Well good morning, everyone. I'm Craig Marshall, BP's Head of Investor Relations and thanks for joining us today. I've got Bernard, Murray and obviously myself here today. We've got a slightly extended presentation. In a moment I'll hand over to Bernard to introduce and cover the full-year highlights. And then to Murray he'll take you through our fourth quarter results. Then we'll turn to strategy. And Bernard and Murray will update you on the progress and financial frame. And then following that, we'll make sure we've got plenty of time for the questions, which I'm sure you'll all have. Before we began, as usual, I'd like to draw your attention to the cautionary statement, which is included in the presentation slide deck. During today's presentation, we will make forward-looking statements, including those that refer to our estimates, plans, targets, aims and expectations, actual results and outcomes could differ materially due to these factors. And those noted in our cautionary statement, as well as in our U.K. and SEC filings. Please refer to those filings which are available on our website for more details. On that note, over to you, Bernard.

Great. Well, thanks, Craig. And good morning to everyone joining us on the phone and on the web. And of course, I'm also delighted that we're able to host a small audience here in-person in St. James this morning. And that includes my leadership team, with the exception of Anja, who will join us on the 1st of March, which we're all very excited about and have to say. We do have Joaquin here, Joaquin stand up for a moment, Joaquin runs our Gas and Low Carbon business in the meantime, until Anja arise. Also want to introduce and is doing a brilliant job by the way. I wanted to introduce two new members of the team. Leigh-Ann Russell, who takes over from David Eyton, who is leaving the company after 40 years, and Dominic and Emeka, where is Emeka. Emeka, who takes over from Dominic Emery, who's also leaving the company after close to 40 years. And all of those moves take effect on March the 1st. And for those of you who are on the web, you can see the team on the slide here. Murray, I think that's a very smiley photograph of you, that's full on smile, that one. The last time we held an in-person event was two years ago. And actually, I was just remarking this morning, this is actually my first time doing a results call in-person in my new role. So it's amazing how time has passed. And it's hopefully a sign of progress and a sign of confidence in the future. And I promise it won't take as long as we did at BP week. So we will come back to that later. Now in the two years since laying out our ambition, our new ambition, we've been through obviously a…

Great, thanks. Thanks Bernard and good morning everyone. Nice to see all of you in-person finally. As usual, I'll start with the macro-environment. During the fourth quarter, Brent rose by 8% to average $80 per barrel, its highest level in seven years. To-date in 2022, Brent has moved above $90 with supply disruptions, easing concerns around Omicron and the expectation of continued declines in inventories. Looking ahead, we expect supply and demand to move back towards balance through 2022. However, with lower levels of spare capacity, price volatility is likely. Turning to gas, during the quarter seasonal demand saw Henry Hub rise by 10% to an average of $4.70. International prices rose sharply with NBP and JKM around 90% higher than in the third quarter. This was caused by low inventory levels and concerns about the availability of supply during the winter months. With ongoing geopolitical uncertainty and low storage levels, we see the potential for continued price volatility. Turning to refining, industry margins remain broadly flat compared to the third quarter and we expect them to remain at similar levels during the first quarter. Local margins may and are being impacted by lockdowns. Moving to our results. In the fourth quarter we reported an underlying replacement cost profit of $4.1 billion, compared to $3.3 billion last quarter. Compared to the third quarter, and gas and low carbon energy the result benefited from higher gas realizations and higher production due to major project ramp up. After an exceptional first nine months, it was an average quarter for gas marketing and trading. In oil production and operations, the result reflects higher liquids and gas realizations. This includes the benefit of very strong NBP prices. The result also reflects higher production including a recovery in the Gulf of Mexico from the impact…

Okay. Thanks, Murray. I'm going to speak for about half an hour to go through a strategy update. So just getting you situated in your seats. Before handing back to Murray. And he'll cover the financial frame for about five, six minutes. And then I'll close and then we'll move to Q&A. So let me turn to our strategic progress. And we now have two years, believe it or not under our belt. And we've made progress on our 2025 targets. And we are increasingly confident not just in those targets, but in the opportunities presented by the energy transition. And before we get into the detail, let me remind you of that strategy, which I would add remains unchanged. It is importantly, a three part strategy. Part one is resilient hydrocarbons. Part two is convenience and mobility. Part three is low carbon energy. Embedded across these is our sustainability framework, which sets out our aims for getting to net zero. Improving people's lives and caring for our planet. And binding it all together is integration, harnessing our collective capabilities as the energy system transitions to help more and more customers get the clean, reliable and affordable energy that they want. And in doing so, create value for our shareholders. And we sum all of this up as BP transforming from an international oil company to an integrated energy company. And I would say, I think we have already made significant progress on this transformation. It's important to set this in context. So if we look back year one, we set out a new direction, a new purpose, a new ambition, a new strategy, a new financial framework, a new sustainability framework, and a new leadership team. That's done. That is now done. Year two 2021 was about change, and…

Thanks, Bernard. I'll try to be at.

How did I do?

You did great. I'll try to be a bit more succinct for those of you who know me. So thanks, Bernard. The detail we provided today links the delivery of our strategy, drive 2025 financial targets. It also shows how we aim to transition the cash flows of the company to 2030 based on our plans. Let me briefly recap. First, we have a high quality resilient hydrocarbons business that we expect to sustain EBITDA around 2021 levels through 2025 and we aim to hold around this level through 2030 at broadly constant price assumptions, with returns of 12% to 15%. Second from 2021, we aim to more than double EBITDA from convenience and mobility to around $9 billion to $10 billion by 2030 while generating returns of at least 15% to 20%. Our customer businesses are ratable and drive growth to 2025 with EV charging driving growth in the second half of the decade. And third and low carbon we aim to grow EBITDA in the second half of the decade, reaching $2 billion to $3 billion by 2030 as our renewables and hydrogen businesses come on line, this is all underpinned by continued relentless focus on cost efficiency, investment in digital and agile ways of working. We continue to expect to deliver cash cost savings from Reinvent BP of $3 billion to $4 billion by 2023 relative to 2019. Taken together, this underpins our confidence in the guidance we gave you in August 2020. We expect to deliver 7% to 9% EBITDA per share CAGR between 2H'19, 1H'20 and 2025. Yes, that's a mouthful, and ROACE of 12% to 14%. This assumes oil price of 50 to 60 per barrel in 2020 real terms. And looking further ahead as the businesses transition, we aim to continue to grow…

Very good, that word more succinct. Yes, great. So this is one to two minutes, and then we'll go to questions. So in summary, it says you have heard a lot today, I agree on our strategic progress towards transitioning into an integrated energy company. And at the end of the day, it all comes together in our investor proposition, Craig's favorite slide, and we've shown that. It is a simple but we believe compelling proposition that combines the following. Number one, committed distributions, generating competitive cash returns today, as we transform the company. Number two, profitable growth, growing EBITDA per share, and growing returns and number three, sustainable value as we invest with discipline in the five transition growth engines, and lower our emissions, all of this in-service of delivering long-term shareholder value. So thanks, again, for listening this morning. Now, it's over to you, Murray and I will be delighted that says we will try anyway to take your questions from the room and online. We've got all the technology that we need to do that. May we ask you to keep them to two points, only please, at most, and to frame them as briefly as you can. This is all Craig's language, if you want to blame anybody, so that we can get through as many questions as possible. And it will also be helpful if you will just state your name for those people who are online. And I guess we'll start here. Murray in in the room. So who wants to lead off? We'll go to the back here. Go ahead.

