane emissions

reduction.

In 2017, PTTEP developed the methane survey guideline to support the operations on methane

self-monitoring and emission reduction.

COG4.7

(C-OG4.7) Does your organization conduct leak detection and repair (LDAR) or use

other methods to find and fix fugitive methane emissions from oil and gas production

activities?

Yes

C-OG4.7a

(C-OG4.7a) Describe the protocol through which methane leak detection and repair or

other leak detection methods, are conducted for oil and gas production activities,

including predominant frequency of inspections, estimates of assets covered, and

methodologies employed.

Since 2013, PTTEP has developed and continued our own methane leak detection and

repairing program for both onshore and offshore operating assets in Thailand, Myanmar and

Australia. The methane leak mitigation and action plan is developed for each assets to reduce

methane emission. In 2017, PTTEP developed the methane survey guideline to support the

operations on methane self-monitoring and emission reduction. The methane survey approach

is under the Loss of Primary Containment (LOPC) Reporting and Reduction which is an integral

part of PTTEP SSHE and Process Safety management system. It has been developed based


46

on the United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) Method 21 and US EPA Leak

Detection and Repair (LDAR) program (EPA-305-D-07-001, Leak Detection and Repair – A

Best Practices Guide, United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA), October

2007).

For example, in 2018 we apply this guideline at our Great Bongkot North and Zawtika

production operations where we had surveyed approximately 16 wellhead platforms, 6

processing platforms and 2 block valve stations with 126 points of fugitive leak detected. This

survey will results in leak reduction of approximately 1,550 tonneCO2e/yr after leak fixed.

These surveys were internally conducted by our PTTEP staff. These measures aim to help us

record our fugitive methane emission with more accuracy and reduce the methane emissions

from fugitive.

Outcomes from the survey shall allow the unintentional leaks to be detected and fixed, which

subsequently enhances process safety, increases productions from the recovered gases, and

ultimately enables to evaluate the current status of PTTEP GHG emissions and comes up with

any means of mitigation accordingly. This approach applies to all projects under PTTEP

operational control. To ensure that the emission reduction performance is maintained, it is

suggested that the leak survey should be conducted regularly. The more frequent the survey

conducted, the better the reduction performance is ensured. Normally, the survey frequency

should be conducted at least, but not limited to, as follows: For routine maintenance by assets:

• After there is any significant change made to the equipment/component

• After major/minor shutdown or maintenance activities

• As per site’s requirement or maintenance programs

For re-monitoring the GHG reduction:

• At the interval of three years for each location

• If the survey for routine maintenance and for re-monitoring the GHG reduction performance

are scheduled for the same period, the survey can be combined together to avoid

overconsuming both manpower and resources.

C-OG4.8

(C-OG4.8) If flaring is relevant to your oil and gas production activities, describe your

organization’s efforts to reduce flaring, including any flaring reduction targets.

PTTEP GHG medium term target was set 25% emission intensity reduction by 2030 from 2012

base year covering all operating assets under PTTEP operational control. GHG emission

performance included in the target covers all sources of GHG emission, i.e. flaring, fuel

combustion, and fugitives and process vents. GHG reduction initiatives has been voluntarily

developed and implemented for achieving the target as planned.

As flare is a major contribution on PTTEP scope 1+2 GHG emission (approximately 55%), the

GHG reduction projects are also focus on flaring reduction as follows:

• Flash Gas Recovery Unit at Greater Bongkot South: The project was implemented since

2013. In 2018, PTTEP was able to recover flash gas from condensate production in Greater


47

Bongkot South accounting for 1,346 MMSCF per year which is equivalent to a flare reduction of

approximately 141,283 tCO2e per year

• Flare gas utilisation at Sirikit Oil Field: The project was implemented since 2013.The excess

gas from the petroleum production process was utilized by selling to UAC Global Public Co.,

Ltd. for electricity production. In 2018, flare reduction can be reduced approximately 44,291

tCO2e per year

• Trunk flow line from remote station of Sirikit Oil Field: Trunk flow line project aims to reduce

flaring at remote station of Sirikit Oil field by transporting excess gas through pipelines to be

consolidated and reused at the main production facilities. The project started to operate in the

4th quarter of 2016. In 2018, estimated flare reduction was of 25,497 tCO2e per year.

• LP Flare Recovery at Sirikit Oil Field: The low pressure excess gas from the petroleum

production process was recovered by gas ejector to return gas which otherwise be flared at low

pressure flare to production process. The project started to operate in the 3rd quarter of 2018.

In 2018, estimated flare reduction was of 1,149 tCO2e per year.

C5. Emissions methodology

C5.1

(C5.1) Provide your base year and base year emissions (Scopes 1 and 2).

Scope 1

Base year start

January 1, 2012

Base year end

December 31, 2012

Base year emissions (metric tons CO2e)

5,037,155

Comment

The base year emissions was recalculated to cover all operating assets in Thailand,

Myanmar and Australia which covered by the GHG intensity reduction target at least

25% in 2030 relatively to 2012 base year.


Base year start

January 1, 2012

Base year end

December 31, 2012


3,919


48

Comment

The base year emissions was recalculated to cover all operating assets in Thailand,

Myanmar and Australia which covered by the GHG intensity reduction target at least

25% in 2030 relatively to 2012 base year.

Scope 2 (market-based)

Base year start

Base year end


Comment

C5.2

(C5.2) Select the name of the standard, protocol, or methodology you have used to

collect activity data and calculate Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions.

American Petroleum Institute Compendium of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Methodologies for the

Oil and Natural Gas Industry, 2009

IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories, 2006

IPIECA’s Petroleum Industry Guidelines for reporting GHG emissions, 2nd edition, 2011

ISO 14064-1

C6. Emissions data

C6.1

(C6.1) What were your organization’s gross global Scope 1 emissions in metric tons

CO2e?

Reporting year

Gross global Scope 1 emissions (metric tons CO2e)

4,136,247

Start date

January 1, 2018

End date

December 31, 2018

Comment


49

C6.2

(C6.2) Describe your organization’s approach to reporting Scope 2 emissions.

