 Again, I would like to say thank you all. I'm delighted to have you here. This is going to be a really an interesting discussion. And I'm very pleased, indeed, that Ibu Keran would be willing to be with us here today to share her insights. She's a path breaker. I think there are only two women who are the head of major oil companies, integrated oil companies, complete upstream to downstream, with huge ambitions for the country and for the future of the company. And we've just had quite an interesting conversation and I'm quite impressed by her vision of what comes ahead. Of course, we need that. Indonesia is growing remarkably. I think it was 11% growth in gasoline consumption last year alone. You have that for five years and you've just doubled demand. And imagine what that's like in a country where the rising expectations and rising disposable income and the capacity to redefine a lifestyle and the expectations for it are huge. And so, of course, this company is going to succeed, but that means it has to have a global perspective going forward. And that's what Ibu Keran has been doing on this trip. She's here finding partners and allies to help understand how can she grow this company and how can she meet the demand in Indonesia. It's really been exciting. We look forward to having a chance to hear her. And as I say, Ernie is going to moderate the discussion. Ernie is a ruthless moderator, so don't make him mad. But we're going to get the most out of this day and we're delighted that you're here. So would you please, with your applause, welcome Ibu Keran, Agustia Wan. We're glad to have you here. Come on, Dr. Hammer. I'm not ruthless on anything. I'd like to welcome Keran, also welcome all of you to CSIS this morning. This discussion is made possible by a generous grant from Derwin Pereira. So it's under the Derwin Pereira Indonesia Initiative. And the vision of that initiative was to bring Indonesian leaders to the United States for deep discussions about what their experience is, what their vision is. And boy, we couldn't be luckier than today to have one of the great leaders in the energy sector in Asia, generally in Indonesia particularly. And I like the fact that Dr. Hamry mentioned that she's a strong woman leader. And we look at Indonesia and we can see that there are several strong women leading that country and several coming in to lead. And so it's a real pleasure to have you here. Keran Ibu Keran is the president and CEO, as you know, Pertamina. That's the Indonesia's state-owned oil and gas company. And she's got a long history in this sector. And she also knows Americans very well. She has worked for a couple of American companies, Hal Burton and Mobile Oil, both in Indonesia and in Dallas, I think, and has been a leader in Pertamina before ascending to the position of CEO. She was the upstream director, which we all know is a very important part of an oil and gas company, and was expert staff to the director before she took over from him. I think without further ado, I'd like to invite Ibu Keran to share her ideas and vision with us. And then we'll open it up for a discussion. So please join me in welcoming Keran at Gusti One. Good morning, everyone. Before we begin, I would like to convey my highest appreciation to CSIS, who has given me the opportunity to speak on behalf of Pertamina as a state-owned company, as a national-owned company, how we see the framework of future energy for Indonesia. I want to talk to you today about Indonesia's energy security. I hope to convey to you in the course of my presentation why I have a sense of urgency on this issue, why we need to appreciate the true risk to our energy security and why we must step up the pace of action to address very real challenges we face in the area of energy security. First, we need to understand what constitutes energy security. Energy security in its simplest form relates to safeguarding the country's energy future by securing a stable and secure supply of energy at affordable prices. That sounds quite straightforward, but underneath this simple definition is a myriad of complex issues that we need to grapple with. Failure to do so might risk jeopardizing our energy future for a long time. I'm not exaggerating by stating that urgent attention is required in this matter. Global energy demand has been largely satisfied over the last few decades with the aid of technological advancement in the energy sector. However, the truth remains that we all live in a world of scarcity, a truth that hits especially hard in the area of conventional energy resources. To compound matters, energy consumption is expected to continue soaring in tandem with demographics and economy growth around the world. According to BP report, the Asia-Pacific region's total consumption of primary energy is expected to rise by about 63.4% to 7.8 billion tons of oil equivalent by 2030. This presents a challenge for the region leaders as they seek ways to fuel the region's energy requirements, particularly as emerging markets go through subsequent stages of industrialization and also urbanization. Focusing on the issue at home in Indonesia with all its abundance in natural energy resources, it is far from having secured its energy future. Let me paint a rough picture of our predicament. Our total primary energy consumption has increased by more than 50% between 2000 and 2010. However, our production, which currently supports the bulk of our energy needs, has fallen way below its production peak of more than 1.6 million per day to roughly about 861,000 barrels per day in 2012. At the same time, our proven