Arun Jayaram : Great. And my follow-up, Olivier, at the Analyst Day in 2022, you highlighted a target of $3 billion in new energy revenue by the end of the decade. I was wondering if you could give us a sense of where you’re at in terms of that path to journey and maybe some of the areas where you’re seeing the most traction today?
Olivier Le Peuch: I think as you remember and just resetting the scene for everyone, I think we had identified five domains in which we believe we have adjacency. We have potential, and we have a technology portfolio, we believe, to bring to market and disrupt and participate in new energy at scale. CCS showed you geothermal, geo-energy, energy storage, critical mineral. And hydrogen that are both — that all of them have different horizons of growth and different scale potential for us. So, we have been, for the last two or three years, seeding investments, developing organically and inorganically technology position. We are very pleased with the momentum in CCS and geothermal going ahead of our expectation in terms of — for CCS sequestration studies and participation to exploration in this market.
And geothermal by its growth potential going beyond the established basins. So we believe that our $3 billion target would be a combination of organic growth on this adjacent market and inorganic development into the non-adjacent market. And we believe that CCS is likely to be leading in terms of potential contributor to this ambition, followed by likely hydrogen starting to be in a position that will more impact later part of the cycle in the next decade. So, we feel confident by the early investment we are making. I will feel confident about the development of the market, the support of the incentive across many regions and the early stage of success in CCS particularly as we execute this.
Operator: We have time for one more question. That is from Roger Read with Wells Fargo.
Roger Read : Congratulations on the quarter. Olivier, I’d like to follow-up a little bit on the last question on the spending, IOCs, NOCs, international E&P, which you mentioned. We generally want to — let’s say, look at the oil strip or assume a flat oil price. If spending is going to increase second half ’24, a fairly positive outlook as you showed kind of ’25 and beyond. Would you characterize overall reinvestment by the industry is still too low? In other words, we don’t need a higher oil price to get higher spending and investment or would you say we are simply dependent on oil prices. I’m just kind of curious the way you’re looking at it from a, I guess, productive capacity these companies and countries need and where they sit on excess capacity today versus that oil price outlook.
Olivier Le Peuch: I think I will turn it a little bit upside down and I realize that, well, our operators are looking at it a national company, IOCs, then looking at the demand that we continue to grow throughout the decade and realize that if they continue to execute on the capital discipline, they need to accelerate the supply coming from international market to fulfill this demand that we continue to grow and will put more pressure on the demand-supply balance. So some of them are responding for to capacity expansion program. Some of them are responding by accelerating the exploration appraisal or their development of existing international acreage that they have and development. So that’s what we see. It applies to both for oil and gas.
And gas is being more driven by regional dynamics on either consumption or gas security access, be it Asia or be it East Mediterranean to feed Europe, Asia for energy security and domestic consumption. Both these factors are driven by demand. The economics at the current level still favorable for long-cycle investment. The price of offshore international development and the economics have improved through the cycle, the benefits of efficiency, integration, technology have turned into making the offshore investment more attractive for the long run. Hence, it has reattracted investments. I will not try to comment on the industry needs more or less. I think the industry is certainly having the incentives today and have put a program in place with the FID pipeline that confirmed that it is attractive.
It would be met with demand in the long outlook. Hence, our confidence into the longevity of the cycle internationally and into the breadth and resilience across oil and gas of the investment profile we are seeing from operators.
Roger Read : And then the follow-up question that kind of ties into that. Obviously, a meaningful dividend raise here and a consistent increase in dividend from the COVID era. But as you look forward, recognizing it’s the board that decides the dividend, but how should we think about the dividend evolving back to the sort of 2014 and 2019 era, when it was substantially higher than today? I know there have been some changes in acquisition and share count and all that, but whether it’s an aggregate dollar dividend or a per share metric, how do you think about the dividend within the overall framework here?