Row 1

Scope 2, location-based

We are reporting a Scope 2, location-based figure

Scope 2, market-based

We have no operations where we are able to access electricity supplier emission factors

or residual emissions factors and are unable to report a Scope 2, market-based figure

Comment

C6.3

(C6.3) What were your organization’s gross global Scope 2 emissions in metric tons

CO2e?

Reporting year

Scope 2, location-based

5,617

Start date

January 1, 2018

End date

December 31, 2018

Comment

C6.4

(C6.4) Are there any sources (e.g. facilities, specific GHGs, activities, geographies,

etc.) of Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions that are within your selected reporting

boundary which are not included in your disclosure?

No

C6.5

(C6.5) Account for your organization’s Scope 3 emissions, disclosing and explaining

any exclusions.


50

Purchased goods and services

Evaluation status

Relevant, calculated

Metric tonnes CO2e

2.77

Emissions calculation methodology

The calculation is made from:

Approx. 2.77 tCO2e using accounting of the goods and services provided during the

event, including emission from cooking, electricity consumption, transportation of

equipment and attendees, accommodation, distribution materials and waste from

PTTEP Transformation event which was a carbon neutral event.

Percentage of emissions calculated using data obtained from suppliers or

value chain partners

100

Explanation

Capital goods

Evaluation status

Relevant, not yet calculated

Explanation

Emission information for capital goods such as machinery and equipment are not yet

available.

Fuel-and-energy-related activities (not included in Scope 1 or 2)

Evaluation status


Metric tonnes CO2e

357


Latest data for electric power transmission and distribution losses was 6% for Thailand

and 5% for Australia in the year 2014. Data is from

https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/eg.elc.loss.zs. Emissions from scope 2 were 5,406

tCO2e for Thailand and 229 tCO2e for Australia, total emissions before transmission

and distribution loss would have been 5,751 tCO2e for Thailand and 241 tCO2e for

Australia.

6% of 5751tCO2e is 345 tCO2e and 5% of 241 tCO2e is 12 tCO2e, then totally = 357

tCO2e for transmission and distribution loss.


51



100

Explanation

Upstream transportation and distribution

Evaluation status

Not relevant, explanation provided

Explanation

Majority transportation and distribution e.g. transportation of rigs and machinery are

already considered including in scope 1 since their operational control is under PTTEP.

Waste generated in operations

Evaluation status


Metric tonnes CO2e

49,904


PTTEP’s industrial waste is mainly disposed in two ways: incineration (which is

alternatively burning in cement kiln) and landfill. By using emission factor for industrial

waste for these two disposal methods, we arrived at an estimate of the Scope 3

emissions from waste generation.

The GHG emission factor from incineration = 1.0 tonneCO2 output/tonne waste

(referred: Good Practice Guidance and Uncertainty Management in National

Greenhouse Gas Inventories, IPCC)

The GHG emission factor from landfill = 0.8 tonneCO2 output/tonne waste (referred:

https://www.anamai.moph.go.th)



100

Explanation

Business travel

Evaluation status


Metric tonnes CO2e

14,772.3


52


1. Activity data: Distance travelled by employees segregated by cabin class and flight

classification by short haul or long haul.

2. Emission factors: In the PTT Group standard 3. GWP values: The GWP values from

IPCC AR4 were used.



100

Explanation

1. Activity data: Distance travelled by employees segregated by cabin class and flight

classification by short haul or long haul.

2. Emission factors: In the PTT Group standard

3. GWP values: The GWP values from IPCC AR4 were used

Employee commuting

Evaluation status


Explanation

Referring "Overview of methodologies: Estimating petroleum industry value chain

(Scope 3) greenhouse gas emissions" of IPIECA and API, the category emissions

comparison also requires considering volume, for example if the amount of fuel used in

a category is smaller than the amount of that fuel sold by the company included in

Category 11 (Use of sold products), the company may assume that accounting for fuel

emissions in both Category 11 and the other category may be double counting.

Categories for which it may be straightforward to avoid the double counting of Category

11 (Use of sold products) emissions include Category 4 (upstream transport and

distribution), Category 6 (business travel) and Category 7 (employee commuting).

Accordingly, PTTEP considered that the emissions from fuel that company sell are more

than the fuel emissions from the fuel used in Category 4 (upstream transport and

distribution) inventory, and we choose to exclude fuel emissions from Category 7 and

disclose under Category 11 (Use of sold products) emissions.

Upstream leased assets

Evaluation status


Explanation

PTTEP leases upstream assets, i.e. helicopter, heavy truck, marine vessel already

included in scope 1 since their activities are under PTTEP operational control.

Downstream transportation and distribution

Evaluation status



53

Metric tonnes CO2e

4,650


1. Activity data: vehicle mileage (segregated by vehicle type and fuel type) and fuel use

data separated by fuel type,

2. Emissions factors: The emission factors in the PTT Group standard & API

Compendium 2009 are used,

3. GWP values: The GWP values from IPCC AR4 were used.



100

Explanation

Processing of sold products

Evaluation status


Metric tonnes CO2e

3,732,934


Natural gas is major PTTEP’s product (More than 70% by volume) and was sold directly

to PTT Gas Separation Plant (GSP) which is our sole customer. Therefore, GHG

emissions from processing of PTTEP’s natural gas sold is equal to scope 1 GHG

emissions of PTT GSP. However, natural gas from PTTEP is approx. 36% of total PTT

GSP feedstock.



100

Explanation

The natural gas we produced are sold directly to PTT as feedstock .

Use of sold products

Evaluation status


Metric tonnes CO2e

24,826,626



54

1. Activity data: volume of gas sold, which is assumed to be combusted within 2018

2. Emission factors: in the PTT Group Standard (Annex A)

3. GWP Values from IPCC AR4 were used (IPCC 2006, vol.2, ch.1, p.1.18)



100

Explanation

Emissions from natural gas combustion by the end user were calculated. It was

assumed that all natural gas sold in 2018 was combusted. The volume of natural gas

sold was 497,477mmscf. This data was not previously calculated in PTTEP’s

Sustainability Report for 2018. Emissions from crude oil are not relevant because it is

not combusted directly and must be processed into other products before being used.