reserve has fallen by more than 1.9 billion barrels since 1992, the fastest decline in Asia. So what can we do to salvage our energy situation? I would like to present to you three main areas of action that could help us on our ways to securing our energy future. First, we need to recognize that we have been too dependent on oil to fuel our country's activities. Despite its declining significance over the years, oil still makes up about 30% of Indonesia's total primary energy consumption in 2011. This over dependence is exacerbated by the combination of poor refining capacities and all declining production that has turned Indonesia into a net importer. I shall not go to the problems attached to an over reliance on foreign oil imports, as they have been well documented over the years. However, I just mentioned the most critical cause for concern and largest contributor to uncertainty in global oil network, geopolitical shocks from the Middle East. We have all been watching the dramatic upheavals in the Middle East as the Arab Spring unfolds. We are concerned about events there as human beings who care for our brothers and sisters who are at risk. But we should also be concerned because events there can affect all prices, and through that medium have a major impact on our energy security as well as on our economic well-being. The media has not been highlighting events there in recent months, having become bored with the Arab Spring. But tensions are rising to new heights in multiple areas. So many all exporters are exposed directly or indirectly to political turbulence that we have to watch events in that troubled region very carefully. President Obama, for example, has just warned that Iran is perhaps a year or so away from possessing a nuclear weapon. In his interview with an Israeli television channel, he observed that he don't want to cut it too close and declined to rule out the possibility of a military action. Iran is a major oil producer and has threatened in the past to block the straits of Hormuz in retaliation against any US or Israeli military action. About 40% of the world's traded oil passes through these straits. So the impact of any military class in Iran on our energy security would be sizable. Iraq is another example. This country is going through a new spiral of violence. Bordering Iran and Iraq are countries in distress, such as Syria, where a virtual civil war has been raging for the last two years. According to the International Energy Agency World Energy Outlook 2012 report, Asia is expected to account for 90% of the Middle East oil exports in the future. Hence, we are at the very much mercy of such developments. The collapse of one of these politically distressed countries could cause trouble to spill over into other parts of the region, sending ripples across the region. A growing reliance on all imports will not spare Indonesia. We must therefore be proactive addressing these risks. And fortunately, Indonesia is in better position than most to reduce its reliance on oil as it enjoys substantial endowments in great variety of alternative energy sources. One example of this is natural gas, which could prove to be a saving grace from our current oil situation. According to former oil and gas regulator BP Migas, companies operating in Indonesia produced 8.8 billion cubic feet of natural gas per day in 2011, or 1.5 million barrels of oil equivalent, which is two-thirds more than of our oil production. Moreover, the Ministry of Energy and Minds has estimated that Indonesia has an enormous 335 trillion cubic feet of estimated gas resources as of 2011, which is equivalent to 59.6 barrels of oil. If all this data is accurate, we should step up the pace of shifting our energy mix to reflect a higher consumption of natural gas. For that, we must first ensure that there is a sustainability in the sector, particularly as exploration activities in the recent years have been stagnant and insufficient to replace aging fields. I believe that in order to achieve our maximum potential, we should not be afraid to engage foreign expertise and partnerships that will help us beef up our energy infrastructure and knowledge. Recent gas finds in Makasa Strait, the Masella Block and the East Natuna Block, have all been very promising. In the East Natuna Block alone, we have 46 trillion cubic feet of natural gas that is estimated to be extractable for processing. In view of such operations in the future, the introductions of greater foreign partnership will equip us with best practices and technology that exist around the world, cutting our learning curve significantly. For instance, Pertamina has been leading consortium, including ExxonMobil and also Total since 2010 to secure a market for gas from East Natuna Field. The conclusions of a conceptual study and recovery reserve estimates is expected to be completed this year when more detailed plans will be pushed through. Such partners will have a positive knockout effect on local firms as they benefit from experiences of our foreign counterparts, aiding other projects such as the one in Mahakam Block or East Kalimantan, where knowledge of deep water operations is developing. The government should assist us in looking at ways which we can extend cooperation with foreign companies so we can develop the sector further to replace oil as a sustainable source of energy in the long term. Since Indonesia is well endowed with gas, we should also explore unconventional gases as a viable proportion to replace oil. Colbert methane serves a good choice in this respect. Colbert methane is a versatile gas that meets the needs