Hi, thank you very much for the presentation. I wanted to ask you two questions.

Just remind people where you're from and just sort of people know.

Perfect. It's Michele Della Vigna from Goldman Sachs. And two questions, if I may. The first one relates to your buyback program. I was wondering, under what circumstances you'd go above the 60% pay out of the free cash flow. I was wondering if perhaps, at higher oil prices, it makes sense to dedicate more to buybacks? And whether there is a hard limit to how much you can do, how much more than let's say $2 billion per quarter? Can you actually execute on the market, given the daily liquidity and the amount of shares you want to buyback in a year? And then my second question relates to the EU green taxonomy. A lot of companies are starting to work to think about what is the percentage of revenues and investment that is consistent with it? I was wondering when I look at your numbers on the green transition, should we just effectively take it ex convenience, which doesn't fit into the EU green taxonomy and think that that could be a good approximation of where you could end up when you start to report those numbers in the next 12 months? Thank you.

Very good. Excellent. On buybacks, Murray will speak to limits and his own views on things. Michele you know, as well as I do. It's -- there are many debates about what is the right use of surplus cash. And I think from day one, I think we've learned outlined a very clear financial framework that takes each of those potential uses of cash in order starting with the first column cash being the dividend, then we want to strengthen that balance sheet. And we have done a lot. I think we had our largest reported debt was $51 billion net debt that was at the end of a quarter, it might have been different in the middle of a quarter. And we're now down at $30.6 billion. I think we're in a much better place with our rating agencies. We're now stable outlook, with S&P, having been upgraded from a negative outlook. And we'll continue to want to put that 40% on the balance sheet through this year. We then want to invest in our hydrocarbons business in our growth engines. And if there's any leftover the fifth and final point is for buybacks. So the board keeps this under constant review. We've been very clear in terms of buybacks for this year, what you can expect, and it's not at least 60%. It is 60% for 2022 with the 40% going to the balance sheet, and we'll update our views on that again, at the same time next year. And obviously, the dividend is kept under review by the board on a quarterly basis. But we've laid out our expectations around that. Anything you'd add and anything around limits to what we can do.

Yes, I think it's just important given the uncertainty in the world that we continue to dedicate money to strengthen the balance sheet. I feel that's very important. Another shot can happen at any moment in time on Omicron or the next wave. And so I think it's better to posture in a conservative space, to be honest. So that's why we're continuing to dedicate cash to the balance sheet. I don't think there's any way we regret that. As far as limitations on share buybacks, there will be market limitations. We're still learning about that about what's possible. Of course, it depends on how fast the share price appreciates, as well, that creates limitations in itself. We feel -- we've already done half a billion dollars of buybacks this quarter for employee offsets in January. So that's behind us. We'll do a billion and a half by the results date. That's carefully worded, because sometimes it's a little bit tricky to do it inside the quarter. So there are days where we're buffeting up against that, but liquidity in the shares is high. We just have to watch a rising share price that it's difficult to continue to buyback with that rise in share price. So, so far, so good. But probably another half a billion in the quarter is getting tight, depending on what happens with share price. But that's a nice problem to have Michele.

Yes, you're not saying that's a bad thing.

That's a great thing. Yes.

Okay. Got it. On EU taxonomy. Look, I think it's a moving space. The proposals being issued, I think a big question you'll have to ask yourself Michele is what to do with natural gas, which is in the current proposal, albeit a decarbonized version of natural gas. Let's see how that survives. Convenience is in our transition growth engines, because it's the non-fuel element of our convenience business, which in the U.K. today, I don't know what the numbers are. But more than half 60%, 70% potentially of people who visit a BP petrol station don't buy any fuel. So it's a convenience offer for a convenience reason, it's an incredibly fast growing business. I've looked at the U.K. market, it's expected to grow at 12.5% per annum over the next five years. So it's a transit -- it's a growth business. It's in transition, because it's non-fossil, it's that aspect of the business that's in there. The trick will be what happens with natural gas. And that could obviously spring your numbers up and down. The others are clearly very much part of the taxonomy. So hopefully that helps. Great questions. Thank you. We'll go here next. It's like everybody's is going to ask a question.

Gordon Gray, HSBC. Just one on the mobility, and particularly EV charging. You've got very ambitious targets for growing EV charge points. Some of that obviously is going to cannibalize your conventional fuel sales. Can just give us a feel what you're seeing on the ground today, about the margin you get from EV charging in a typical fuel station relative to historic conventional fuel margins?

I think that's the most we've said so far. It's what Emma said in an interview recently that we're at the point where the margins are broadly equivalent. So we're at the stage where the margins are equivalent. We probably think that they can get better. If you look at our Hammersmith EV charging station, our utilization rate in Hammersmith is 67% today. 67% that's on a time basis. Many of the assumptions that people have in their plans are around single-digit utilization rates. When you look at the residence time of a charging customer, probably a little bit longer than that of a petrol customer. We see enormous opportunity on the convenience side. In fact, we see that with our station here in the car park underneath Hyde Park in London, where the convenience offer is also a big draw. So we see opportunity there. So we're very excited about this business. We're opening 115 charge points a week. Now we're adding 115 charge points a week in the fourth quarter. We sold more power in December in China than we did in the entire 2020 year. This is a business that's growing exponentially. And when you talk about the role of a company like ours in the transition, and people question it. Why wouldn't we want to absolutely take on that market? Look at the starting position we have, 550 million customers within 20 minutes of a BP site. Look at the brand that we have. Look at the convenience offer that we have. in Germany, Albert Heine, in the Netherlands, AMPM in America, huge. We would be fools not to embrace this opportunity that is being presented to us. So we see massive opportunity. That's why since last year, that plan has accelerated more capital is being deployed. And we're very excited about the long-term potential fleets. Hugely interesting. Between 6% and 8% of the power that we discharged through our charging network in the U.K. in 2021 was to Uber. So fleets will become important. Fleets that's where we're concentrating in America. So 4.5x more electricity, more power sold in 2021 than in 2020. And we are targeting a 100 fold increase by the end of the decade. All about undergo fast charging, ultrafast charging. It's a very different business, but it ones that plays enormously to our strengths. You love it, what have I missed.

