CC BY
236
УДК: 338.45 ГРНТИ: 06.71.02 DOI: 10.32415/jscientia.2019.03.05
RUSSIAN OIL AND GAS (O&G) INDUSTRY: MODERN CHALLENGES AND INNOVATIONAL DEVELOPMENT
I. V. Bakhareva ©
Plekhanov Russian University of Economics 36 Stremyannaya lane, 117997 Moscow, Russia
E3 Bakhareva Irina - irene.bakhareva@gmail.com
The paper researches the competitiveness of the Russian oil and gas industry in the face of upcoming global innovational changes. The analysis includes the evaluation of the macroeconomic and innovational environment in which the industry operates, the summarization of several predominant research and development trends in the industry as well as the peculiarities of research and development activity in the Russian oil and gas industry. The findings show that the Russian oil and gas industry underinvests in the development of own technology and innovation and heavily depends on foreign imports in several key areas of its operation.
Keywords: innovation, R&D, innovational technologies, oil and gas industry.
НЕФТЕГАЗОВАЯ ОТРАСЛЬ РОССИИ: ВЫЗОВЫ СОВРЕМЕННОСТИ И ИННОВАЦИОННОЕ РАЗВИТИЕ
И. В. Бахарева ©
Российский экономический университет имени Г.В. Плеханова Россия, 117997 г. Москва, Стремянный переулок, 36
ЕЗ Бахарева Ирина Владимировна - irene.bakhareva@gmail.com
В статье исследуется конкурентоспособность российской нефтегазовой отрасли в условиях предстоящих глобальных инновационных изменений. Проведенный анализ включает в себя оценку макроэкономической и научно-исследовательской среды в России, обобщение тенденций, которые преобладают в научных исследованиях и разработках мировой нефтегазовой отрасли, а также определение особенностей инновационных исследований в российской нефтегазовой действительности. В результате анализа автор приходит к выводу о том, что российская нефтегазовая отрасль вкладывает недостаточно средств в развитие собственных технологий и инноваций и в значительной степени зависит от иностранного импорта в ключевых областях своей деятельности.
Ключевые слова: инновации, НИОКР, инновационные технологии, нефтегазовая отрасль.
Introduction. In a globalizing world economy, technology and innovation on macro- and micro-levels have become one of the key priorities of modern economic agents. For governments and firms alike, new and improved technologies signify the strengthening of competitive advantage, intensified value creation, and improved global image. For developing and transitioning economies, innovation has become the means of converging with developed economies and battling welfare problems such as poverty, income differentiation, uneven standards of living, education and health care, etc.
For Russian Federation, an example of an economy in transition, modernization, and innovation are recognized as most relevant and effective tools of achieving long-term economic development and strengthening the country's global competitive position, the factors that would allow the Russian economy to enter the path of innovative socio-economic development.
The Russian oil and gas (O&G) industry is a critical economic player on the Russian market and an integral part of the country's economic development. With a global orientation towards research and development (R&D) and innovation, the industry faces severe challenges due to low levels of innovational activity. The Russian O&G industry will only be able to compete successfully on the global market if it makes innovational policies its main priority.
Methodology. The paper researches the current state and main trends of R&D activity in the Russian O&G industry to evaluate its competitive position in the wake of global
innovational changes in the industry.
This paper uses qualitative and quantitative research methods. The author conducts extensive desk research on innovational activity in Russia based on the analysis of industry-specific journals, academic publications, and themed literature. Horizontal and vertical analyses were conducted using statistical data provided by the Russian Bureau of Statistics and data obtained from corporate financial and sustainability reports of the Russian O&G companies selected for the research purposes of the current paper. Field research was conducted via semi-formal interviews with several representatives of the Russian O&G industry.
Peer comparison within the Russian O&G industry with regard to R&D expenditures and R&D output is hindered by the fact that there is no definitive framework for R&D expense accounting. Companies tend to choose what accounts as an R&D expense and what does not, which makes the attempts at comparison rather difficult [21]. For some major companies, such as Novatek or Surgutneftegaz, there was no indication of R&D expenses in the corporate financial statements, which hinders any industry-wide comparisons based on open sources data.
R&D Environment in Russia. Before embarking on the analysis of innovational capacity and development of the O&G industry in Russia, it is essential to study macroeconomic factors as well as the innovational environment in the country, because these factors could in turn potentially affect innovational development of the Russian O&G industry.