of various markets. It is also highly affordable at half the price of diesel, clean and uses more efficient extraction techniques that have minimal impact on the environment. Among other benefits mentioned, it is also more economical as lower costs will be incurred in comparison to exploring conventional wells. According to Canada-based CBM Asia Development Corporation, current drilling costs to run at approximately $1 million per well based on 500 to 750 horsepower rigs. This drilling cost compares to favorably to onshore conventional drilling costs in Indonesia that cost between 10 to $30 million per well. Furthermore, with an estimated Colbert methane reserve, that is ranked number six in the world, I firmly believe that Indonesia should ramp up the development of pace in this unconventional resource. Excuse me. As a vote of confidence in our CBM future, Pertamina has plans to invest around $1.5 billion to develop 200 CBM exploration wells in the next five years, possibly increasing the investment if production targets are elevated. In the longer term, we should then plan for the extraction of other unconventional gases, such as shale gas, which is currently getting much attention because of the success of United States have enjoyed in this area. But as for now, let us take one step at a time and concentrate for maximizing Colbert methane as our utmost priority. We must be reminded that natural gas is still a fossil fuel. While it is an important component of our economy now, it cannot be the solution to all our energy needs. Rather, it should act as a support bridge that connect us to a low carbon economy based on renewable energy. It will decrease our reliance on oil for now. This brings me to the second point that I would like to make. We should all brace ourselves as Indonesia dependence on oil is not the only problem with its energy mix. Indonesia's primary energy consumption in 2011 was 71% made up of hydrocarbons. This trend of utilizing hydrocarbon such as oil, gas and coal is widely expected to continue dominating our energy consumption in the future. We must be fully aware that our current consumption levels, those energy resources could run out in a short time. Such carbon intensity will not only incur risk similar to the other reliance on oil, they also generate concerns over pollution and the emissions of greenhouse gases. For example, increasing emissions could unnecessarily increase international pressure to resolve excessive carbon levels as we have seen in the case of China and India. Domestically, a continuing reliance on oil and gas will worsen the pollution in major cities such as Jakarta. Thus, such an energy mix is unsustainable in a long run. We simply have to do more to diversify our energy mix and reduce our consumption of hydrocarbons. Our future generation should not have to bear the consequences of our inactions today. The Indonesian government has acknowledged that sooner or later, Indonesia and the rest of the world must bid farewell to crude oil as a major source of electricity. As a result, there are long-term plans to build an energy mix that includes a larger proportion of renewable energy sources. For instance, the government has plans to increase our annual electricity generation from renewable sources to around 99 million tons of oil equivalent by 2025. Currently, the figure only stands at 10 million tons of oil equivalent. However, such talks to promote development of renewable energy have been ongoing for the longest time and we are still underachieving. I firmly believe that we can push ourselves to meet such targets for renewable energy much earlier. In order to accelerate our speed in this area, we should take advantage of our existing strengths. Inevitably, this points us to the direction of geothermal energy. A geographical position on the Pacific ring of fire has bestowed us with an unparalleled amount of potential geothermal energy. Not only is geothermal energy clean and renewable, it requires much less space than other forms of renewable energy such as solar and wind power. It also provides a predictable, constant supply regardless of climatic conditions or the time of day. Indonesia's geothermal source has been estimated potential to generate 29,000 megawatts of electricity if it is fully exploited. At the moment, we are currently only utilizing 1,200 megawatts of electricity from that source, showing how far off we are towards taking advantage of our natural environment. As with many other initiatives that are meant to develop renewable energy sources, efforts to exploit geothermal energy sector have been stimulated by the government's lack of supportive frameworks. Encouragingly though, Indonesia has a good chance of catching up in this area. An increasing number of investors have entered the sector in recent years. Among them working on new geothermal projects include Japanese conglomerate Sumitomo and also India's Tata Energy. There are also developments on the macro level. Just last year, the government of Indonesia and New Zealand has signed a cooperation agreement on geothermal energy. New Zealand has been actively developing geothermal energy. We have contributed 70% of its renewable energy share. Hence, their experience in addition to our natural capacity for development could improve to be a game changer. I am hopeful and also optimistic that we will be able to progress significantly in this area of energy to strengthen our case towards energy security. Other than geothermal sources, there are other renewable sources that are worthy for consideration too. Take the case of biofuels. We have