Enterprise Risk Management In The Oil And Gas Industry: An Analysis Of Selected Fortune 500 Oil And Gas Companies Reaction In 2009 And 2010

In 2009, four of the top ten Fortune 500 companies were classified within the oil and gas industry. Organizations of this size typically have an advanced Enterprise Risk Management system in place to mitigate risk and to achieve their corporations\u27 objectives. The companies and the article utilize the Enterprise Risk Management Integrated Framework developed by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations (COSO) as a guide to organize their risk management and reporting. The authors used the framework to analyze reporting years 2009 and 2010 for Fortune 500 oil and gas companies. After gathering and examining information from 2009 and 2010 annual reports, 10-K filings, and proxy statements, the article examines how the selected companies are implementing requirements identified in the previously mentioned publications. Each section examines the companies Enterprise Risk Management system, risk appetite, and any other notable information regarding risk management. One observation was the existence or non-existence of a Chief Risk Officer or other Senior Level Manager in charge of risk management. Other observations included identified risks, such as changes in economic, regulatory, and political environments in the different countries where the corporations do business. Still others identify risks, such as increases in certain costs that exceed natural inflation, volatility and instability of market conditions. Fortune 500 oil and gas companies included in this analysis are ExxonMobil, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, Baker Hughes, Valero Energy, and Frontier Oil Corporation. An analysis revealed a sophisticated understanding and reporting of many types of risks, including those associated with increasing production capacity. Specific risks identified by companies included start-up timing, operational outages, weather events, regulatory changes, geo-political and cyber security risks, among others. Mitigation efforts included portfolio management and financial strength. There is evidence that companies in later reports (2013) are more comprehensive in their risk management and reports as evidenced by their 10-K and Proxy Statements (Marathon Oil Corporation, 2013)

Evidence of nitric acid uptake in warm cirrus anvil clouds during the NASA TC4 campaign

Uptake of HNO3 onto cirrus ice may play an important role in tropospheric NOx cycling. Discrepancies between modeled and in situ measurements of gas-phase HNO3 in the troposphere suggest that redistribution and removal mechanisms by cirrus ice have been poorly constrained. Limited in situ measurements have provided somewhat differing results and are not fully compatible with theory developed from laboratory studies. We present new airborne measurements of HNO3 in cirrus clouds from anvil outflow made during the Tropical Composition, Cloud, and Climate Coupling Experiment (TC4). Upper tropospheric (\u3e9 km) measurements made during three flights while repeatedly traversing the same cloud region revealed depletions of gas-phase HNO3 in regions characterized by higher ice water content and surface area. We hypothesize that adsorption of HNO3 onto cirrus ice surfaces could explain this. Using measurements of cirrus ice surface area density and some assumptions about background mixing ratios of gas-phase HNO3, we estimate molecular coverages of HNO 3 on cirrus ice surface in the tropical upper troposphere during the TC4 racetracks to be about 1 × 1013 molecules cm-2. This likely reflects an upper limit because potential dilution by recently convected, scavenged air is ignored. Also presented is an observation of considerably enhanced gas-phase HNO3 at the base of a cirrus anvil suggesting vertical redistribution of HNO3 by sedimenting cirrus particles and subsequent particle sublimation and HNO3 evaporation. The impact of released HNO3, however, appears to be restricted to a very thin layer just below the cloud. Copyright 2010 by the American Geophysical Union

Keystone XL Pipeline

The Keystone Pipeline and everything it entails has taken over the news and the majority of North America. Most people around the United States did not know the Keystone Pipeline already existed before all of the uproar and protesting began back at the end of 2011. The part of the pipeline that does not exist is the additional expansion, the Keystone XL Pipeline, which was proposed in 2008. Since the approval of the project in March 2010, the Keystone XL Pipeline has been a problematic proposition ever since the idea was introduced by the TransCanada Energy Company. While the project was originally developed as a partnership between TransCanada and ConocoPhillips, TransCanada is now the sole owner of the Keystone Pipeline System, as TransCanada received regulatory approval on August 12, 2009 to purchase ConocoPhillips' interest. TransCanada attempted to get a permit for the new pipeline for more than three years. Since the pipeline crosses international borders, TransCanada had to obtain a Presidential Permit through the State Department for construction of the portion of the pipeline that goes from Canada to the U.S. To this day, even though a substantial amount of the project is complete, protesters are still against the idea of transporting tar sands throughout Canada and the United States to refineries in Houston, Texas so that we will have additional sources of oil and fuel to supply our needs. The paper discusses the controversy, the accounting implications, the legal implications, and local press. Pictures Included

Enterprise Risk Management In The Oil And Gas Industry: An Analysis Of Selected Fortune 500 Oil And Gas Companies’ Reaction In 2009 And 2010