End of life treatment of sold products

Evaluation status


Explanation

PTTEP’s products are crude oil, natural gas and condensate as business to business

nature. We do not sell our product to the mass consumers. These products generally do

not end up as waste since they are fuels or are used to produce fuels, therefore there is

no end of life treatment for our products

Downstream leased assets

Evaluation status


Explanation

PTTEP does not have any downstream leased assets.

Franchises

Evaluation status


Explanation

PTTEP engages in only exploration and production without downstream business.

PTTEP therefore does not have any franchises as defined in the GHG Scope 3

Accounting and Reporting Standard.

Investments

Evaluation status


Explanation


55

PTTEP engages in only exploration and production (upstream) without midstream and

downstream business and does not provide any financial services. Therefore, this issue

is not applicable to our current business model.

Other (upstream)

Evaluation status


Explanation

All relevant had been identified in each category above.

Other (downstream)

Evaluation status


Explanation

All relevant had been identified in each category above.

C6.7

(C6.7) Are carbon dioxide emissions from biologically sequestered carbon relevant to

your organization?

Yes

C6.7a

(C6.7a) Provide the emissions from biologically sequestered carbon relevant to your

organization in metric tons CO2.

Row 1

Emissions from biologically sequestered carbon (metric tons CO2)

5,536

Comment

Biogenic carbon dioxide emissions is from the combustion or decomposition of

biologically-based materials other than fossil fuels e.g , bio diesel (B5) used in Thailand

contain 5% of biofuel.

C6.10

(C6.10) Describe your gross global combined Scope 1 and 2 emissions for the

reporting year in metric tons CO2e per unit currency total revenue and provide any

additional intensity metrics that are appropriate to your business operations.


56

Intensity figure

0.000023436

Metric numerator (Gross global combined Scope 1 and 2 emissions)

4,133,252

Metric denominator

unit total revenue

Metric denominator: Unit total

176,363,391,870

Scope 2 figure used

Location-based

% change from previous year

23

Direction of change

Decreased

Reason for change

The reasons for change are from:

1. The increase in the total revenue due to the increase of average selling product price

in 2018.

2. The decrease in the total GHG emission as a result of unplanned shutdown of the

Bongkot South (GBS) asset which has high GHG emission intensity in Q4 and GHG

emission reduction initiatives detailed in C4.3b. such as the flash gas recovery, flare gas

utilization, trunk flow line and the marine transportation projects .

Note: the consolidated revenue is used as the denominator for the calculations.

C-OG6.12

(C-OG6.12) Provide the intensity figures for Scope 1 emissions (metric tons CO2e) per

unit of hydrocarbon category.

Unit of hydrocarbon category (denominator)


Thousand tonnes of production

Metric tons CO2e from hydrocarbon category per unit specified

249

% change from previous year

7

Direction of change

Decreased


57

Reason for change

The reasons for change is from the decrease in the total GHG emission as a result of

GHG emission reduction initiatives detailed in C4.3b and unplanned shutdown of the

Bongkot South (GBS) asset which has high GHG emission intensity in Q4.

Comment

C-OG6.13

(C-OG6.13) Report your methane emissions as percentages of natural gas and

hydrocarbon production or throughput.

Oil and gas business division

Upstream

Estimated total methane emitted expressed as % of natural gas production or

throughput at given division

0.44

Estimated total methane emitted expressed as % of total hydrocarbon

production or throughput at given division

0.35

Comment

As an upstream oil and gas business, our methane emission is mainly from flaring and

fuel combustion while total production ratio of natural gas to total hydrocarbon was 79%

by weight

C7. Emissions breakdowns

C7.1

(C7.1) Does your organization break down its Scope 1 emissions by greenhouse gas

type?

Yes

C7.1a

(C7.1a) Break down your total gross global Scope 1 emissions by greenhouse gas

type and provide the source of each used greenhouse warming potential (GWP).


58

Greenhouse gas Scope 1 emissions (metric tons of

CO2e)

GWP Reference

CO2 3,809,364 IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (AR4 -

100 year)

CH4 324,525 IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (AR4 -

100 year)

N2O 1,807 IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (AR4 -

100 year)

SF6 2 IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (AR4 -

100 year)

Other, please

specify

HFC, CFC, HCFC

549 IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (AR4 -

100 year)

C-OG7.1b

(C-OG7.1b) Break down your total gross global Scope 1 emissions from oil and gas

value chain production activities by greenhouse gas type.

Emissions category

Combustion (excluding flaring)

Value chain

Upstream

Product

Unable to disaggregate

Gross Scope 1 CO2 emissions (metric tons CO2)

1,596,838

Gross Scope 1 methane emissions (metric tons CH4)

8

Total gross Scope 1 emissions (metric tons CO2e)

1,598,836

Comment

Total gross Scope 1 included the emissions of CO2, CH4 and N2O

Emissions category

Flaring


59

Value chain

Upstream

Product



2,203,313


37,187


2,296,268

Comment

Total gross Scope 1 included the emissions of CO2, CH4 and N2O.

Emissions category

Venting

Value chain

Upstream

Product



0.02


0


0.02

Comment

Total gross Scope 1 included the emissions of CO2, and CH4. This is included the

process (feedstock) emissions.

Emissions category

Fugitives

Value chain

Upstream

Product


60



3,597


9,255


241,143

Comment

Total gross Scope 1 included the emissions of CO2, CH4, N2O, HFC, PFC, Mixture and

SF6.

C7.2

(C7.2) Break down your total gross global Scope 1 emissions by country/region.

Country/Region Scope 1 emissions (metric tons CO2e)

Thailand 3,668,964

Myanmar 250,933

Australia 216,350

C7.3

(C7.3) Indicate which gross global Scope 1 emissions breakdowns you are able to

provide.

By facility

By activity

C7.3b

(C7.3b) Break down your total gross global Scope 1 emissions by business facility.

Facility Scope 1 emissions (metric tons CO2e) Latitude Longitude

GBN 633,503 7.89501 102.4656

GBS 1,777,903 7.65743 102.680852

ART 774,022 8.24169 102.47739

S1 & L22/43 435,926 16.80199 99.95117

Suphanburi 2,876 14.33893 99.97073

SPH 44,597 16.677019 102.771435

PSB 110 7.23497 100.56158

RSB 27 10.030612 98.633312

PTTEP AA 216,350 -13.57462 123.29637


61

Zawitka 250,933 14.190867 96.045583

C7.3c

(C7.3c) Break down your total gross global Scope 1 emissions by business activity.