a huge amount of biomass reserves arising from our agricultural industries, including sugar, rubber, and palm oil. Based on that, Indonesia has the potential to become a major center of biofuel production even though it is currently constrained by the fact that most biofuel resources are being exported due to the higher value placed in food. Another upcoming source with potential for further development is bioethanol. Development of the fuel has been part of Indonesia's plan to reduce energy imports and improve air quality standards. Plans to produce a 10% blend of high-octane fuel ethanol by 2020 could reduce our gasoline imports by more than 30 million barrels a year, mostly from our transport sector. We can do well to take a leaf out of Brazil's look where the government has been highly successful in developing bioethanol. The Brazilian government began to invest heavily on ethanol productions after the 1973 oil crisis. Its success since has allowed bioethanol to play a huge role in liberalizing the country from the vulnerabilities of the oil market. But I do have a word of caution in this case. That is, we must not wait for another crisis to explode before taking similar actions. There are many other renewable energy sources that Indonesia can potentially tap on. That includes hydro and marine power, offshore wind, and solar power. While I love to spend more time in going through details of each source, unfortunately, time constrained dictate that I shall leave them for some other time. Overall, there is an incredible potential in developing our natural gas and renewable energy sector. Such endeavors will have to be supported by the government for any hopes of progression. However, one issue has been haunting the government for many years, and its impact is far more extensive than most would expect, bringing me to my third and final point. Many observers have pointed out over the last few years that Indonesia is threading on dangerous grounds with its fuel subsidies program. Fuel subsidies have grown since their introduction in the 1960s. Not only has it been increasingly difficult to sustain the level Indonesians want, it is also turning into a major hindrance to efficiency in the energy markets. Ultimately, it is obstructing many important initiatives for two reasons. First, these subsidies are extremely costly to maintain as more than 20% of the annual budget now goes towards funding fuel subsidies, not to mention the strain of future budgets as the debt-servicing cost of deficit budget grows. In the 2013 state budget passed in October 2012, the government has announced a budget of 193 trillion Indonesia rupiah as subsidies for a quota of 46 million kilometers of fuel. Despite the substantial provision, the quota provided each year has been insufficient to cover rising consumer demands. For example, the 44 million kilometers of fuel provided for in 2012 ran out by November, requiring the People Representative Council to approve an additional 1.2 million kilometers to meet demand. This is evidence that subsidies have dealing the price of energy from underlying realities of supply and demand, causing Indonesians to become oblivious towards the true cost of fuel and resulting in consumption that is both excessive and also wasteful. Second, there is a misallocation of resources because it allows fuel to be sold at artificially low prices at the expense of key areas such as poverty alleviation, healthcare and also infrastructure development. For instance, the value of subsidies in our 2013 state budget exceed the combined national expenditure on education, healthcare and public works. The ramifications are huge for the energy sector. A key reason that the sector has remained underdeveloped is the fact that Indonesia has been suffering from a persistent infrastructure problem that turns away foreign investors. With the government expenditure on infrastructure continuing to be below 3% of GDP, there is no wonder that we are unable to attract foreign investors. As I have mentioned, we need the participation of foreign companies to facilitate technological and also knowledge transfers. Reducing our allocation of funds towards fuel subsidies should free up more resources for such developments. However, doing away with the scheme is not an easy option for the government as Indonesians have long taken it as their right to enjoy subsidized fuel. It could take a long time before we see fresh developments. With the 2014 elections looming, neither the ruling party nor the opposition would release the prospect of having to craft a policy that cuts fuel subsidies. This burden of responsibility would probably fall on the shoulders of our new president. I hope by then that at the very least, the government can raise the prices of subsidized fuel to cut the raging costs associated with it. It will make the fuel more expensive and hence rain in the demand as consumers will have to shoulder part of the burden of fuel costs while the government saves several trillion rupiah. Also it would level the playing field of other forms of power like renewable energy to compete with subsidized fuel. It would in turn encourage the development of renewable energy. Diagressing away from the energy sector, the reduction of fuel subsidization costs will also help to provide a better livelihood of our people by freeing more funds to help them attain quality growth. Fuel subsidization is only a short term relief to their cost of living. In the long term, stronger measures including education policies, infrastructure for businesses and affordable healthcare will go a longer way in enhancing