S^S
913 944
431
2%
1%
0% rT m ,nr ,nr 1M IJ7 110 1JI 1JJ 110 142 H9 149 149
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 200& 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 as % o1 cu rrent prices GD P t R &□ in current p rices t R in constant prices of 2000
Source: Federal Agency of State Statistics data [16], author's calculations
Figure 1. Internal R&D expenditures in Russia, 2000-2016, % and billion rubles
1000 000 500 400 200 0
The nominal gross domestic product (GDP) of Russia had undergone an almost thirteen-time increase since the year 2000, from 7 306 to 92 082 billion rubles in 2017 [16]. The real GDP, i.e., the nominal GDP measured in the constant prices of 2000, during the same period increased only twofold. The average growth rate of the real GDP was 3.7 percent during the period in question but dropped to 0.3 percent in the last five years. The real GDP indicator eliminates the inflation effects and outlines the changes in the quantity of goods and services produced, therefore, indicating that a considerable share of nominal GDP growth observed in Russia in the period from 2000 to 2017 resulted not from production and manufacturing expansion, but rather from price increase effects. Compared with GDP dynamics in other countries, there is a significant gap between GDP growth rates of Russia and other developing economies and economies in transition, such as China (6.7 percent), India (6.53 percent), Brazil (1.95 percent), etc. [10]
In addition to low economic growth rates, the analysis of R&D expenditures, one of the main indicators of a country's technological and innovational activity, showed that the share of R&D expenditures in Russia accounted only for 1.1 percent of the total GDP in 2016 [16]. To compare, the extent of R&D spending in the GDP of the USSR reached 1.89 percent in 1990 [16].
Despite the fact that the dynamics of nominal internal R&D expenditures has been positive since 2000, the analysis of R&D expenditures in constant prices of the year 2000 suggests that the scale of annual increases in R&D expenditures was not as significant as it may seem. Since 2014, the amount of funds the Russian economy spends on R&D stagnated and was subject to any significant positive dynamics.
In other countries, for example, in the OECD area, total R&D expenditures increased from 2.12 percent in 2000 to 2.35 percent of the area's GDP in 2016, with Israel and the Republic of Korea being at the forefront with 4.25 and 4.24 percent in 2016, respectively [10]. The proportion of R&D expenditures in the GDP of China, which set out to become a hub of global technological and innovational activity, grew from 0.89 percent in 2000 to 2.1 percent in 2016 [10]. The position of Russia with regard to R&D spending nowadays resembles that of Brazil, which increased gross domestic spending on R&D from 1.0 percent in 2000 to 1.17 percent in 2014, and in the European Union - the Slovak Republic (1.1 percent) and Poland (1 percent) [22].
Another characteristic observed during the analysis of technology and innovation in Russia is the massive government presence in the Russian economy. This dynamic is also observed in the proportion of government R&D funding in the economy. It might be argued that the transition of a country to the innovational path of economic development requires government involvement; however, in case of Russia, there have not been any sustainable positive results observed in the economic activity of the private sector, especially in technology and innovation.
Sectoral R&D dynamics indicates that the role of government R&D funding has increased considerably over the last two decades, rising from 54.8 percent in 2000 to 69.5 percent in 2015, whereas internal R&D expenditures of the private sector fell from 32.9 percent to 26.4 percent during the same period [16]. Given the government priority of bringing the Russian economy onto the innovational development path, solidified in the 2011 government initiative titled the Strategy
10094 BO%
so%
40% 20% 0%
30% 26% 2S% 27% 2B:-n 27% 26%
-
_
2000 2005 2010
■ Government fun ding
2D11
2012 2013
i Bushes enterprfee funding
2014
2015
Higher educatioiVnon-profi: enterprise funding
■ Funds from abroad
Source: Federal Agency of State Statistics data [16]
Figure 2. R&D Funding by Sector, in 2000-2015, % of national R&D
2020, the fact that private R&D funding cannot reach, let alone exceed, the levels of the 2000s is more than alarming.
The analysis of UNESCO data on gross domestic expenditure on R&D for 44 selected countries showed that Russia had one of the highest government contributions to R&D in 2015 among the countries in consideration, behind Mexico with 71 percent. There are countries with a considerably higher share of government funding in R&D, such as Tajikistan or Iraq, where the government funded all, or nearly all, R&D activity in the country in 2015; however, these cases are exceptions rather than norm [22].