The growth and fleets in the U.S. was pretty surprising. 10x growth over the decade. So 254,000 electric vehicles now in fleets 10x growth through the end of the decade is the most conservative estimate we see. That's why we went into ample power to really get a leapfrog ahead on their customer book, and then their digital offer. They have a great digital stack. It allows you to help manage a business on their behalf the overall fleet and you can charge on a fleet on a service basis. So we're bringing that back to the U.K. as well. We've got deals with Royal Mail, fire brigade, police just customer after customer after customer. And if we can link together the offshore energy, the onshore hydrogen with these fleet and on fast on the go charging, you've recreated the upstream in about a decade's time. So it's just a fabulous, fabulous opportunity ahead of us with very high returns,

And if you're charging geek like we obviously are, check out the blogs on Blazon Blogger in Germany, who compares reliability of charging networks all across Germany, and AROU, which is our brand in Germany is number one with 1% downtime. So anyway, fun space who next Lucas? And then we'll start heading over to the side of the room here shortly.

It's Lucas Herrmann from Exane. Two questions a little more here. And now perhaps the first is you must have very good visibility on the LNG trading business into Q1. Given I suspect, Carol would have set most of your positions for you. I wonder whether you can make any commentary on how you expect trading in that quarter, or the next quarter to go relative to, shall we say the last two? And the second just goes back to balance sheet, Murray. And maybe it ties in with trading to some degree as well. But just the mix of cash in debt, it's very visible, the Europeans carry a lot of cash relative to the U.S. It's also very apparent that you trade a lot more than the U.S., but the level of cash carried on balance sheet now. Is it really appropriate? Or should you be thinking about bringing that down and suffering less of an interest hit through differentials? What was that?

Thanks Lucas. Murray, I'll let you take both.

Sure. Starting with balance sheet, my favorite thing Lucas. $39 billion of cash at the end of last year down to $30 billion in cash. And you saw the statistics on debt buybacks, we'll continue to do that, as long as it economically make sense to continue to buyback debt. Depends on what happens with interest rates. But for now, we think that continues to be a sensible thing to do. We do have to carry high levels of cash though, as a trading organization, in order to trade on exchanges. You have to have cash buffers for initial margin and variation margin. And that's why we can drive the returns that we drive through having that cash. I think that's an effective use, the returns are pretty darn high on a cash basis much better than you can get into depository bank or anything else. So I think we will run a little bit higher cash position, especially as we go through the volatile times we're in right now. Exchanges are demanding more margin call these days, given the volatility and until while this deficit and energy supply last, we'll just need to run our cash balances. So I don't think that's a bad thing. I think it's a good thing, Lucas, because it enables Carol's profits. As far as speculating about how Carol will do in the first quarter. I think I'll hold fire. The gas markets are pretty volatile right now predicting is gas price going to go up as bad gas price is going to go down as tricky right now. We obviously have a large LNG traded book, there'll be doing a lot of cargo deliveries into Europe. I think we did 35 into Europe over the past year seven and seven here into the U.K. to try to help with gas supply. But there's a large position that will be delivered and they find, oh, Carol, she'll do pretty well. So let's see Lucas.

And on LNG cargo I've learned provides enough heat for 100,000 homes for a year. So 35 cargoes into Europe last year seven cargoes into the U.K. over the winter, which is double our normal capacity. Chris.

Thanks so much. Chris Kuplent from Bank of America. Murray fully endorse your message on the balance sheet if I may. Can you remind us of your sensitivity away from net debt in your provisions and lease books to rising interest rates, which I guess we have to prepare for? And my second question, if I may 2021 is a special year because I remember well, 2016 and '17 Investor Day is targeting 2021. And you've made it not exactly easy to compare with targets that were set at the time, but I would argue downstream as the one that let you down. Of course, we're in COVID times downstream was particularly hit during 2021. You highlighted $600 million, Bernard on COVID impact pet cams gone. But you're using again, convenience and mobility as a target to get excited about earnings growth. And I can't see much earnings growth over the last four years that we talked about in there. So how can you maybe convince us that this time is different?

Very good, very balance sheet.

Yes, sensitivity to interest rates. As I mentioned in the speech, an awful lot of the debt book that we've gone with recently on the debt races is fixed. So we've taken advantage of the low rates in 20s, and 30s. And fixed most of our balance sheet, pretty low rates. We won't retrieve those. So those should carry most of the debt book fixed for the next few decades. I think that'll turn out to be fortunate timing, but two or three CFOs down the road will actually tell us what happens. As far as the rest of the leases aren't sensitive to interest rate moves. So that's not a risk. And of course, the Macondo pay down remains out there as well on a gross basis. And that's not subject to interest rate volatility as well. So I think, as I came into the job, there were a lot of people asking me about the strength of the balance sheet, the nature of our debt book, I think, Kate and Navneet have done a fabulous job of fixing it, lengthening it and decreasing the risk profile the business significantly. So I think that concern is largely behind us. And something that shareholders can now count on for moving forward.

On convenience and mobility, part of downstream business from the old days with and without products. I'd say a couple of things. I think the area that's been challenged over the last year or two, in particular aside from COVID has been Castrol. We've had higher base all costs feed through last year, there's a lag there, they're twice what they were pre-COVID. Our margins are off. We have challenges on the supply chain on additives. So that's an area where we've seen some challenge, no question about that. We're on it. We have a plan. We will grow that revenue base. We are going to take out costs. We see massive opportunities for digitization. We see massive opportunities in the warehouse base. And we do believe that the additive situation will resolve itself around the middle of the year. So the underlying premise of Castrol remains very, very strong. In fact, they had their highest sales on record in China last year, and they remain the number one brand in India. So that's some work to do. Beyond that the convenience and mobility business, why do we have confidence, 20% increase in gross margin between 2019 and 2021. That's on top of a 10% increase the previous year, and a 10% increase the year before that. What's driving these types of things, basket sizes, people are wanting to shop or local. And if the quality is there, they're going to come to your store. Basket sizes are up 20%. Thorntons are seeing basket sizes are up 29%. We have I think, 16 million loyal customers. That's way up over the past couple of years. And a loyal customer is worth of 4x more than a regular customer. We've talked about the digitization and the app through BPme. We've had the highest number of transactions ever, in November on the BPme app. And they're twice what a non-BPme app is. The U.K. in retail had its best Christmas ever on record. So when I look at the inputs to the business, I'm very confident that under MS leadership, we will deliver the plans that we've laid out. COVID has been some headwinds. We've had a few challenges in Castrol. But the underpinnings of that business in that space are brilliant. And they're all driven by a commitment to the brand, a commitment to the quality they offer, and a real commitment and investment into digitization of that offer. So pretty excited about it, Chris, you'll have to hold us to account that's what we're here to do. And that's what we intend to do. Got to come to Lydia here on the front row.

