So we think it has a lot of benefit in terms of both the contracting strategy, the access to different providers and ultimately, the architecture that you create. So when you look at all of those combined, we think that it’s the right approach. As I say, we looked at it from a capital efficiency perspective, which I’ve talked about, which is both cost and time. We looked at it from the ability to sort of create incremental operational efficiencies from fine-tuning the storage capacity and then greater flexibility to do that. And then if we chose from a financing perspective, we could create greater flexibility there. So I think we don’t see any increased technical risk, in fact, probably nothing there what we feel we’re taking there’s any disbenefit to it.
And I think in cycle times, it’s absolutely competitive.
Subash Chandra: Hey, got it. Makes sense. A follow-up. The Kodiak workover, what do you think that could do for Gulf volumes? How do you think of if everything worked out, exit Gulf volumes in €˜23?
Andy Inglis: Yes. Well, I think we’re — great just to go back, obviously, the sidetrack well, we’ve had some skin issues. We’ve done an investigation, partners involved. We believe we have an effective way to intervene on the well work over the well and anticipate that it’s going to execute in the, sort of, back-end of the third quarter around the third quarter. So we’ll have in the production impact in the fourth quarter. I think in terms of the volumes probably coming from the well, we could probably around what Neal, double…
Neal Shah: 1 to 2,000 barrels a day.
Andy Inglis: Yes, a couple of thousand barrels a day net increase Subash. I think that’s sort of — it could be greater than that, but that’s sort of what we’re targeting.
Subash Chandra: Okay. Thank you very much.
Andy Inglis: Great. Thank you.
Operator: Thank you. Our next questions come from the line of James Hosie with Barclays. Please proceed with your questions.
James Hosie: Hi, there. Thanks for the presentation. So it’s encouraging to see all the updates on Tortue. I’m just wondering if you want or need LNG offtake contracts before you sanction Phase 2? And then also there’s any update on the possibility of redirecting some of your Phase 1 cargoes to realize some of the upside to your contracted price?
Andy Inglis: Yes, good question, James. Fundamentally, Phase 2 is different from Phase 1. The capital that’s involved is significantly lower. And therefore, we believe we absolutely will not require a full sale of the contracts before we sanction. I think that with the announcement now of Phase 2 in terms of the concept and the scale and the timing of the project, we intend to engage in the market in this year to look at options that we have around flexibility on sales. And without wanting to preempt that process, I would say there will be an element of fixed to it. We’ll have to review what indexes we choose and how we manifest. And I believe that we will have an element of spot in it as well to be able to fully capture upside.
So we will not have to have sold all of the gas at FID. And so the FID is sort of separating from that, whereas when we’re at Phase 1, it was very much linked. On Phase 1 with the cargo opportunities, we continue to make progress on that. We have engaged now with a sort of high-graded list of potential buyers. We’re working with those buyers on a contract structure, which we believe will give us the best opportunity to capture the upside. And we anticipate that we would be in a position to sort of select the high-graded buyer and the contract structure probably in the first half of this year. With regard to BP Gas Marketing, we’ve continued to debate, discuss with them the contract structure. There’s clearly a difference of opinion between us in terms of how it would actually operate, so when you have a disagreement amongst friends, we’ve gone to a third-party.