Despite the fact that the share of R&D-performing enterprises in the private sector of the Russian economy has fallen dramatically (from 2 238 in 2000 to 1 326 in 2016) as has the share of businesses' contribution to R&D and innovation, private businesses still consume the bulk of total R&D expenditures in the country [16]. In other words, instead of using internal financing or combining state financial support with their own funds to perform R&D and innovation, businesses tend to utilize state funding to cover their own R&D expenditures. All else being equal, with the government increasing the share of public research expenditures and higher education financing, the business sector may become more and more underfunded.
The analysis of the R&D activity in Russia indicated that the country has stagnated in its economic growth, which in turn explains the low share of R&D expenditures in GDP and the timidity of the Russian private sector to embark on and finance R&D activities. What adds to the rather unfavorable R&D environment in the country are the geopolitical factors. Strained relationships with other countries and sanctions, affect the viability of the private sector and consequently its ability to finance R&D and implement innovation. Furthermore, the uncertainty that arises from the tense geopolitical situation prevents new inflows of foreign direct investment into the country, whereas Western economic sanctions imposed on Russia in 2014 have led to drastic changes in governmental policies. High dependence of the industry on goods and services imported from abroad forced the Russian government to opt for import substitution policies and launch a series of measures aimed at limiting the exposure of the public and private sectors to the punitive policies of the U.S. and the European Union.
Global O&G Industry: Predominating R&D Trends. Having to operate in the weak national R&D environment poses certain challenges to technological and innovational development of industries with high strategic importance, such as the Russian O&G industry. With ever-present advances in global technology and innovation, especially in such R&D intensive industry as O&G, the Russian O&G companies have to apply enormous efforts to remain competitive on the international market and adjust to technological and innovational changes that reshape the landscape of the global industry.
In the wake of the 'shale revolution', a result of advances in O&G production technology, in particular a new combination of horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing (fracking), and greatly empowered by high O&G prices observed before 2014, the oil and natural gas reserves located in shale and other tight-rock formations of North America were made accessible. Furthermore, the stimulation of production from older wells was also made possible [3]. However, the peculiarity of shale O&G production is its dependence on oil prices. Due to highly expensive and cost-intensive operations, shale producers'
average breakeven price is close to 50 dollars per barrel [5]. If intensive R&D efforts of shale companies are successful in driving the breakeven price down, the O&G supply on the market will increase several times and significantly boost competition on the global O&G market.
The technological breakthrough that led to producing liquefied natural gas (LNG) launched the development of a new industry, which has seen considerable growth over the last years, with global LNG consumption reaching more than 280 million tons in 2017 [3]. Owing to its advantages compared to other hydrocarbons such as suitability for collection, storage, and sea shipment, as well as lack of negative environmental impact, LNG has become an effective source of energy. Global LNG trade has been growing at CAGR between 5 and 6.5 percent [3]. Demand for LNG has seen a dramatic increase in Asia, especially in China, Pakistan, and India, where incremental demand increased by 13 million tons in 2017. Sanford C. Bernstein & Co. predicts that energy companies will unlock more than 150 million tons of new supply capacity worldwide. In Russia alone, upon their estimated completion by 2019 and 2025, Yamal-LNG and Arctic-LNG-2 projects, with three trains each, are expected to reach production capacities of 16.5 and 19.8 million tons per annum and consequently increase the share of Russia in the global LNG exports, which accounted for 4.2 percent (10.8 million tons) in 2017 [3; 7; 15].
Growing demand for energy encourages countries both developed and developing to dedicate increasing amounts of R&D efforts to study abundant reserves of gas hydrates (primarily methane gas hydrates), a naturally occurring solid combination of natural gas (methane) and water, which were previously unknown or regarded as non-recoverable. Gas hydrates could be a potentially vast source of natural gas; however, their extraction is not only costly but also highly complex, as gas hydrates are found mainly in severe environments such as beneath terrestrial permafrost and marine sediments near continental margins [1]. Currently, global natural gas hydrate mining is at its early experimental phase, with researches attempting to eliminate low production efficiency, costly apparatus and materials implementation, environmental risks, etc. Japan, where the methane hydrate reserves are estimated at 1.1 trillion cubic meters, and the U.S. claim to have already completed their trial mining. China, with estimated 38 trillion cubic meters of hydrate reserves, although having conducted its first drilling and coring program in the South China Sea in 2007, is estimated to enter commercial production of gas hydrates only by 2036-2050, due to its lagging in technical capacities [6; 20]. With further technological and innovational advancement in detection and mining, gas hydrates may become sole energy sources for these countries and consequently shift their demand, i.e., for LNG imports, and therefore change the energy market dynamics forever.