Thanks. It's Lydia Rainforth from Barclays. And two questions if I could. Firstly thank you for doing this in-person. It's very interesting to see. In terms of the EBITDA -- if you think about the transition EBITDA that's sort of 20% to 25% I think of your overall EBITDA number now by 2030. So within that I mean obviously there has been discussion, but it doesn't actually look like that kind of messaging about being an IC is necessarily getting through to the share price. So at what point do you go? Actually, we need to do more around that, or there's a different structure that you look at? And then the second part is, clearly there's a lot of focus on the low carbon and energy transition in there. How do you feel about inflation within the CapEx side of the renewable side? So let's say on the oil price on the oil side, but around the renewables business, given that these are new projects, that the first time that you've done them? How comfortable are you in the CapEx?

Great. Murray you want to take inflation? I'll take the IEC question.

Yes, inflation more broadly, we ate most of the inflation in 2021. The only place we're seeing material inflation in 2022 right now is things like solar panels, and then our lower 48 business. Highly predictable, isn't it, when you see an upswing in price, the first place that it shows up as a lower 48. We're probably seeing a forecast of 5% to 10% inflation in the lower 48. But I suspect the guys will do better than that. If you guys have met Dave Lawler, he likes to sandbag a little bit. So I think he's just trying to make room for more activity with me. So I think, he's going to love that. I think it's, I think we're okay in the historic upstream and the downstream, and we'll be able to eat most of the inflation in 2022. You're right policy it's got inflation, 30% or some of the numbers we're seeing, but because of the cycle time with it, it's fine, you spend the money, but you get a higher PPA, and you still get the returns you want. So it doesn't really impact the returns ratio of the business itself. As far as the longer wavelength inside offshore wind, we're just now on Empire 1 and Empire 2 going to market with bids, we'll see what those look like. And we'll be interested to hear back from Equinor throughout the year, we should hear back by the end, I suspect Equinor will update the market once they're through all that process near the back end of 2022 about what we're seeing. I think there will be bubbles of this stuff. So there will be some heat and then more capacity will come on, et cetera. So I think it will all be on the timing of when you contract versus when you fix in a PPA, and when you fix in your debt. And I think two big companies such as ourselves, will be able to manage our way through that to get to the returns. As far as CapEx, Lydia, we'll stick with the 14 to 16. And we'll just modulate -- we will modulate our equity to manage that or modulate the debt levels we have to make sure that we manage through this. We're focused on returns and we're focused on capital discipline. That's core in our mind as we go through this.

And on your first question, Lydia. Tackle it a couple of ways. One is I think, I think as the world is beginning to grapple with the complexity of the energy transition, I think there is a day by day, increasing understanding that there is a role, and not alone, just a role. But actually there is a need for a company like ours. And I think that is becoming more and more apparent. It has a long journey still to go, no doubt. But it is becoming more and more apparent because reliability, and affordability matters as well as clean. And the reality is that natural gas with renewables of which we have both, which we can add a trading organization to so that we can provide a customer with that predictable, reliable, affordable, cleaner supply. There's a role for a company like that, because people don't want to have to go to somebody for their renewable power and go to somebody else for their base load power and go to somebody else, to hedge their pricing and to do all of these things. There is a one stop shop here. It's called an IEC. It's called BP. So I think, in some ways, the challenges and we don't wish them to be like this, but it is a complex transition. And I think it increases the argument that we have a role and that there is more than that, that companies like ours are needed. The second thing that I would say, and that is why we had confidence clearly when we laid out our strategy 18 months ago, but the more I learn, and the more we learn, and the more time we spend in it, the more excited you get about just what a company like…

No, I was pretty passionate. Does that help?

Yes, good, excellent. We'll go over and we will go to the phone lines here.

Biraj Borkhataria, RBC. So question on divestments. I mean, at this point in the cycle, your balance sheet doesn't need divestments. But you obviously have your top down targets in the upstream that the 40% decline. I just want to get a sense of how you're thinking about accelerating that potentially in light of high commodity prices. And then the second question related to that, but the 2022 guidance, could you just remind us if there's anything left due from Alaska, and if that's embedded in that $2 billion to $3 billion number?

Murray, handle the second part. Biraj on the first part, not top down in terms of the 40% reduction in production there. We've looked back to the year 2010 and BP has consistently every year done on average $4 billion to $5 billion of divestments every single year since the year 2000. Portfolio high grading is a natural piece of running a good business, and we will be doing this. Energy transition or no energy transition, this is good business. And this is what we will do in the years ahead. We set out a target already of $25 billion. That's what we said we do by 2025. We've done 15, we've got 10 to do, two to three per annum, which was kind of what our guidance used to be many, many years ago, $2 billion to $3 billion of divestments per annum. Accelerating divestments, it's all a question of value. We're not in a rush, no rush here at all. If someone else sees more value in an asset that we feel is less important to us, than it might be to them, then we're open minded. But there is no intent to accelerate, there is an intent to prosecute the plan that we've laid out. And the main thing to do is we're going to be driven by value. That's what we're going to be driven by. And if we see value, we'll do it. If we don't, we won't. And that's where I would leave it, Alaska 2022.

Yes, so $15.5 billion of proceeds have been announced or transactions have been announced for sale, $12.5 billion has been received. So we've got three of deferred payments, including Alaska, we'll probably get depends on the oil price, depends on performance, but 10% of that is Alaska, 10% of up to two threes, Alaska, inside 2022. And it's a gradual payout structure over time based on price and performance could be higher if the price goes higher, or if they perform better but that gives you a rough range, Biraj.

Thanks, Biraj. Let's go to the phone line, or Zoom. Can we go to Jason Kenney at Santander. Jason? I thought you were supposed to be here.

I was unfortunate, I mean, well, I say unfortunately, I'm in Scotland, enjoying a sunny day.

Very good, that is nice.

Thanks for the presentation. Really enjoyed the camaraderie and the positivity that you're generating, it is phenomenal to see and to watch. I've got a point of clarification, I think you mentioned on the biogas, bio energy kind of $0.10 split for biogas but a much larger part of the EBITDA potential from biogas relative to the volume, if you could just clarify that for me. Secondly, on fleet charging, any data points around the AMPLY deal in the U.S. would be much appreciated. Are there likely to be other targets in the fleet space in the fleet first just phenomenal opportunity? Or do you think that there's going to be mainly organic growth on the back of that positioning? And one more, if I may, is there a scenario where BP moves net cash by mid-decade? Is that something that you've envisaged and any implications that you think could go to that?

