Exploration doesn't increase emissions. It might be counterintuitive. It basically meets demand.
When you look at the fact that 90% to 95% of emissions are post-offshore extraction, it begs the question of why we wouldn't do more of it. Studies have shown, if we look at our frontier and the scale of the types of developments you see around the world in Suriname, Guyana, Mozambique and Namibia, that when these fields come on, they displace 30 to 40 kilograms per barrel a day emissions-wise with 10 to 15.... Without exploration, we're just going to allow those legacy fields, which are a higher cost to maintain and are more problematic for reducing emissions, to proliferate. Actually, it has happened in other jurisdictions that quite frankly are not so concerned.
From my perspective, for us to target our upstream, our productive area, instead of the consumption area is counterintuitive, and it's not really good policy.