In 2009, four of the top ten Fortune 500 companies were classified within the oil and gas industry.  Organizations of this size typically have an advanced Enterprise Risk Management system in place to mitigate risk and to achieve their corporations’ objectives.  The companies and the article utilize the Enterprise Risk Management Integrated Framework developed by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations (COSO) as a guide to organize their risk management and reporting.  The authors used the framework to analyze reporting years 2009 and 2010 for Fortune 500 oil and gas companies.  After gathering and examining information from 2009 and 2010 annual reports, 10-K filings, and proxy statements, the article examines how the selected companies are implementing requirements identified in the previously mentioned publications. Each section examines the companies’ Enterprise Risk Management system, risk appetite, and any other notable information regarding risk management.  One observation was the existence or non-existence of a Chief Risk Officer or other Senior Level Manager in charge of risk management. Other observations included identified risks, such as changes in economic, regulatory, and political environments in the different countries where the corporations do business.  Still others identify risks, such as increases in certain costs that exceed natural inflation, volatility and instability of market conditions.  Fortune 500 oil and gas companies included in this analysis are ExxonMobil, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, Baker Hughes, Valero Energy, and Frontier Oil Corporation. An analysis revealed a sophisticated understanding and reporting of many types of risks, including those associated with increasing production capacity.  Specific risks identified by companies included start-up timing, operational outages, weather events, regulatory changes, geo-political and cyber security risks, among others.  Mitigation efforts included portfolio management and financial strength.  There is evidence that companies in later reports (2013) are more comprehensive in their risk management and reports as evidenced by their 10-K and Proxy Statements (Marathon Oil Corporation, 2013)

Keystone XL Pipeline

The Keystone Pipeline and everything it entails has taken over the news and the majority of North America. Most people around the United States did not know the Keystone Pipeline already existed before all of the uproar and protesting began back at the end of 2011. The part of the pipeline that does not exist is the additional expansion, the Keystone XL Pipeline, which was proposed in 2008. Since the approval of the project in March 2010, the Keystone XL Pipeline has been a problematic proposition ever since the idea was introduced by the TransCanada Energy Company. While the project was originally developed as a partnership between TransCanada and ConocoPhillips, TransCanada is now the sole owner of the Keystone Pipeline System, as TransCanada received regulatory approval on August 12, 2009 to purchase ConocoPhillips' interest. TransCanada attempted to get a permit for the new pipeline for more than three years. Since the pipeline crosses international borders, TransCanada had to obtain a Presidential Permit through the State Department for construction of the portion of the pipeline that goes from Canada to the U.S. To this day, even though a substantial amount of the project is complete, protesters are still against the idea of transporting tar sands throughout Canada and the United States to refineries in Houston, Texas so that we will have additional sources of oil and fuel to supply our needs. The paper discusses the controversy, the accounting implications, the legal implications, and local press. Pictures Included

Enterprise Risk Management In The Oil And Gas Industry: An Analysis Of Selected Fortune 500 Oil And Gas Companies Reaction In 2009 And 2010

In 2009, four of the top ten Fortune 500 companies were classified within the oil and gas industry. Organizations of this size typically have an advanced Enterprise Risk Management system in place to mitigate risk and to achieve their corporations objectives. The companies and the article utilize the Enterprise Risk Management Integrated Framework developed by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations (COSO) as a guide to organize their risk management and reporting. The authors used the framework to analyze reporting years 2009 and 2010 for Fortune 500 oil and gas companies. After gathering and examining information from 2009 and 2010 annual reports, 10-K filings, and proxy statements, the article examines how the selected companies are implementing requirements identified in the previously mentioned publications.Each section examines the companies Enterprise Risk Management system, risk appetite, and any other notable information regarding risk management. One observation was the existence or non-existence of a Chief Risk Officer or other Senior Level Manager in charge of risk management. Other observations included identified risks, such as changes in economic, regulatory, and political environments in the different countries where the corporations do business. Still others identify risks, such as increases in certain costs that exceed natural inflation, volatility and instability of market conditions. Fortune 500 oil and gas companies included in this analysis are ExxonMobil, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, Baker Hughes, Valero Energy, and Frontier Oil Corporation.An analysis revealed a sophisticated understanding and reporting of many types of risks, including those associated with increasing production capacity. Specific risks identified by companies included start-up timing, operational outages, weather events, regulatory changes, geo-political and cyber security risks, among others. Mitigation efforts included portfolio management and financial strength. There is evidence that companies in later reports (2013) are more comprehensive in their risk management and reports as evidenced by their 10-K and Proxy Statements (Marathon Oil Corporation, 2013)