Great, Jason, thank you. I thought you were being nice, genuinely. But you wanted three questions. So now, now I get it. But, Murray, if you take bio, and net cash, I'll take AMPLY, AMPLY is a great, it's a great acquisition where we've, I haven't met the team personally, but the team obviously has, and we're excited. What did we buy, we bought three things we bought, number one, a great management team. Number two, we bought a long list of customers. And number three, we bought a digital stack that would have taken us two, three, four years to build on our own. I know that Richard Bartlett, who runs our EV charging business is in America this week, or next week, and he's meeting with the team, and they're going out to other customers, some very big customers, potentially that would be fantastic if we could sign up. So hugely excited about that, it's given us a big acceleration in our fleet journey in America. And that's what we wanted to do, when we do more deals like that, possibly. But what you should know is that all of what we do is within our $14 billion to $15 billion frame for this year, and within our $14 billion to $16 billion frame going forward. So we may use acquisitions at a relatively small scale like that to help accelerate our ambition. But you shouldn't see, you won't see any surprises in our capital, because it's all-in. Murray, on biofuels, it is a billion and biofuels in a billion and biogas anything else you want to say, it's just very high returns biogas, right.

Yes, the biogas is a bit of a different model in the biofuel side. Inside our trading organization, we don't generally tend to use CapEx, we tend to use our balance sheet for commercial commitments. So you won't see much CapEx put into biogas, there'll be some, but you won't see much CapEx go into that, we will be long-term commercial commitments and leveraging those, so you get some pretty extraordinary returns inside the biogas business.

Plus the credits.

Plus the credits, of course, which are very attractive and could be traded as well. And then the biofuels side, we will have the CapEx heavy period, we will invest somewhere around $2 billion to $3 billion into the five facilities that Bernard talked about, through the middle of the decade, we define now on three of them. So let's see how the engineering estimates come through. And then very much looking forward to building these options. That would be fantastic. As far as net cash negative, well, I guess that's a question on oil price, isn't it? We've given you a lovely little chart, I can't remember what slide it was, we've given you a lovely little chart, and we've added a yellow brick at the top for what happens to debt as price goes up. So that gives you the total, total free cash flow that we're getting out of the business. And certainly it's possible that we're getting more cash than we know what to do with. For now, I'm going to be conservative and manage the company as if it's $40 oil, anything, anything we could get above that just helps obviously, and that will go 60% to buybacks and 40% continuing through that. But it's possible with the pricing we're seeing now, Jason, but for now I'll just focus on 2022 and make sure we continue to be conservative with the balance sheet.

Thank you, Murray. Excellent, let's go to Jason Gabelman from Cowen and Company on Zoom as well. And Jason, thank you for your question, Jason Gabelman?

Yes, hey. Thanks for taking my question.

Hi, how are you?

Good, yes. I had two, first just it was a clarification on. I'm trying to compare this to kind of when you initially laid out the strategy, and it looks like when you laid out the strategy, bioenergy, and LNG was in your low carbon and energy business footprint and the EBITDA growth that you were discussing had that portion in the low carbon energy. And now it looks like it's in resilient hydrocarbons and the EBITDA growth associated with bioenergy and LNG, is in resilient hydrocarbon, so if you could just clarify that. And point two, I wanted to ask, Murray, you mentioned polysilicon inflation at 30%. And it seems like a pretty eye popping number and you're obviously focused on growing your renewables power business quite a bit. So if you could discuss, how you think about that inflation potentially continuing over time as solar and wind growth continued to accelerate industry wide, relative to your capital budget, and how you manage that and think about hitting your growth targets in terms of capacity, you plan to bring online. Thanks.

Jason, thank you. On bioenergy and LNG, bio and LNG is definitely and the resilient hydrocarbons. The reason bio is in there is because it's based on the biofuels business in there is based around those refineries, right. That's what we're going to do in there and that's, there is no perfect place to allocate these. Believe me, we've been back and forth on this a lot. And there's no there's nothing, there's nothing cute going on there as an Irish phrase. It's simply that's where we think that belong and the key is what it adds up to at the end and the returns that we get from each business. But that is exactly where bio and LNG sit and where it used to sit in the old frame, the old description in low carbon.

Gas and low carbon, yes.

Yes in gas and low carbon because LNG was there. We put all the resilient hydrocarbons together LNG gas and biogas in there, polysilicon.

Yes, so let's remember the model, we have on Lightsource BP. So we injected $200 million or $300 million into Lightsource BP, a few years ago, we don't inject capital after that. So it doesn't impact our capital frame, the point of Lightsource BP is to be a developer. So they're going to develop 25 gigawatts through the first half of the decade, that's the target they've set. And they're going to acquire land, get the permits, get the design done, get a power purchase agreement in place, get the debt in place, and then they plan to flip those molecules. So the capital construction associated with the poly silicate goes to whoever's buying it, mostly pension funds these days. So from our perspective, sitting inside BP and a shareholder of Lightsource BP and sitting inside Lightsource BP, they're not expending this capital on the solar panels themselves, that's for the purchasers to do. Instead, what we're trying to do is create this developer model that creates profit out of the flip and provides electron sources for Carol's trading business, if it makes sense, we kind of have the option to offtake that electrons into our portfolio. So that poly silicate inflation level has doesn't impact BP, so to speak, it's more impacting the consumer, Jason. We're not seeing anywhere near those levels of inflation in other spaces inside offshore wind, et cetera. But again, we're just inside the first bidding process with a supply chain really, this year, and Equinor as a lead partner and Empire 1 and 2 will report back to the market in due course, so I think, no real impact from the poly silicate because of the nature that we run Lightsource BP right now.

They're also looking, I think, in your old job with in procurement with developing long-term supply agreements, like we would have our long-term relationships like we would have in the old oil and gas business. So it's one of the things that I think we're working with them on to these frame agreements that we've traditionally used in oil and gas, to see if they can develop long-term relationships. Jason there so and some of these megawatts that we're flipping on at the moment look like they're not being impacted by inflation prices. They seem to be very attractive.

Lot of solar panels that they bought and a couple of deals a while back, that they're not having to pay the increased prices yet, but we're doing Lightsource BP is doing its first big flip as we speak. And it'll be interesting to see what comes out of that in the first half of the year. Interesting to see what the pricing is. Great, thanks, Jason.

We're encouraged. Great, Jason. Thank you. Let's go back to the room here. Let's go in front here. That's not somebody.

Hi, hello. It's Martijn Rats, Morgan Stanley. I've got two questions, if I may, about the oil and gas business. The first one relates to the long-term production targets that were initially set during BP week. And I do remember sort of a 20% to 25% decline by the middle of the decade and a 40% decline by the end of the decade, initially through disposals and then later through sort of runoff of the portfolio. But listening to your earlier I think I heard you say but I just wanted to check that you said that with the investment plan that is now in place, this could keep underlying production flat. So it sounds like more long-term, less near term and more disposal is not an underlying sort of decline of the portfolio. So I wanted to ask you, to what extent this guidance at least the targets on long-term production actually changed, if I sort of brought the sort of got this correct. And then the second thing relates to oil prices as in the interesting thing about the 2030 guidance is, of course, that you do get into that period where if you could conceivably start to think very differently about the oil markets. Now, I'm not asking you to speculate about oil prices by 2030…

It is higher or lower.