Activity Scope 1 emissions (metric tons CO2e)

Flare 2,296,268

Stationary Combustion 1,488,280

Mobile Combustion 110,556

Vent Emission 0.02

Fugitive Emission 240,459

Fugitive of Fluorinated Gas 684

C-CE7.4/C-CH7.4/C-CO7.4/C-EU7.4/C-MM7.4/C-OG7.4/C-

ST7.4/C-TO7.4/C-TS7.4

(C-CE7.4/C-CH7.4/C-CO7.4/C-EU7.4/C-MM7.4/C-OG7.4/C-ST7.4/C-TO7.4/C-TS7.4) Break

down your organization’s total gross global Scope 1 emissions by sector production

activity in metric tons CO2e.

Gross Scope 1

emissions, metric

tons CO2e

Comment

Oil and gas

production activities

(upstream)

4,136,247 The Gross Scope 1 emission presented is excluded

the GHG emission from transportation of personnel

and transportation of materials from supplier to

industrial sector boundary

Oil and gas

production activities

(downstream)

0 PTTEP is categorized as upstream oil & gas company

and no activities related to downstream.

C7.5

(C7.5) Break down your total gross global Scope 2 emissions by country/region.

Country/Region Scope 2,

location-

based (metric

tons CO2e)

Scope 2,

market-

based

(metric tons

CO2e)

Purchased and

consumed

electricity, heat,

steam or cooling

(MWh)

Purchased and consumed

low-carbon electricity,

heat, steam or cooling

accounted in market-

based approach (MWh)

Thailand 5,406 15,562 0

Australia 210 1,019 0

Myanmar 1 4 0


62

C7.6

(C7.6) Indicate which gross global Scope 2 emissions breakdowns you are able to

provide.

By facility

By activity

C7.6b

(C7.6b) Break down your total gross global Scope 2 emissions by business facility.

Facility Scope 2 location-based emissions

(metric tons CO2e)

Scope 2, market-based emissions

(metric tons CO2e)

S1 & L

22/48

2,857

Suphanburi 1,314

SPH 681

PSB 460

RSB 94

PTTEP AA 210

Zawtika 1

C7.6c

(C7.6c) Break down your total gross global Scope 2 emissions by business activity.

Activity Scope 2, location-based emissions

(metric tons CO2e)

Scope 2, market-based emissions

(metric tons CO2e)

Electricity

Purchased

5,617

C-CE7.7/C-CH7.7/C-CO7.7/C-MM7.7/C-OG7.7/C-ST7.7/C-

TO7.7/C-TS7.7

(C-CE7.7/C-CH7.7/C-CO7.7/C-MM7.7/C-OG7.7/C-ST7.7/C-TO7.7/C-TS7.7) Break down

your organization’s total gross global Scope 2 emissions by sector production

activity in metric tons CO2e.

Scope 2,

location-

based, metric

tons CO2e

Scope 2, market-

based (if

applicable), metric

tons CO2e

Comment

Oil and gas

production

5,617 The scope 2 GHG from our operation is

just from the purchased electricity for


63

activities

(upstream)

onshore facilities and petroleum support

bases only. The offshore facilities used

their own-generated electricity that

supplied by fuel gas.

Oil and gas

production

activities

(downstream)

0

C7.9

(C7.9) How do your gross global emissions (Scope 1 and 2 combined) for the

reporting year compare to those of the previous reporting year?

Decreased

C7.9a

(C7.9a) Identify the reasons for any change in your gross global emissions (Scope 1

and 2 combined) and for each of them specify how your emissions compare to the

previous year.

Change in

emissions

(metric tons

CO2e)

Direction

of change

Emissions

value

(percentage)

Please explain calculation

Change in

renewable

energy

consumption

0 No change 0 Renewable energy source, e.g. solar

power, etc. is non material source of

energy used by PTTEP. Therefore, no

change in emission as well as

percentage of emission value were

identified.

Other

emissions

reduction

activities

178,100 Decreased 4.3 In 2018, our reduction in GHG emission

is a result of a combination of a

shutdown in operating asset with high

GHG emission intensity and

implementation of emissions reduction

activities included the flash gas recovery

project at Greater Bongkot South, Sao-

Thien A oil field flare gas recovery and

utilization, heat recovery steam

generator at Sirikit oil field, seawater

pump optimization, marine vessel

project, reduction of methane fugitive

emissions, and trunk flow line at Sirikit


64

oilfield. More details of these projects

can be found in C4.3b.

Divestment 0 No change 0

Acquisitions 0 No change 0

Mergers 0 No change 0

Change in

output

307,792 Decreased 6.6 Decreasing in 2018 production rate can

lead to 6.6 % decrease in emissions.

Change in

methodology

0 No change 0

Change in

boundary

0 No change 0

Change in

physical

operating

conditions

0 No change 0

Unidentified 0 0

Other 0 No change 0

C7.9b

(C7.9b) Are your emissions performance calculations in C7.9 and C7.9a based on a

location-based Scope 2 emissions figure or a market-based Scope 2 emissions

figure?

Location-based

C8. Energy

C8.1

(C8.1) What percentage of your total operational spend in the reporting year was on

energy?

More than 5% but less than or equal to 10%

C8.2

(C8.2) Select which energy-related activities your organization has undertaken.

Indicate whether your organization undertakes this

energy-related activity

Consumption of fuel (excluding

feedstocks)

Yes


65

Consumption of purchased or

acquired electricity

Yes


acquired heat

No


acquired steam

No


acquired cooling

No

Generation of electricity, heat, steam,

or cooling

Yes

C8.2a

(C8.2a) Report your organization’s energy consumption totals (excluding feedstocks)

in MWh.

Heating value MWh from

renewable

sources

MWh from non-

renewable sources

Total

MWh

Consumption of fuel

(excluding feedstock)

HHV (higher

heating value)

14,946 6,747,139 6,762,085


acquired electricity

2,279 13,826 16,105

Consumption of self-

generated non-fuel renewable

energy

390 390

Total energy consumption 17,615 6,760,965 6,778,580

C8.2b

(C8.2b) Select the applications of your organization’s consumption of fuel.

