Mr. Peeling, it seems to me that you do very good lobby work. Clearly, your aim is to give oil production in the west a good image.
Your document and your remarks seem to be wishful thinking. One would expect that from a government, but one would have hoped for greater precision from you.
Are your companies prepared to do what it takes to obtain ISO 14001 certification? Are they ready to indicate what concrete measures they have taken or will take? What improvements do they intend to make over the next few years? Have they conducted studies on the life cycle? What externalities are they prepared to absorb? Are they preparing for the depletion of oil resources, the depletion of water, and so on?
This seems to be an exercise in public relations, but with very little precision. That was my remarks concerning the companies' intentions.
Getting back to sustainable development, which is much more important, I completely agree with the use of the French term “développement durable”. That is generally the term I use. I have been saying it for years. When we know that a resource is being depleted, why not save some of it for things that will be difficult to convert? Perhaps I am somewhat of an idealist.
I often cite the example of aluminum. We know that aluminum production will end within a few years. However, it is an irreplaceable metal in certain products. At present, we are still building bridges in aluminum with large structures. We are wasting our aluminum. Why could we not save it for things that absolutely require aluminum and do the same with oil?
At this time, 88,000 products are manufactured with oil. Those products would disappear overnight if there were no more oil. Could we not, in an ideal world, gradually reduce usage in order to make this resource, which will be difficult to replace, last as long as possible?
Do you agree with me?