That is exactly, that is stuff of anything but it's not entirely unimportant. And it does signal that at least the underlying BP view, is that even by 2030, we will not be in a sharply declining oil demand environment, where prices are all down to the marginal cost of the lowest supplier. It does signal that you think by 2030 oil is still kind of sort of at least in terms of price businesses, it has historically been. Is that correct?

So I'll take the second question around pricing, Murray will take the volume question and help me if we got anything, right. So on oil prices, it's so we have updated our oil prices, as we do every year, we update them last year. And basically from our existing assumption, the near term prices drifted up a little bit. And the long-term prices drifted down a little bit such that on average, throughout the period, they were pretty much the same. Our oil price assumption for 2030 is $60 real based on the 2020 baseline, which is $71, which is roughly what it was in 2021. Now, the question, of course, that you ask is, well, what if the transition goes faster if it does this or that? What I think is interesting, Martijn, about the transition question is that an accelerating transition doesn't always lead to a lower oil price. It depends on investment patterns, not just demand. So you could argue, you could see a world where because of lack of investment, even though the energy transition is accelerating, oil prices are much, much higher, which is sort of counterintuitive to how some people would think about it. I think, because the kind of general sense is that accelerating transition means lower prices. That need not be the case, because as we know, it reply, it relies not just on a demand side of the equation, but also a supply side. And of course, what people sometimes forget is that oil fields decline, and therefore they will -- they need investment. So that's a long story short to say. The energy transition could actually result in higher prices, even if it's accelerating, as well as obviously result in lower prices. Our job on an annual basis is to put forward our best view, knowing that it's probably not right. I think I can say that, because that's true, probably not right. But it is our best estimate. And our best estimate is $60 real and we think that balances up all the things that we know about in the world. If oil prices are lower, our businesses resilient to that. We've taken out cost, we're at $6 per barrel production costs so. We've got the tightest highest margin portfolio that we can, and that $9 billion to $10 billion won't be 20% of overall EBITDA it will be 50% or something higher, and vice versa. So there's no simple answer to your question, I'm afraid, but that's how we would think about it. And then on the upstream volumes and underlying production flat.

Yes, no one in the SCA gives you each quarter our latest view on oil price, and we don't see the depth in oil price on the SCA until 2040. God knows if we're right, but that's our viewpoint right now. Production so the production guidance that we gave two years ago 2.6% down to 2% down to 1.5% with squiggles as estimates a decade out it's a little bit tricky a decade out. We were a little bit vague in what we said about divestments versus underlying decline. We didn't really give hard guidance. Ariel and the team have been with Gordon had been working. That's very hard now for the past couple years. Since we last talked to some transactions have changed and gold has become a very, very strong asset with the Eni transaction we did. Looks like a fabulous set of assets there. So we've had portfolio change. We've had drilling success. With -- we're applying -- we're digitizing our 10 core processes inside the upstream and refining and Gordon and covering some pretty cool things that mean the reservoirs are going to perform better than we thought. And the technology, the capital efficiency of the business is going to be higher than we thought, last time around. So right now what we're getting to is we were at 2.6 in 2019. We're obviously around 2.2 in 2021. We still have this guidance of around 2 in 2025. And we still have this squiggle 1.5 in 2030. What we're now saying is that declined from 2.2 to 1.5. So basically going to be a gradual divestments over time, and that we can hold the base business flat now with growing margins 20% growth and at least 20% growth and margins as we bring on Mad Dog Phase 2, Tango, et cetera, et cetera. And we pivot the investment more to the Deepwater GoM of the world to the BPX of the world where the Permian is doing really well. So it's a pretty material update to our view on the hydrocarbons business. And it's a fabulous cashflow generator for us through the decade. And we're investing pretty much everything we can and every basin with the exception of one, which is BPX, which will continue to manage for a dividend.

Just follow-up very quickly that. So there's a half a million barrels a day of production the second half of the decade for zero incremental CapEx relative to previous guidance?

Through that, including divestment, et cetera. Yes.

Yes.

Well, we were a bit vague. We weren't very specific on what divestment was in the second half of the decade, Martijn. So a little bit tricky to suggest that we were just vague.

What we're not doing, we're not investing for growth. So we're receiving that capital. We're not exploring in new basins, all of those things remain as is. What we are doing is investing in high quality, investment opportunities and continuing to high grade the portfolio. So it will be smaller, in a volume sense. It will have equivalent cash flow, it'll have higher returns, it will have lower emissions. For us, it feels like a good way to run the business and the world needs it. And it will provide us with the cash flows.

And hopefully you're used to us. We generally don't make promises. We can't deliver, we tend to try to make sure that we can deliver these things. So it feels prudent right now.

It's throwing it out there. We keep going in the room. Go ahead.

Hi, it's Henry Tarr from Berenberg. Two questions, obviously, in the current environment, sharply higher commodity prices. Are you seeing risks of an increasing fiscal burden? So we're seeing headlines in the U.K. around windfall taxes. I wonder whether, post-COVID governments are looking for ways to refill the coffees to some extent. And then the second question on the balance sheet, obviously, the position there is improving. There's been a focus on divestments, as your own valuation starts to improve we've seen on the transition and low carbon side valuations there sort of come the other way over the last 12 months is. Are you starting to get more interested in acquisitions in some of that low carbon area? Thanks.

Great, Henry. Thank you. Quickly and Murray will correct me. Fiscal burden. Are we seeing anything around the world? The answer to that is simply no, we're not. We're not seeing increased pressure. At this point in time. Obviously, there's a debate in the U.K. about a windfall tax. We obviously have said what we feel this morning about that, which is, if anything, the U.K. needs more gas, not less gas right now. And that's going to require more investment, not less investment, and a windfall tax isn't probably going to incentivize more investment. Number one, and number two, what we need to do is help Britain transition. And we also announced this morning, that for every pound we make in the U.K., this decade, we will invest more than two pounds into the U.K. this decade. And the vast majority of that investment will be into the energy transition. Offshore wind in Scotland, offshore wind in the Irish Sea, hydrogen power, hydrogen, Teesside, net zero Teesside for power, our refueling, our charging network that will build out the list goes on and on. So that's our position here in the U.K. fiscal burden upping around the world. No, we're not. We're not seeing that. Murray second question do you want to take it?

I think the second question was, do we have more appetite for inorganic. So I suppose that we will look at inorganics. Obviously, but we'll stick to our $14 billion to $15 billion capital range for 2022. That includes inorganics. And the longer-term that we've laid out a $14 billion to $16 billion includes inorganics, as well. You'll see us do $250 million, $500 million deals where we think it's sensible. Biogas is interesting places to do it. Amply charging is an interesting place to do it, et cetera. So we'll do modest. We'll be pursuing modest things Henry.

