British oil major BP is targeting a final investment decision for the development of its Cypre project off Trinidad and Tobago for 2020.Illustration: BP’s Angelin development in Trinidad / Image source: BPThe Cypre project’s aim is to develop the Macadamia gas discovery announced by BP back in June 2017, when BP said it had found gas at its Savannah and Macadamia wells.The Savannah – now renamed to Matapal – has already been sanctioned, envisioning a three-well subsea tie-back to the existing Juniper platform.With a production capacity of 400 million standard cubic feet of gas a day, first gas from Matapal is expected in 2022. As for the Cypre project, BP will not follow the Matapal route.In a statement on Friday, BP said it has been working on the development of a new concept for future platforms being piloted for the Cypre development.This, BP said, is expected to significantly reduce the cost of developing resources as well as reducing carbon emissions.“The Cypre project is targeting final investment decision in 2020. If the pilot in Trinidad is successful in unlocking marginal resources, the design may have the potential to be applied in other regions worldwide,” BP said in a statement coinciding the Trinidad & Tobago Prime Minister Dr Keith Rowley’s visit at BP’s head office in London last week.BP’s Upstream chief executive Bernard Looney emphasized the company’s long-term commitment to Trinidad and Tobago during a meeting with the Prime Minister: “BP values our long-term partnership with Trinidad and Tobago. We have been the largest investor in the country’s upstream sector – investing over US$6 billion in the last five years alone – and are committed to continuing to take our business forward. In the past two years, we’ve started up three new Upstream major projects in Trinidad and recently approved the development of another two.”BP’s regional director for Trinidad & Tobago Claire Fitzpatrick said:: “We had a fruitful meeting, discussing current issues and updating the Prime Minister on our activities over the short, medium and long term. Our exploration program, for example, will continue in 2019, as well as work on our two sanctioned projects, Cassia Compression and Matapal.”As previously reported, BP in December 2018, sanctioned two new gas developments offshore Trinidad, Cassia Compression and Matapal. A couple of months later, in February 2019, BP produced first gas from its Angelin offshore development that had been approved for development in June 2017.BP is the largest producer of natural gas in Trinidad and Tobago, accounting for about 55 percent of national production.Offshore Energy Today StaffSpotted a typo? Have something more to add to the story? Maybe a nice photo? Contact our editorial team via email. Offshore Energy Today, established in 2010, is read by over 10,000 industry professionals daily. We had nearly 9 million page views in 2018, with 2.4 million new users. This makes us one of the world’s most attractive online platforms in the space of offshore oil and gas and allows our partners to get maximum exposure for their online campaigns. If you’re interested in showcasing your company, product or technology on Offshore Energy Today contact our marketing manager Mirza Duran for advertising options.
A recent study has found that scientific methods currently used to measure the carbon footprint of various products is not sufficient in determining their actual impacts on the environment.The two studies conducted by Robert Vos of the USC Spacial Studies Institute, published in the November edition of the journal Environmental Impact Assessment Review, state that the available science cannot give an accurate report of the carbon footprint impact of products as basic as paper.Vos argues that the problem with the current science is what it measures. Vos said that carbon footprint labels should specifically take into consideration the location of production and the effects on surrounding land use.For instance, when Vos and Joshua Newell of the University of Michigan studied the carbon footprint of paper in U.S. and Chinese supply chains, they found a significantly varying impact according to the forest harvested, which labels do not currently acknowledge.According to Vos, forests serve as the “planet’s lungs,” meaning they absorb and store carbon dioxide, and when trees are harvested for paper this process is affected.“The type of forest and the harvest practices are, hands down, the most crucial thing to measure about any wood-based product,” Vos said in a press release.The study analyzes three existing international protocols for quantifying carbon footprints and proposes changes to include management practices of forests.Some studies suggest that the loss of forests accounts for about 20 percent of the entire greenhouse gas emissions worldwide annually.“We need to do a much better job incorporating the carbon emissions associated with forest-based products to tackle climate change,” Newell said in a press release. “From our study, it is clear that from a greenhouse gas emissions perspective, not all paper is created equal.”Some scientists speculate that the reason behind these inaccurate carbon footprints is companies that put profit before environmental effects.“There’s a big struggle between industry and the environment,” said Maya Lusk, a freshman majoring in environmental studies. “Industries are not interested in having environmental-friendly products; they are most interested in profit and a lot of the time, environmental alternatives are more expensive.”Vos said most retailers of paper items don’t even know where their paper fiber comes from.Some students like Sam Cheng, a freshman majoring in biological sciences, also said that environmental concerns sometimes take a backseat to convenience.“Most people think the need for quality comes before the environmental impact,” Cheng said.