Indicate whether your organization undertakes this

fuel application

Consumption of fuel for the generation of

electricity

Yes


heat

No


steam

No


cooling

No


66

Consumption of fuel for co-generation or

tri-generation

No

C8.2c

(C8.2c) State how much fuel in MWh your organization has consumed (excluding

feedstocks) by fuel type.

Fuels (excluding feedstocks)

Motor Gasoline

Heating value

LHV (lower heating value)

Total fuel MWh consumed by the organization

88

MWh fuel consumed for self-generation of electricity

0

MWh fuel consumed for self-generation of heat

0

Comment


Diesel

Heating value



440,512


1.44


0

Comment



67

Jet Kerosene

Heating value



18,167


0


0

Comment


Natural Gas

Heating value

HHV (higher heating value)


6,193,011


306,333


0

Comment


Biodiesel

Heating value



14,040


0



68

0

Comment


Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG)

Heating value



16,246


0


0

Comment


Marine Fuel Oil

Heating value



89,751


0


0

Comment


Lignite Coal

Heating value



69


3,847


0


0

Comment

C8.2d

(C8.2d) List the average emission factors of the fuels reported in C8.2c.

Biodiesel

Emission factor

0.00608

Unit

metric tons CO2e per m3

Emission factor source

IPCC 2006 Vol 2 Ch 3 table 3.2.2 for Emission Factor and Biodiesels (EtOH theoretical

number) IPCC (2006) Vol. 2 Ch. 1 table 1.2 and GREET1_2011 Biodiesel density , ‘Fuel

specs’ sheet, cell E30.

Comment

Diesel

Emission factor

2.7446

Unit



IPCC 2006 Vol 2 Ch 1 table 1.4 for Emission Factor and DEDE 2010 p.41 for

Conversion Factor

Comment

Jet Kerosene

Emission factor

2.4899


70

Unit




Conversion Factor

Comment

Lignite Coal

Emission factor

Unit


Comment

Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG)

Emission factor

3.06076

Unit

metric tons CO2 per metric ton



Conversion Factor.

Comment

Marine Fuel Oil

Emission factor

3.10886

Unit




Conversion Factor.


71

Comment

Motor Gasoline

Emission factor

2.27628

Unit



IPCC 2006 Vol 2 Ch 1 table 1.4 for Emission Factor and and DEDE 2010 p.41 for

Conversion Factor.

Comment

Natural Gas

Emission factor

2.69263

Unit

metric tons CO2e per metric ton


API 2009

Comment

C8.2e

(C8.2e) Provide details on the electricity, heat, steam, and cooling your organization

has generated and consumed in the reporting year.

Total Gross

generation

(MWh)

Generation that is

consumed by the

organization (MWh)

Gross generation

from renewable

sources (MWh)

Generation from

renewable sources that is

consumed by the

organization (MWh)

Electricity 306,333 306,333 390 390

Heat 0 0 0 0

Steam 0 0 0 0

Cooling 0 0 0 0


72

C8.2f

(C8.2f) Provide details on the electricity, heat, steam and/or cooling amounts that

were accounted for at a low-carbon emission factor in the market-based Scope 2

figure reported in C6.3.

Basis for applying a low-carbon emission factor

No purchases or generation of low-carbon electricity, heat, steam or cooling accounted

with a low-carbon emission factor

Low-carbon technology type

Region of consumption of low-carbon electricity, heat, steam or cooling

MWh consumed associated with low-carbon electricity, heat, steam or cooling

Emission factor (in units of metric tons CO2e per MWh)

Comment

C9. Additional metrics

C9.1

(C9.1) Provide any additional climate-related metrics relevant to your business.

C-OG9.2a

(C-OG9.2a) Disclose your net liquid and gas hydrocarbon production (total of

subsidiaries and equity-accounted entities).

In-year net

production

Comment

Crude oil and condensate, million

barrels

30.75 The hydrocarbon productions are from

17.52MBBL of crude oil and 13.23 MBBL of

Condensate

Natural gas liquids, million barrels 0 No production from natural gas liquids


73

Oil sands, million barrels

(includes bitumen and synthetic

crude)

0 No production from oil sands

Natural gas, billion cubic feet 497.5 NA

C-OG9.2b

(C-OG9.2b) Explain which listing requirements or other methodologies you use to

report reserves data. If your organization cannot provide data due to legal restrictions

on reporting reserves figures in certain countries, please explain this.

PTTEP defines Proved Reserves are those quantities of petroleum which, by analysis of

geological and engineering data, can be estimated with reasonable certainty to be

commercially recoverable, from a given date forward, from known reservoirs and under current

economic conditions, operating methods, and government regulations. Practically, Proved

Reserves mean the petroleum in reservoirs which can be commercially produced based on

supporting data gathered during the well testing process. The Company’s Proved Reserves are

reviewed annually by our earth scientists and reservoir engineers to ensure the industry’s

rigorous professional standards.

Moreover, PTTEP defines Probable Reserves are those additional quantities of petroleum

obtained from an analysis of geoscience and/or engineering data similar to that used in the

estimation of Proved Reserved but with less production possibility.

Due to the company policy, PTTEP publicly reports only Proved and Probable reserves.

C-OG9.2c

(C-OG9.2c) Disclose your estimated total net reserves and resource base (million

boe), including the total associated with subsidiaries and equity-accounted entities.

Estimated total net

proved + probable

reserves (2P)

(million BOE)

Estimated total net

proved + probable +

possible reserves (3P)

(million BOE)

Estimated net

total resource

base (million

BOE)

Comment

Row

1

1,028 Due to the company

policy, PTTEP publicly

reports only Proved and

Probable reserves

C-OG9.2d

(C-OG9.2d) Provide an indicative percentage split for 2P, 3P reserves, and total

resource base by hydrocarbon categories.


74

Net proved +

probable

reserves (2P)

(%)

Net proved +

probable +

possible reserves

(3P) (%)

Net total

resource

base (%)

Comment

Crude oil /

condensate /

Natural gas liquids

25 Due to the company



Probable reserves

Natural gas 75 Due to the company



Probable reserves

Oil sands (includes

bitumen and

synthetic crude)

0 PTTEP had no reserve

from oil sands

C-OG9.2e

(C-OG9.2e) Provide an indicative percentage split for production, 1P, 2P, 3P reserves,

and total resource base by development types.