One of the slides in Murray's back is so very important, because I think one of the -- let's be transparent about it. The challenges that some people have had with the strategy has been around the renewable space where the returns are guided at 8% to 10%. And we're talking about $2 billion to $3 billion of EBITDA there by 2030. In a business that could be generating over $40 billion of EBITDA. So that has been a question. And that's why this disclosure this morning around these five transition growth engines are so important, because it is not just a renewables strategy, as some commentators have maybe written it to be. It's much more than that. First of all, it's a three part strategy of which low carbon is one. But importantly, in the transition, we talked about five growth engines. And $2 billion to $3 billion from renewables at 8% to 10% is one of five elements in that transition. And all the other ones have higher, much higher returns. So it is an element of, but not the totality of BP's transition story. Bio energy is very important. EV charging is going to be a big business for us. Hydrogen is going to be a business. And we've talked about convenience. So I think that is a very important message that we want to learn today. Henry, thank you. We keep going. Irene, please up front here.

Thank you. It's Irene Himona from Societe Generale. You gave us a lot of visibility -- financial visibility on the transition. My question concerns the announcement that you aim for net zero across operations, production and sales. So I'm, I think you're adding the sales bit, I wonder if you can help us understand where scope three fits in there. Is there any change to the previous definition of scope three from your production only? And do we assume that the interim targets remain the same except they now include sales? Thank you.

Very good, great. Irene, thank you. So on -- so aim two is production, our definition of scope three. Aim three is product lifecycle, product lifecycle emissions, and most people will call that scope three. So we cover product emissions in two places in our aim two, which is our production and in aim three, which is around our sales, and the total sales in aim three, used to just have our marketed volumes in there. But it's now also got our physically traded volumes in there as well, with the exception of crude, which is not something that is immediately turned into an emission, it has to go somewhere before it happens. So we're consistent with other some other companies on that. And that means that our baseline on aim three increases from about a giga ton to about 2 giga tons when we include those physically traded volumes. So scope, aim two is unchanged, that is still our plan. Aim three, three, three updates, it used to be 15% by 2030. It's now 15% to 20% by 2030. It used to be 50% reduction in intensity by 2050. It's now 100%, or it's now net zero by 2050. And the third change is that it is now total sales on all of those measures I just gave you on aim three, and not just marketed. And that's what we're doing. Aim one has also changed in that we have accelerated to 2030 ambition, which used to be 35%, 30% to 35%. We've been updated that to 50% from our operational emissions. So that's aim one is operations. Aim two is production. Aim three is sales our marketed products. So hopefully that helps. Thank you, Irene. We'll go to Os Clint here.

Yes, sorry. Os Clint from Bernstein. Two questions. First, one of your peers over in the U.S. I think last week talked about collapsing the structure in the silos to bring out the best of the organization. So something I think you said years ago, bringing downstream management from the basement up to the sixth floor and working together and things like that. So you mentioned the 26 turnarounds, working together last year, but I'd love to get some more examples of what the best of the organization has come out through BP. Maybe numerically or cost saving structurally avoid them improvement structurally, will be the first question? And secondly, back on renewables and confident message again on 8% to 10% returns. I noticed though, in Lightsource, they do deals like last year one in Spain. They talk about commercial close pretty quickly eight months, but one of the ways to get there is with a PPA and a competitive process with BP trading. So there's a good price coming from here to Lightsource allows you to be confident there. But is there anything value leakage as Carol's team take that the other side, and how can we be confident there's a strong return coming the other side?

Great, Os well Murray be thinking of the second one and help me with the first one. I think and we can talk to Gordon afterwards on some of the examples. But the up-streamers tend to be a pretty proud bunch, but the refineries, people have been helping them out as we brought these organizations together. So it's not a specific cost number. But we had challenges in Egypt, around flange integrity on one of our projects. And we deployed some refining people who were experts in that space to go and sort the issue for us. We also had a situation in Trinidad on a project that we were building, where we had some compressor issues or something. And again, refining technology people were deployed into the oil and gas business to help that. Now, you would argue that should be happening in any company, but there is a reality of organizational boundaries, and so on, and so forth. So I personally and the turnaround one is a brilliant example. We're going to see more and more of that, I'd be lying to you, if I said that everything was working exactly as it wants, we want it to be on day one, it takes time for an organization to settle down, people to get to know their new roles. There's been a lot of change, and we're settling down now. And that's what the focus is on this deliver. So only one job now deliver. And I think we're going to go and see more and more opportunities as the year goes ahead. You've also got next to you who used to, in her well, still does, I guess are about to change, runs our global supply chain organization. And it's something we debated for years, we used to have an upstream supply chain organization and the downstream one. And we brought them together a few years back. And again, I think I've actually personally been surprised at the value that's been created through that process. So, one of the questions we're encouraging people to ask inside the company this year, is a very simple question, which again is obvious. But we need to do more of which is, whenever faced with a problem, whenever faced with a question, the one question we must always ask, what's the right thing for BP? What's the right thing for BP? And maybe that's a lead in to the second question about integration. But more and more examples to come as the organization now settles down, Murray?

Yes, I think some stats on collapsing, there were maintenance contracts that the downstream had cheaper rates than the upstream had 25% savings when you brought the contractor.

Thought we were low cost.

In the upstream, yes. When you bring that together, you get 25% savings, because the upstream was paying more than the downstream. That's a small example of what we've seen in the procurement space over time. The part that I'm super pumped about is we've under invested in digital and the downstream, and history, we just haven't had that focus and the passion that Bernard and I had, we spent five years streamlining to one financial system inside the upstream enables us to now deep dive in task mind and knock 30% to 40% efficiency or dis-efficiency out of the upstream, we'll have a five year program to go invest in the downstream now, synthesizing the back office getting onto a single system, put task money on top of it, that prize is going to be big as we get into it. It's something that we definitely haven't done. So there's just a tremendous, tremendous prize to bring together -- to bring together the best of what downstream did which was real rigor and process safety and cost discipline with the technology from the upstream and great fabulous results. So that's enough of me on my diatribe on technology. And then on trading and shipping. That question made me smile as Carol's traders aren't going to allow her to do a deal that she loses money on. They're just not incentivized that way, et cetera. So if you see a transaction between trading and shipping and Lightsource BP, you can know that it was a competitive process, and that the traders feel they're getting a good deal. There's a reason that trading and shipping does a 2% uplift of returns and it's from the competitive edge that they have a fuller and scale of their business. So rest assured it was a good deal.

We've got a few minutes left, thanks Os and we'll see Christyan Malek is on Zoom.

Thanks for taking my question.

Hi, Christyan.