the lives of Indonesians. Furthermore, this will help us to achieve our millennium development goals that are quickly reaching its deadline in 2015. There are many other problems within the government's energy framework and policies that requires reforms, but they will take a massive amount of effort and time to correct. For now, the path of action is clear. The government must first bite the political bullet and reduce the fuel subsidies as a first step towards greater change. At the end of the day, we must strike a balance that will not overburden our people nor threaten the plans of our energy future. In conclusion, I can go further and warn many other challenges ahead, but today I have identified three areas of change that I feel are within our reach. First is reducing our reliance on oil by developing our natural gas and unconventional gas sector. Second is diversify our energy mixed by accelerating plans to explore renewable energy sources. Last is reducing fuel subsidizing costs and reallocate such funds towards more important areas. With the right resolve, Indonesia will emerge stronger and more defensible in the realm of energy. But first, we must seize the day and implement some hard decisions or risk discussing about the same issue in just to come. That concludes my speech and thank you very much for your attention. Great, thank you very much, Ibu Karen, for your thoughtful remarks. I'd like to open the floor to questions and as usual, we would just ask that you identify yourself and your organization if you're affiliated before you ask your question. I'll start with Sean. Thank you. Sean Levine with Eurasia Group, the Indonesia analysts there and thank you for the three policy directions that you want to see Pertamina going in. My question is really about with the Energy Commission and Parliament now discussing revisions to the 2001 oil and gas law. The question really is what has been your role in those discussions with the Energy Commission in particular, but also, where do you see Pertamina going forward and what role do you see Pertamina playing in the sector given that after the dissolution of BPM gas last year, there was a strong push by some members of Parliament and particularly some factions within Parliament to see a greater role for Pertamina in the sector moving just from an operator to the regulator for the sector taking on the role of BPM gas going forward similar to what occurred during the New Order period. So just how do you feel about the whole situation and where do you see that going? Thank you. Thank you, Sean, for the question. Pertamina wants to be a global player and we have changed our vision since 2012 to become an energy company not just an oil and gas company is actually to accommodate the diversification of energy in Indonesia that we have seen that it is going the right way. So we will, of course, be involved in the conventional oil and gas in CBM. We are also involved in geothermal. We are also involved in the renewable energy such as we are now in the process of developing a power plant from a waste, municipal waste and we are also now together with another state-owned enterprise building some solar panels for smaller industries. We have not touched on wind and hydropower as yet. In terms of the role of Pertamina in discussing with the legislation on the new policy of the oil and gas, Pertamina has been given an opportunity to give some insights on how an NOC should play a greater role as if in the other countries. We have, that's about it. We are comparing ourselves towards Petronas. We are comparing ourselves with PTT and also like the likes of Petrobras and also Pemex. But I would not see Pertamina as being a regulator because we cannot be an operator and a regulator at the same time and we want to build a strong Pertamina as a worldwide corporate company. So that's my input for you. Thank you. Over here. Thank you. My name is Heru from Science Science Operations University. I thank you very much for your remarks and policy prescriptions for the future sustainable energy policies for Indonesia. In April 2011, the government and the house trying to address this problem of reducing the fiscal subsidies and it triggered a massive protest in the streets and the number of violence in the house. So in our understanding, this policy tends to be unpopular for politicians. How Pertamina would sell these prescriptions for the politicians, especially for the upcoming elections? And also the fact that, would you say that? I know this is going to be a very personal question. Would you say that your position as the CEO in Pertamina would be secure with your supporting continuation of reducing fiscal subsidies for the next administration? Thank you very much. Thank you, Heru. I know that there's been a very long discussions in 2011 with the legislation on how to increase the subsidized fuel. But I think for 2013, it has reached to a certain level that the national budget has deficit. And if we continue to operate like we have done in the past years, I don't think that the national budget can survive. Pertamina has been asked to do lots of things actually to monitor the usage of the subsidized fuel. Right now we have been trying to introduce the IT system through every nozzle of the retail station so that we can monitor and also limit the usage of fuel subsidy. But that will become 100% completed probably by the end of the year. So you will probably see a greater result in 2014. We have to start at some day, yeah? I mean, we have, you know, since we came the net importer of oil, we should have then taken the several