Development type

Onshore

In-year net production (%)

14

Net proved reserves (1P) (%)

15

Net proved + probable reserves (2P) (%)

14

Net proved + probable + possible reserves (3P) (%)

Net total resource base (%)

Comment


Development type

Shallow-water


75

In-year net production (%)

86

Net proved reserves (1P) (%)

85

Net proved + probable reserves (2P) (%)

86

Net proved + probable + possible reserves (3P) (%)

Net total resource base (%)

Comment


C-CO9.6/C-EU9.6/C-OG9.6

(C-CO9.6/C-EU9.6/C-OG9.6) Disclose your investments in low-carbon research and

development (R&D), equipment, products, and services.

Investment start date

October 1, 2017

Investment end date

December 31, 2020

Investment area

R&D

Technology area

Carbon capture and storage/utilisation

Investment maturity

Small scale commercial deployment

Investment figure

19,000,000

Low-carbon investment percentage

0-20%

Please explain

PTTEP has planned to invest in Climate related RD&T amount of at least 3% of annual

net profit.

Climate related RD&T, including new technologies and capability of the Company’s

research and development program, is developed to be in line with the Company’s


76

growth strategy. The Capability and Technology Development. Roadmap was created

as well as research on technology to support business growth in 3 areas which are

focused to increase exploration success, enhance more production, and develop green

practice. For this project, PTTEP is developing high value products from Flare or

Associated Gas.

Investment start date

July 1, 2017

Investment end date

December 31, 2025

Investment area

R&D

Technology area

Carbon capture and storage/utilisation

Investment maturity

Pilot demonstration

Investment figure

456,000,000

Low-carbon investment percentage

0-20%

Please explain

PTTEP has planned to invest in Climate related RD&T amount of at least 3% of annual

net profit. Climate related RD&T, including new technologies and capability of the

Company’s research and development program, is developed to be in line with the

Company’s growth strategy. The Capability and Technology Development Roadmap

was created as well as researchs on technology to support business growth in 3 areas

which are focused to increase exploration success, enhance more production, and

develop green practice. For this project, PTTEP is studying to develop process of CO2

Conversion to Carbonate-base product.

C-OG9.7

(C-OG9.7) Disclose the breakeven price (US$/BOE) required for cash neutrality during

the reporting year, i.e. where cash flow from operations covers CAPEX and dividends

paid/ share buybacks.

31.7


77

C10. Verification

C10.1

(C10.1) Indicate the verification/assurance status that applies to your reported

emissions.

Verification/assurance status

Scope 1 Third-party verification or assurance process in place

Scope 2 (location-based or market-based) Third-party verification or assurance process in place

Scope 3 Third-party verification or assurance process in place

C10.1a

(C10.1a) Provide further details of the verification/assurance undertaken for your

Scope 1 and/or Scope 2 emissions and attach the relevant statements.

Scope

Scope 1

Verification or assurance cycle in place

Annual process

Status in the current reporting year

Complete

Type of verification or assurance

Limited assurance

Attach the statement

1

2018SDReportEN.pdf

Page/ section reference

Page 94-95

Relevant standard

ISAE 3410

Proportion of reported emissions verified (%)

100

Scope

Scope 2 location-based


78


Annual process


Complete

Type of verification or assurance

Limited assurance


1

2018SDReportEN.pdf

Page/ section reference

Page 94-95

Relevant standard

ISAE 3410

Proportion of reported emissions verified (%)

100

C10.1b

(C10.1b) Provide further details of the verification/assurance undertaken for your

Scope 3 emissions and attach the relevant statements.

Scope

Scope 3- at least one applicable category


Annual process


Complete


1

2018SDReportEN.pdf

Page/section reference

Page 94-95

Relevant standard

ISAE 3410


79

C10.2

(C10.2) Do you verify any climate-related information reported in your CDP disclosure

other than the emissions figures reported in C6.1, C6.3, and C6.5?

No, but we are actively considering verifying within the next two years

C11. Carbon pricing

C11.1

(C11.1) Are any of your operations or activities regulated by a carbon pricing system

(i.e. ETS, Cap & Trade or Carbon Tax)?

Yes

C11.1a

(C11.1a) Select the carbon pricing regulation(s) which impacts your operations.

Australia ERF Safeguard Mechanism

Other ETS, please specify

Voluntary CDM

C11.1b

(C11.1b) Complete the following table for each of the emissions trading systems in

which you participate.

Australia ERF Safeguard Mechanism

% of Scope 1 emissions covered by the ETS

0

Period start date

January 1, 2013

Period end date

December 31, 2018

Allowances allocated

0

Allowances purchased

0

Verified emissions in metric tons CO2e

0

Details of ownership

Facilities we own and operate


80

Comment

Period end date is based on end of asset sold. Since starting the operations, tax have

never been paid as PTTEP emission is within the emission limits by the regulation.

Other ETS, please specify

% of Scope 1 emissions covered by the ETS

0.26

Period start date

January 17, 2013

Period end date

January 16, 2019

Allowances allocated

0

Allowances purchased

0

Verified emissions in metric tons CO2e

10,581

Details of ownership

Facilities we own and operate

Comment

PTTEP has been certified in 2015 by the United Nations Framework convention on

Climate Change (UNFCCC) for its CDM project, Sao-Thien A Oil Field Flare Gas

Recovery and Utilization Project in Sukhothai, Thailand. Effective on 17th January 2013

the CDM project has been successfully registered as a CDM project. As of the end of

2013, the project has resulted in emission reductions equivalent to 10,581 tCO2e and

been issued of 10,581 tCO2 certified emission reduction (CER) (for 2013 emission

reductions) in 2015. The carbon credit is valid until January 2019. In 2014, PTTEP has

participated in T-VER pilot project in Reforestation and the carbon reduction from that

project was approved and certified by Thailand Greenhouse Gas Organization (TGO).

C11.1d

(C11.1d) What is your strategy for complying with the systems in which you

participate or anticipate participating?