Hi, thanks for taking my question. And sorry I couldn't be there in person, I am nursing a bad stomach. But first of all, I'm going to say well done on today's results and delivering what you promised two questions for me. And the first one, while I look at your EBITDA targets from 2025 onwards, I can't have Murray that trends we've seen when inflation supply chain issues, rising interest rates will negate the returns that you plan to make both in oil and gas and renewables in the former. I'm having a hard time squaring a decline in volumes or with a sustained EBITDA and cost inflation -- if cost inflation and execution starts to become problematic. So can you just help us frame what are your base case assumptions around some of these headwinds, so that we know these returns have been appropriately risked. And the second is a bit more philosophically relates to the energy crisis we're in. I guess, on one hand, we've seen improvement in revenue coming from higher energy prices, it seems to have a negative impact vis-à-vis rising customer costs and geopolitical societal risks. So my question faces on two elephants in the room first on Russia, and how you see the long-term relationship evolving your dividends versus the risk of geopolitics. And then second, on the higher economic rent, which feels like a real threat, if society becomes frustrated from the energy transition becoming too costly for the consumer. Thank you.

Thanks, Christyan. I'll take the second question. And I'll let Murray take the first one. On Russia, look one of the things I've learned in my life, you've probably all learned in your life is let's not worry about things until they happen and who knows what's going to happen. Russia is a big part of the energy system globally. It's a member of OPEC +, it supplies gas and energy into Europe. We along with many of our peers have a presence in Russia. We've been there for over 30 years. And our job is to focus on the business, our business, which is what we're doing, there are no changes to our ongoing business in Russia today. And if something comes down the road, then obviously we'll deal with it as it comes down the road. So that's all I would say, on Russia. On rent, I think it's a great question, Christyan and it's one that's on our mind. And I'm sure it's on government's minds. And I think the real concern is that if the consumer or if society equates higher costs with the transition, then that will in effect, have the potential risk of slowing down that transition that society so desperately wants. So that is why I think we feel very passionately about the need for real plans in this space such that we don't just tackle one side of the equation, but that all sides of the equation are tackled, because if we don't tackle demand as well as supply, if we don't think about what's going to replace hydrocarbons, or what are we going to do with hydrocarbons then I think we end up in a situation potentially, where the consumer is effectively put off the transmission because of the cost. And I think that would be a real shame and not something that we want to happen. So that's what we're trying to do everything that we can to be able to prove that you can get clean, reliable, affordable energy. But it takes some compromise. And that's the reality. So, two great questions, Murray and we'll begin to wrap I think on inflation.

Yes, great. So for the past two decades, Christyan, we've planned on CPI, and then the business has to beat that inflation. That's what we've done for the past two decades, we've been through many price cycles through those two decades, and we've been able to achieve it. Looking forward, we plan on CPI inflation, and then the business has to tackle it, and has to eat that inflation. And interestingly, I think if we talk to you in Oman, or in Baku, we'd have said, we see 30% to 40% waste in the business, I still see 30% to 40% waste in the business, there's still just tremendous opportunity in this sector to do better, and the new sectors we're operating in, it's the exact same. So I think our job as a business is to eat that inflation. Why do I say that because the price could be low at any moment. We can't let costs creep into our business, because we don't control the commodity price. So yes, we do plan on inflation. Yes, we do eat it, we've got two decades of track record of doing it. And I remain convinced that there's huge prize to get after that will help us tackle it over the next decade as well, Christyan. So I think on balance, our plans are just fine.

And I'll give you an example. I've been spent most of my career in drilling, we've had a massive focus on non-productive time, for every time, every day I spent in drilling. And yet we brought it down 20% over the last two years. Our last year, we brought it down 20%. There's always room to go. There's always more to do. And that's why agile digital supply chain efficiencies, where there's massive opportunity, as Murray says, last question on the phone for those of you in the room where you can catch us afterwards, Paul Cheng at Scotiabank and then we'll wrap, Paul, you can make it quick please.

Thank you. Two questions, one for hydrogen business, can you talk about what's the risk to achieve your target? I mean, based yes the plan going to be driven by some form of improvement in the economical technology that we see or that the existing technology as well as the existing government support will be sufficient for that business? That's the first question, the second question is that when we are looking at your biofuel business, with the feedstock costs have been rising because of that, and also that we see a substantial margin squeeze, how that may impact your investment plan in the future or I mean, that you think that this just transitionary and you don't believe that it's going to have any long-term indication?

Fantastic, Murray will take the biofuels question, Paul. On hydrogen, ultimately, it's a cost question, isn't it? How do we get the cost of hydrogen of blue, green hydrogen to a different place so that it is truly competitive, it's going to require a mixture of things, it will require policy support, it will require initially customers willing to pay a little bit of a premium probably, it doesn't really require much on the technology side, other than it does require scale to be built so that we can get repeatability. I'm personally optimistic that we will see all of that, I think the policy support, we see it here in Britain, as we're trying to build a hydrogen, a green Anna blue hydrogen plant up at site. I think we will get the support that we need. Customers are crying out for this. They're all under pressure to decarbonize their portfolios, they're trying to figure out how to do it, they're coming to us all the time trying to ask and some are willing to pay a little bit. So let's see where that goes. And the scale will come. So this is a business where we have, it's like anything at the beginning. It's a bit of an effort, but that's what we need to do. If the world's going to decarbonize, it's hard to abate sectors, hydro, which it must, hydrogen will be a part of it. It's a necessary part of that. And that will happen. And we're beginning to see the early stages of why we should be optimistic about that. And we'll have come later in the year and dive into this in greater detail, biofuels and costs and stuff and then we'll wrap up.

Yes, I think on biogas the key is you need to be along the entire value chain. So you need to take positions upstream midstream, downstream, and that's what we do. It's hard to predict where the rent will be. It does move much like it has an oil value chains and gas value chains in history. So from our perspective, we just make sure we're all along the value chain and that way we don't face risk on the rent. So you will take us see us take some equity positions in the upstream, you'll see us do an awful lot of long-term contracts both near-term and long-term to manage the risk. And then Carol will optimize and trade around it across biofuels, biogas, et cetera. So playing along the whole value chain is what's critical on biogas. We've got 35 flowing units, it's a lovely phrase flowing in it's, we have 35 of them in 2,500 construction. So we've got 60 out of the 220 that we're talking about already there. They're all under long-term commitments, a decade or so. So pretty cool business makes great money.

And we'll look at expanding with our rail network in Germany, elsewhere in Europe, and we may go upstream in Europe as well in this space, so very exciting. Excellent, thank you all. Sorry, we've run a few minutes over. For those of you in the room that we didn't get to, we'll be mingling around and happy to have a chat at least for a few minutes. Big thanks to Craig, and his team for the enormous amount of work that went into that. Getting ready for today, Giulia, you and your teams and strategy, huge amount of work gone in right across all the organization. Thank you for being here in-person, thank you for those of you who have listened in online, hope it was helpful. Great to see you all back in-person here in London and appreciate the interest and we will leave you all to it, thanks.