With easy-to-access reserves diminishing rapidly, upstream O&G companies will have to implement sophisticated innovational technologies to locate and extract future hydrocarbons. Growing inaccessibility of O&G fields, with operations moving to hostile environments, increasing water depth levels and offshore distances, will mean higher exploration and development costs for new investment projects, which could only be reduced given the existence of advanced cost-cutting technologies. Price volatility also negatively affects the profit potential of investment projects, as it happened after a sharp decrease in oil prices in 2014.
With the operations of O&G companies progressing
Z014 ZÜ15 2016
—Innovation^ GWS in Total GWS Turn wer. %
2010 2011 2012 2013
Total GWS Turn over Innovational GWS Turnover
Source: Federal Agency of State Statistics data [16]
Figure 3. GWS turnover in mineral extraction and mining in Russia, 2010 - 2016, % and billion rubles
in scale and technological sophistication, there is severe pressure on the companies with regard to the compliance with environmental standards and industrial environmental control. For example, in 2016, for Gazprom Group alone environmental protection costs rose 6 percent due to higher wastewater tariffs and costs of oil and product spill readiness activities, whereas capital investments in environmental protection and sustainable use of natural resources rose by 43 percent compared to 2015, amounting to 22.54 billion rubles [14].
The matters of ecological awareness have moved to the forefront of the global O&G industry. The accidents that occurred in the past, such as the explosion on the Deepwater Horizon offshore drilling rig in the Gulf of Mexico, which resulted in the worst oil spill in the U.S. history, led to disastrous environmental consequences. Drilling operations are more often performed in harsh environmental conditions, such as in offshore areas of the Arctic region, and the technology and equipment used there must be of highest technical quality and operated only by highly qualified staff. Any risk of technological glitches or inappropriate utilization could result in an ecological catastrophe, the consequences of which could be extremely hard to reverse.
Growing demand for energy motivates countries to look for alternative energy sources such as renewable and low-carbon energy. According to FS-UNEP Center, in 2017, wind, solar, biomass and waste-to-energy, geothermal, marine and small hydro together generated 12.1 percent of world electricity, compared to 11 percent in 2016 [2]. The same year global government and corporate R&D in the renewables sector amounted to nearly 10 billion dollars, with business R&D increasing by 12 percent compared to the previous year [2].
Nowadays global companies that once were conventional O&G companies shift their strategic emphasis to become energy companies with diverse business portfolios. In 2016, Shell created the New Energies division, and the plan is to allocate up to 2 billion dollars in renewable and low-carbon energy projects in 2018-2020 [11].
Despite the fact that the O&G industry has been utilizing digital technologies for years, especially in upstream activities of model exploration and production assets, e.g., reservoirs, pipelines, etc., the potential for further digitalization remains. The International Energy Agency (IEA) estimated that digital technology could reduce production costs by 10 to 20 percent through 'advanced processing of seismic data, the use of fiber optic sensors, and enhanced reservoir modeling' [11, p. 17]. The use of these innovational technologies may not only reduce the associated costs but also improve safety and equipment reliability due to more frequent inspections and more effective preventive maintenance.
With the trends outlined above, among others, gaining substantial recognition within the global energy industry, cost control, and cost efficiency remain among the top priorities of O&G companies, meaning that technological and innovative capabilities of energy companies will play a crucial role in determining success or failure of these enterprises in the longer term.
Peculiarities of R&D and Innovation in the Russian O&G Industry. As one of the potential indicators of successful R&D activity in the O&G industry, the volume of innovational goods, works, and services (GWS) in the total volume of GWS sold in Russia increased almost three times since 2010 and reached 420 billion rubles in 2016 [16].
