O&G vs dairy<strong>The</strong> O&G industry in <strong>Taranaki</strong> can be compared to theother major industries in the region. A good gauge of itssignificance is a comparison to the dairy industry 4 .Indicator O&G Dairy <strong>Taranaki</strong>TotalEmployment (FTEs) 3,206 6,436 47,930GDP ($mn) 1,684 678 5,307Labour525,296 105,345 103,162Productivity (NZ$/FTE)Business units 130 2,621 14,517Source: BERL regional database, Statistics NZWhile the O&G industry employs lessthan half as many people as the dairyindustry, it contributes almost 2.5times more to regional GDP. This islargely a result of the capital intensityof the industry, which results in highlabour productivity of the sector atover $525,000 per FTE.4This includes both dairy cattle farming and dairy processing.6.3 MAJOR CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS<strong>The</strong> approach applied in this <strong>report</strong> differs from that in the2007 BERL EIA <strong>report</strong> in that a <strong>full</strong> life-cycle assessmenthas been undertaken. <strong>The</strong> process assessed spans fromexploration through to production and decommissioning,and is broken down to a project or well basis.As such, industry activity has peaks and troughsdepending upon the projects in train and the stage ofdevelopment. In recent times, there have been a numberof field and well development projects (new well projectsas well as existing well development projects) that haveseen the industry operate at a relatively high level ofactivity for a number of years. <strong>The</strong>se ‘major’ projectsare largely completed and activity is starting to ease(although there are still some large projects underway,for example the Todd Energy LPG facility).<strong>The</strong> development of new technology in the global O&Gindustry has resulted in changes to how developments arelikely to be undertaken in the future and also provides theopportunity to extend the productive life of existing fields.For example, the Maui field was anticipated to bewritten off as <strong>full</strong>y depleted several years ago. However,new technology has enabled small pockets of gas tobe detected and other areas of low pressure gas tobe extracted. In addition much of the remaining gas istrapped between layers of water and is being accessedby horizontal drilling.46<strong>The</strong> <strong>Wealth</strong> <strong>Beneath</strong> <strong>Our</strong> <strong>Feet</strong>
Each project has a different economic impact, dependingupon where the activity occurs (onshore vs. offshore), howthe resource is extracted (piped onshore or direct export viaFPSO), and what is being extracted (oil, gas or both).This <strong>report</strong> considers projects asseparate to the general economicactivity, as activity can potentiallychange dramatically depending onthe success or failure of projects. <strong>The</strong>economic impact of individual projectscan be significant and would skewthe economic impact of the industry ifincluded.<strong>6.4</strong> ROYALTIES AND TAXE&P companies are required to pay royalties on the oiland gas produced as well as company tax on profitsgenerated in New Zealand.<strong>6.4</strong>.1 RoyaltiesRoyalties on the oil and gas produced make up themajor proportion of total royalties collected by theNew Zealand Government.In the year to June 2010, total royalties collected by theGovernment amounted to $451 million.Oil royalties accounted for $399 million of this(89 percent) and gas levies amounted to $33 million,(or 7 percent).Over the last six years, O&G has accounted for, onaverage, 92 percent of total annual royalties collectedby the Government. However, over the last two years,O&G royalties have accounted for closer to 97 percent ofall royalties collected. This coincides with a significant(fivefold) increase in royalties in the 2008/2009 year,predominantly an outcome of increased oil production 5 .Exclusion of projects from the EIA<strong>Our</strong> EIA does not include the activity generated fromsignificant construction projects. This is due to the valueand the variability of these projects, which could skewthe EIA results.For example, the Kupe project cost $1.3 billion and tookseveral years to reach production. While a large portionof this expenditure was spent offshore (on goods andinternational consultancy) a good portion of it was spentin New Zealand on local production and services.<strong>The</strong> earlier <strong>report</strong> (BERL, 2007), estimated that around$620 million of this project would have been spentwithin New Zealand (including imported equipmentand services), mostly in <strong>Taranaki</strong>.That <strong>report</strong> looked at the construction costs of the fivemost recent projects undertaken in New Zealand – Kupe,Cheal, Pohokura, Maari, and Tui.Nationally, it was estimated that the last five projectsresulted in total employment of 8,715 FTEs for one yearand contributed around $660 million to GDP.Last five projects (New Zealand)Direct Direct +IndirectTotalImpactOutput ($mn) 954.2 1,493.8 2,046.6GDP ($mn) 276.7 455.3 658.2Employment (FTEs) 4,053.1 6,424.4 8,715.1Source: BERLWithin <strong>Taranaki</strong>, the construction of the last five projectscontributed $450 million to the regional economy andemployed 6,350 FTEs for one year.Last five projects (<strong>Taranaki</strong>)Direct Direct +IndirectTotalImpactOutput ($mn) 756.5 1,210.4 1,354.2GDP ($mn) 219.4 379.5 454.1Employment(FTEs)3,506.3 5,680.3 6,346.5Source: BERL5Mineral royalties have also increased each year, although off a significantly lower base ($11.3 million in 2009/2010).<strong>The</strong> <strong>Wealth</strong> <strong>Beneath</strong> <strong>Our</strong> <strong>Feet</strong>47