PTTEP has been certified in 2015 by the United Nations Framework convention on Climate

Change (UNFCCC) for its CDM project, Sao-Thien A Oil Field Flare Gas Recovery and

Utilization Project in Sukhothai, Thailand. Effective on 17th January 2013 the CDM project has

been successfully registered as a CDM project. As of the end of 2013, the project has resulted

in emission reductions equivalent to 10,581 tCO2e and been issued of 10,581 tCO2 certified

emission reduction (CER) (for 2013 emission reductions) in 2015. The carbon credit is valid


81

until January 2019. In addition, PTTEP also committed to operate under compliance with

regulatory requirement of any countries where we operate

C11.2

(C11.2) Has your organization originated or purchased any project-based carbon

credits within the reporting period?

Yes

C11.2a

(C11.2a) Provide details of the project-based carbon credits originated or purchased

by your organization in the reporting period.

Credit origination or credit purchase

Credit purchase

Project type

Solar

Project identification

Carbon Credit from Solar Cell Installation Project from the University of Phayao's

Campus Power Project for PTTEP Transformation Event in October 2018.

Verified to which standard

Verified to which standard


T-VER project of Thailand Greenhouse Gas Management Organization (Public

Organization)

Number of credits (metric tonnes CO2e)

2.77

Number of credits (metric tonnes CO2e): Risk adjusted volume

2.77

Credits cancelled

No

Purpose, e.g. compliance

Voluntary Offsetting

C11.3

(C11.3) Does your organization use an internal price on carbon?

Yes


82

C11.3a

(C11.3a) Provide details of how your organization uses an internal price on carbon.

Objective for implementing an internal carbon price

Stakeholder expectations

Change internal behavior

Drive low-carbon investment

Identify and seize low-carbon opportunities

GHG Scope

Scope 1

Application

Corporate structure that price is applied to increases the project economic viability for

some assets located in Thailand. In 2016, PTTEP began to include carbon pricing in

new project assessment related to flare gas recovery unit of a Thailand offshore asset

by using reference price from the Thailand Greenhouse Gas Management Organization

(TGO).

Actual price(s) used (Currency /metric ton)

200

Variance of price(s) used

a single price that is applied throughout the company independent of geography,

business unit, or type of decision

Type of internal carbon price

Shadow price

Impact & implication

PTTEP collaborated with companies within the PTT Group to develop our internal

carbon pricing scheme. This carbon price will be factored into investment decisions,

especially in projects with potential to generate a significant amount of GHG emission,

such as bidding for petroleum concessions and assessment of GHG emission reduction

projects. As a guideline, the company uses the price of 200 baht per tonne of CO2

equivalent, as recommended by the Thailand Greenhouse Gas Management

Organization (Public Organization), or a price in line with the relevant laws and

regulations of the country of operation.

C12. Engagement

C12.1

(C12.1) Do you engage with your value chain on climate-related issues?


83

Yes, our suppliers

Yes, our customers

C12.1a

(C12.1a) Provide details of your climate-related supplier engagement strategy.

Type of engagement

Compliance & onboarding

Details of engagement

Included climate change in supplier selection / management mechanism

Climate change is integrated into supplier evaluation processes


Green Procurement Criteria Manuals,

% of suppliers by number

9.4

% total procurement spend (direct and indirect)

3.64

% Scope 3 emissions as reported in C6.5

1

Rationale for the coverage of your engagement

Since 2017, PTTEP has developed and implemented the Green Procurement Criteria

Manual covered the goods and services that still not being included in Thai Green Label

Products list and PTTEP has significant proportion of spent on that goods or services. In

2018, PTTEP’s green procurement guideline is developed with the objective to

elaborate of roles and responsibilities as a responsible and prudent operator by

considering beyond private cost-benefit and approach to maximize net benefit of the

wider environment. This is to promote procurement of environmental friendly goods and

services, seek the opportunity to reduce environmental impact throughout their life cycle

by integrating environmental performance considerations in PTTEP’s procurement

process. This guideline focuses on how to integrate green criteria into procurement and

contract processes which can be applied to all related functions in corporate and

Thailand assets.

In 2018, over 9.4% of suppliers applied the manual and it could enhance more

consumption in green products or services supply.

Impact of engagement, including measures of success

PTTEP has set target 30% of office supplies to be green products and services by 2022.

Up to 2018, we achieved at 9.4%. of suppliers applied the manual since it was the

beginning of implementation phase for the manual. This target has been annually

monitored by responsible party and reported to relevant top management. In additional


84

the achievement of the engagement measures in term of number of suppliers

implemented the manual and % of total procurement spend in green products/services.

Comment

C12.1b

(C12.1b) Give details of your climate-related engagement strategy with your

customers.

Type of engagement

Collaboration & innovation

Details of engagement

Other – please provide information in column 5

% of customers by number

100

% Scope 3 emissions as reported in C6.5

100

Please explain the rationale for selecting this group of customers and scope

of engagement

As natural gas is major PTTEP’s product (More than 70% by volume) and was sold

directly to PTT Gas Separation Plant (GSP) which is our sole customer, the processing

of our sold products by the GSP contributed as a significant GHG scope 3 emission.

The engagement with our sole customer is implemented via an establishment of the

Environmental taskforce in collaboration with customer to develop climate change

related policy & strategy.

Impact of engagement, including measures of success

With the systematic engagement i.e quarterly meeting, carbon pricing policy

development and as a result of the collaboration on policy and strategy, PTT Gas

Separation Plant (GSP) as a PTT subsidiary set the target on 5% GHG intensity

reduction. This target was quarterly monitored from the GHG emission performance

reported by PTT GSP. In 2018, PTT GSP already achieved at 13.3 % GHG intensity

reduction against 20% intensity reduction in 2030.

C12.3

(C12.3) Do you engage in activities that could either directly or indirectly influence

public policy on climate-related issues through any of the following?

Direct engagement with policy makers


85

Other

C12.3a

(C12.3a) On what issues have you been engaging directly with policy makers?