0.25%
0.20%
D.15%
0.10%
0.05%
0.00%
1.1. Li. iL. Ii ■■ h ■. Ii
I
I
2010
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
■ Tatneft ■Rosneft ■ Lukoil ■ Gazprom Gaspronnneft
Source: corporate financial reports [18]; author's calculations
Figure 4. Share of R&D in non-current assets, %
2016
2017
Table 1
Share of imports in key technical areas of O&G engineering
Technical area (product, technology) Share of imports in 2014 Planned max. share of imports by 2020-21 Expected decrease by 2020-21
Technologies and equipment for offshore operations 87.5% 67.5% 20.0%
Technologies, equipment and services for well operation 82.2% 66.0% 16.2%
LNG technologies 70.7%% 55.0%% 15.7%
Controlled directional, horizontal and multilateral well drilling equipment and technology 74.3% 53.3% 21.0%
Technologies and equipment for geological exploration 63.3°% 50.0%% 13.3%
IT solutions for drilling, extraction, transportation and processing of hydrocarbons 91.0%% 43.1%% 47.9%
Hydrocarbon processing technologies 73.7% 40.0%% 33.7%
Technology and equipment for O&G transportation 57.1% 36.1% 21.0%
Catalyzers and additives 76.3% 18.8% 57.5%
Source: Minpromtorg [9]; author's calculations
However, the depicted year-on-year dynamics shows that the innovational GWS turnover was much higher in 2011-2014; however, in the last years, it failed to reach those levels. The share of innovational GWS in the industry's turnover fell from 7.2 percent in 2014 to 4 percent in 2016, indicating a slump in innovational activity and commercialization of its results among mineral extraction and mining companies.
With innovational technologies requiring state-of-the-art equipment, the decreasing productivity of fixed assets and the decreasing amount of fixed assets available per one worker, which are evaluated with such indicators as fixed assets yield and fixed assets endowment, respectively, could hinder development and implementation of advanced technologies in the Russian O&G companies. Although, despite the negative trends, over the last years, with regard to the two indicators mentioned above, the natural resource extraction industry in Russia has on average performed better than other economic sectors of Russia [16].
The analysis of accounting statements of major Russian O&G companies with market capitalization more than RUB 1.0 trillion, as estimated at the end of the Q1 of 2018 via the Moscow Stock Exchange, revealed that the share of R&D in non-current assets did not exceed 0.5 percent over the period from 2010 to 2017.
The highest portion of R&D in the structure of corporate assets was noted in Tatneft and Rosneft, whereas by funds invested most significant contributions to R&D activities were made by Gazprom and Rosneft, with more than RUB 3 billion and 1.8 billion rubles of R&D inputs in 2017, respectively.
As was mentioned, the degree of dependence of the Russian O&G industry on imported technology, services, and equipment, particularly in O&G engineering, is notably high. According to the Ministry of Industry and Trade, the share of imports of certain technologies and equipment reached 100 percent in 2014.
The table below shows that some of the highest shares of import in consumption were observed in such technologically advanced areas as software solutions for drilling, extraction, transportation, and processing of hydrocarbons as well as technologies for catalyzer and additive production for oil processing and petrochemistry. Yet these areas are expected to have undergone the most substantial cuts, of 50 to 75 percent, in favor of domestic production by the year 2020-21, the fact that indicates the existence of local manufacturing companies
that could potentially produce the required apparatus [9].
Despite the planned import substitution measures, the adjusted shares of imports in consumption of equipment and technologies for offshore operations, well and LNG operations may remain well above 50 percent. The highest exposure arises in such technologically advanced areas of O&G engineering as fracking equipment, solutions for dynamic modeling of polyphase flows in wells and pipelines, and onboard LNG-fueling systems, where import dependence may still constitute 80 percent in 2020 [9]. Any intensification in global macroeconomic and trade environment and application of further punitive measures could be potentially disastrous for Russian O&G companies involved in large-scale LNG projects and offshore development. The reason being that the Russian industry may only be partially equipped, in terms of both physical and human capital resources, to develop necessary parts, equipment, and technologies and carry out innovational R&D activities.
In an attempt to unlock the technological and innovational potential of national engineering manufacturers, further steps have been taken to solidify the Russian O&G engineering industry. The developments in geopolitics have allowed many Russian companies, in the wake of import substitution policies, to find and expand markets for their products and gain access to additional state and industry financing. Among the measures the Russian government implements to enhance the viability and competitiveness of the industrial sector, including the O&G industry, are [12]:
- Financial support: subsidies, tax preferences, special investment contracts (SIC) up to 10 years; preferences in government procurement;
- Informational and consultation support: State Industry Information System (SIIS) aimed at bringing free-of-charge up-to-date industry information to industry participants and other stakeholders, e.g., industry development and current trends, industry participants, production volumes, use of resource-saving technologies and renewable energy sources, etc.;
- Human resources development;
- Foreign trade: promotion of Russian industrial output on international markets, the creation of favorable export environment.
With the support of PJSC Gazprom, the association of equipment manufacturers "New Technologies of the Gas Industry" was created in 2012 to consolidate industrial efforts
and foster cooperation on the part of Russian manufacturers in development and implementation of cutting-edge technologies for extraction, transportation and processing of natural gas, which in 2017 included 118 Russian enterprises [8].
Among other goals of the association is to provide a standardized framework for industrial processes, equipment and technical solutions. In 2016, PJSC Gazprom registered its voluntary certification system InterGasCert, which aims to provide compliance standards for goods, works, services and management systems of Russian manufacturers to national and international quality requirements. Certification of O&G industry participants with such O&G quality management standards as CTO Gazprom 9001, ISO 29001, American Petroleum Institute Spec Q1 and Q2, etc. could greatly improve the company's market position and its international investment attractiveness. Such certification could potentially benefit Russian engineering companies, as it enables participation and gives competitive advantage in international tenders, etc., therefore, encourage competitive behavior in the industry and attracting foreign industry participants.
Conclusion and recommendations. The analysis showed that the global O&G industry has been undergoing significant changes in the wake of shifting global energy demand, digitalization and oil price volatility. The emphasis within the industry has shifted toward cost-effective and cost-efficient innovative solutions that would enable O&G companies to stay competitive on the market and drive down costs of operations.
The Russian O&G industry, one of the most strategically relevant industries in the economy, has to develop and maintain its competitive advantages on the global market, which becomes particularly relevant in the situation of adverse macroeconomic and geopolitical environment. Among the top strategic priorities of the industry is to alleviate the industry's strong dependence on imported technologies, services and
REFERENCES
equipment and create an environment favorable enough to attract and stimulate national engineering, IT and other O&G industry-related companies to enter the market. The Russian O&G industry will only be able to enhance its viability and strengthen its competencies if it makes R&D its main priority.
The creation and maintenance of competitive, therefore more efficient, market environment in the O&G industry will require a set of comprehensive measures, encompassing the national economy as a whole, such as:
- Development of policies and market mechanisms that could stimulate competitive behavior in the industry and consequently boost business and investment sentiment in the Russian economy. With efficient market mechanisms in place, further steps could be taken to reverse the currently observed negative dynamics in R&D expenditures of the private sector and the number of R&D-performing companies, for instance, steps such as improving the competitiveness of the enterprises manufacturing import substitutes, attracting institutional investors into R&D-intensive industry projects co-financing, etc.;
- State supervision over technical and economic characteristics of technologically advanced parts and equipment manufactured by Russian companies, to establish the appropriate level of competitive ability and compatibility with foreign counterparts. An additional measure such as obligatory company level certification, such as O&G quality management standards CTO Gazprom 9001, ISO 29001, American Petroleum Institute Spec Q1 and Q2, etc., of larger O&G industry participants could significantly improve the company's market position, its investment attractiveness, enable registration and participation in international tenders, etc.;
- Creation of a definitive benchmarking framework for innovational and R&D activity in the O&G to provide a better insight into and peer comparison of the company's R&D output.
1. Beaudoin YC, Dallimore SR, & Boswell R. (eds). Frozen Heat: A UNEP Global Outlook on Methane Gas Hydrates. Volume 2. Norway: Birkeland Trykkeri A/S; 2014.
2. Global Trends in Renewable Energy Investment Report 2018. The Green Growth Knowledge Platform (GGKP). http://www.greengrowthknowledge.org/ resource/global-trends-renewable-energy-investment-report-2018.
3. Hydraulic Fracturing. Independent Petroleum Association of America. https://www.ipaa.org/fracking.
4. IGU World Gas LNG Report - 2018 Edition. The International Gas Union (IGU). https://www.igu.org/sites/default/files/node-document-field_file/IGU_ LNG_2018_0.pdf.