Focus of

legislation

Corporate

position

Details of engagement Proposed legislative

solution

Cap and

trade

Support PTTEP has signed a memorandum of

understanding (MOU) with Thailand’s

Greenhouse Gas Organization (TGO) to be the

first of Thailand’s pilot project for the Thailand

Voluntary Emission Reduction Program (T-

VER), an initiative by TGO to develop a carbon

market in Thailand.

In 2016, PTTEP in collaboration with TGO

developed methods to reduce GHG for Methane

Leak Detection and Repairing in Petroleum

Processing and Distribution Systems. These

procedures are not only helpful to PTTEP but

can be used by other agencies.

The projects help to

promote a voluntary

carbon market in

Thailand for trading and

offsetting carbon.

Cap and

trade

Support In January, 2013, PTTEP’s Sao-Thien A’s flare

gas recovery and utilization project was

registered by UNFCCC’s CDM Executive Board

as a CDM project. We have been certified for

10,581 tCO2e of our carbon credits.

The project helps to

support the CDM

program and expands

the adoption of carbon

reduction projects in

Thailand

C12.3e

(C12.3e) Provide details of the other engagement activities that you undertake.

PTTEP in collaboration with government agencies, academies has implemented several

projects to promote our Corporate Social Responsibility which are directly or indirectly influence

public policy on climate-related issues. Examples of projects that have been launched;

1. PTTEP in combination with the Andaman Coastal Research Station for Development,

Faculty of Fisheries of Kasetsart University and Research and Development of Mangroves and

Coastal Forests (Ranong), and the Department of Marine and Coastal Resources, arranged the

3rd Conservation Youth Camp in December 2017, which took part in conservation activities that

at the Research and Development of Mangroves and Coastal Forests (Ranong), and Marine

Ecosystem Study. The PTTEP Conservation Youth Camp” was initiated in 2014, to give

secondary school students the chance to learn and realize the importance of natural resources

in their hometown, Ranong Province. The mangrove in Ranong Province is one of the most

plentiful mangroves in the Asia-Pacific region, and this area was announced as a Biosphere

Reserves under the UNESCO Man and the Biosphere (MAB) Programme in 1997.


86

2. The Forest Volunteers for Environmental Protection training is a collaboration between

PTTEP and the Marine and Coastal Resources Administration Office 4 Surat Thani,

Department of Marine and Coastal Resources. The training is focused on creating awareness

and participation in the conservation of natural resources and the environment, sustainable use

of forest resources and also wildfire prevention for communities in the areas near the PTTEP

Reforestation project.

3. PTTEP is committed to reducing the environmental impacts through various projects e.g.

working with the Chaipattana Foundation, the Office of Royal Projects, the Department of

Forestry, Kasetsart University’s Faculty of Forestry and other related agencies, and launched

the “Forest Restoration for Eco-Learning at Sri Nakhon Khuean Khan Park Project” for eight

years (2013-2020). The improvement of the walking paths and nature signs took one year to

complete. But the ecological restoration of Bang Kachao forest is an ongoing mission that will

run until 2020. the Forest Reforestation for Eco-learning at Sri Nakhon Khuean Khan Park

Project (in line with HRH Princess Sirindhorn’s initivative, Bang Kachao) in Samut Prakan

Province. The project was initiated in 2013 to restore a 40-rai forest in botanical garden and to

renovate the park into an eco-learning site in the style of natural classroom. The site has

become a popular recreational ground, nicknamed “the Lung of Bangkok”. In 2018, PTTEP

continues to organize “Young Guide Course”, a training course for students in the area to build

up network and raise awareness of the value of “Bang Kachao, Forest in the City”. So far, 242

students have been trained under this program. This year 308,715 visitors visit Sri Nakhon

Khuean Khan Park which is 35% higher than 2017.

C12.3f

(C12.3f) What processes do you have in place to ensure that all of your direct and

indirect activities that influence policy are consistent with your overall climate change

strategy?

PTTEP communicate the sustainability strategy and relevant policy internally and publicly

through various channel i.e. internal announcement, meeting and training, website and

networking activities. For internal communication, we encourage all employees, both staff and

management level, to understand and implement the specific policy and target as well as

climate related issues. For external engagement, we adhere to the stakeholder management

guideline, which providing the company-wide implementation and guidance to all function

groups. To give priority to stakeholder management, the identification and prioritization enables

PTTEP to put in place a proper engagement plan to reach the ultimate goal which is to obtain

stakeholder’s trust. The function who play the important role on stakeholder engagement is

government affairs office, together with the corporate environment management, affected

business units, and strategic planning and sustainable office. Their role is to develop the

company position on the climate related issues and ensure the communication alignment and

compliance with the public policy and target. In order to communicate our expectations on

sustainable development which is including the climate issues, PTTEP has created a

Sustainable Development Booklet that provides a quick overview of how PTTEP plans to

ensure our sustainable growth. This booklet aims to ensure that all PTTEP employees,

subsidiaries, contractors and suppliers and joint venture companies have the same perspective

and general understanding of how to apply sustainability concepts in their day-to-day roles

across the organization and in interactions with peers and stakeholders.


87

C12.4

(C12.4) Have you published information about your organization’s response to climate

change and GHG emissions performance for this reporting year in places other than

in your CDP response? If so, please attach the publication(s).

Publication

In mainstream reports, incorporating the TCFD recommendations

Status

Complete

Attach the document

2

2018AnnualReportEN.pdf

2018SDReportEN.pdf

Page/Section reference

Sustainability Report 2018: Page 66-76, 86-89.

Annual Report 2018: Page 9-12, 47-55, 215-217.

Content elements

Governance

Strategy

Risks & opportunities

Emissions figures

Emission targets

Comment

C14. Signoff

C-FI

(C-FI) Use this field to provide any additional information or context that you feel is

relevant to your organization's response. Please note that this field is optional and is

not scored.

C14.1

(C14.1) Provide details for the person that has signed off (approved) your CDP climate

change response.


88

Job title Corresponding job category

Row 1 Chief Executive Officer Chief Executive Officer (CEO)

Submit your response

In which language are you submitting your response?

English

Please confirm how your response should be handled by CDP

Public or Non-Public Submission I am submitting to

I am submitting my response Public Investors

Please confirm below

I have read and accept the applicable Terms

welcome to your cdp climate change questionnaire 2019 c0 ......ptt exploration & production...

Documents