5. Kemp J. U.S. shale breakeven price revealed around $50: Kemp. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/article/usa-shale-kemp/rpt-column-u-s-shale-breakeven-price-revealed-around-50-kemp-idUSL5N1KV40G.
6. Moridis GJ, Reagan MT, Collett TS, et al. Toward Production From Gas Hydrates: Current Status, Assessment of Resources, and Simulation-Based Evaluation of Technology and Potential. SPE Reservoir Evaluation & Engineering. 2013;12(5): 745-771. doi: 10.2118/114163-pa.
7. НОВАТЭК и «Тоталь» становятся партнерами по проекту «Арктик СПГ 2». Официальный сайт ПАО Новатэк. http://www.novatek.ru/ru/ press/releases/index.php?id_4=2443 .
8. Об ассоциации. Официальный сайт Ассоциации производителей оборудования «Новые технологии газовой отрасли». http://newgaztech.ru.
9. Order of the Ministry of Industry and Trade of Russia No. 645 of March 31, 2015 "Ob utverzhdeniiplana meropriyatiipo importozameshcheniyu v otrasli neftegazovogo mashinostroeniya Rossiiskoi Federatsii". The document has not been published. (in Russ). [Приказ Минпромторга России № 645 от 31 марта 2015 г. «Об утверждении плана мероприятий по импортозамещению в отрасли нефтегазового машиностроения Российской Федерации». Документ опубликован не был.]
10. OECD Economic Outlook: Statistics and Projections. OECD iLibrary. doi: 10.1787/eo-data-en.
11. Digitalization and Energy. International Energy Agency. https://www.iea.org/publications/freepublications/publication/DigitalizationandEnergy3.pdf.
12. Federal Law of the Russian Federation No. 488-ФЗ of December 31, 2014 "O promyshlennoi politike v Rossiiskoi Federatsii" (in Russ). [Федеральный закон Российской Федерации № 488-ФЗ от 31 декабря 2014 г. «О промышленной политике в Российской Федерации».]
13. Perrons RK. How innovation and R&D happen in the upstream oil & gas industry: Insights from a global survey. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering. 2014;124:301-312. doi: 10.1016/j.petrol.2014.09.027.
14. PJSC Gazprom. Annual Report 2016. Gazprom website. http://www.gazprom.com/f/posts/11/885774/gazprom-annual-report-2016-en.pdf.
15. Проект «Ямал СПГ». Официальный сайт ПАО Новатэк. http://www.novatek.ru/ru/business/yamal-lng.
16. Российский статистический ежегодник. Федеральная служба государственной статистики. http://www.gks.ru.
17. Rykova IN, Kotlyarov MA. Potentsial innovatsionnogo razvitiya krupneishikh organizatsii Rossii. ETAP: ekonomicheskaya teoriya, analiz, praktika. 2012;(4):87-109. (in Russ). [Рыкова И.Н., Котляров М.А. Потенциал инновационного развития крупнейших организаций России // ЭТАП: экономическая теория, анализ, практика. 2012. № 4. C. 87-109.]
18. Сетевое издание «Центр раскрытия корпоративной информации». Официальный сайт Центра раскрытия корпоративной информации. http://www.e-disclosure.ru.
19. Shell. Shell Energy Transition Report. Shell website. https://www.shell.com/energy-and-innovation/the-energy-future/shell-energy-transition-report/ jcr_content/par/toptasks.stream/1524757699226/f51e17dbe7de5b0eddac2ce19275dc946db0e407ae60451e74acc7c4c0acdbf1/web-shell-energy-transition-report.pdf.
20. Tan Z, Pan G, Liu P. Focus on the Development of Natural Gas Hydrate in China. Sustainability. 2016;8(6):520. doi: 10.3390/su8060520.
21. Tasmukhanova AE, Shekish RB. Comparative characteristics of the methods of accounting and planning of research and development work in Russia and Kazakhstan. Naukovedenie. 2016;8(3):85. (in Russ.). [Тасмуханова А.Е., Шекиш Р.Б. Сравнительная характеристика методов учета и планирования научно-исследовательских и опытно-конструкторских работ в России и Казахстане // Науковедение. 2016. Т. 8. № 3. С. 85.]. http://naukovedenie.ru/PDF/08EVN316.pdf.
22. UNESCO, UIS. Science, technology and innovation. UNESCO/UIS website. http://data.uis.unesco.org/Index.aspx.
Received 17.03.2019