actions which we have not. So my position as a CEO does not, you know, I think if I have to say what is right for the country, I will say what is right for the country regardless of what will happen to my position. Okay, thank you. Ibu, could I just follow up on that question? I think you, about saying what's right for the country, you are the partner of many of the international oil companies who are working in Indonesia. And you mentioned at the outset, the production has fallen off and proven reserves are down. What do you think the operating environment is for the international oil companies as they work in Indonesia? And do you think that is it business friendly enough for you to do what you wanna do? What changes do you see in the near term? I thank you, Ernie. I think since Indonesia reform in 1998, I presume that for the IOCs, it has become a very challenging, should I say, environment to work with because of so many challenges and their policies that are being challenged and so on. And it is not easy, I think, for the IOCs because pertamina is also having difficulties, especially when working with the local governments. And so we are not different than the IOCs, Ernie. So we also face the same problem. We still have some attractive resources, but it is in a more difficult, should I say, territory of Indonesia. There is no more easy oil in Indonesia and most of it is, of course, in the offshore and deep water, it is high cost, high risk. And that's why I think the investors would like a long-term, should I say, secure contract. And of course, all investors would like to see a return which is better than the other, should I say, countries in the region. And I don't know whether Indonesia in terms of that is still competitive compared to Thailand or even Vietnam or even Myanmar. So I think we do have home work there, especially on the cost recovery mechanism because I see that exploration phase is the hardest in the upstream phase and it is most costly. And we should be able to recover that even after the asset is been producing. And that course might not be as attractive as it should be compared to previous years or compared now to other parts of the country. Thank you. Maybe I could just follow up with another question. You talked about geostrategic risk in the Middle East, but there are analysts who are concerned about geostrategic risk in Asia. And some of that centers now around the South China Sea, the East Sea, and sort of the question of China's, how will China use its economic might and around some of the sovereignty issues for instance, the Nine Dash Line, which I think somewhere crosses the tip of the Natuna field that you mentioned. So how do you think about geostrategic risk and China's role in the region? As a CEO of ANOC, I see that Natuna is a very huge asset that needs to be exploited due to the fact that we need the energy. Whether it crosses the borderline, we will not take that to an account as yet. But when time comes, we will be able to sit and negotiate on business to business deal based on the reserve that covers the borderline. But for now, I think it is best if we concentrate on how to exploit the asset. From the CSIS Southeast Asia program, Ibu, you mentioned how you want to become an international oil company. Could you tell us a little bit about ways you're going offshore and what other markets you're looking, and the one market that is opening up within Southeast Asia itself is Myanmar Burma. There, I can't remember, I think it's 14 blocks that they're going to open in the next few months forbidding, might you be interested in looking at that area for oil? Thank you, Marie. I think the policy for Pratamina is to look for producing assets, producing all assets at this point of time due to the fact that we have a huge gap of demand in the country itself. We would like to bring the entitlement of the production from overseas to Indonesia to fill in the capacity that we are lacking of. So for Myanmar or for any other parts of the countries, if there is an opportunity for Pratamina to enter in an oil producing field, then we will enter with a partner if it's offshore, because Pratamina, if it's offshore and if it's outside of Indonesia, we would like to work with the big sisters, but if it's for Indonesia, we are brave enough to be the operator. Thank you. Thank you, hi. My name is Jessica Darmalan, I work on Indonesian projects at Rare Conservation, and my question is regarding that you mentioned about biofuels and there is a significant potential in biofuels production from palm oil. However, the palm oil production industry is very ridden with controversial environmental degradation and also deforestation, and so how will production of biofuels and other alternative energies be ensured that they are produced in a stable manner for? Thank you. In that case, what we have done was actually right now, we are still discussing with some partners how to produce energy from the agriculture waste with zero waste, just like what we have done from the municipal waste, we are trying to provide electricity from the waste, but producing zero waste. So that's the target from Pratamina. Regarding the deforestation, Pratamina has been obliged to cultivate 100 million trees until 2015. So as a state-owned company, we are also concerned about the environment and also the green that we are hoping to see because we are in the business of exploiting oil and gas. So by 2015, we hope that we can cultivate 100 million trees. Right now, we have achieved of about 30 million trees. Thank you. A question here in the front. Hi, very interesting talk. I'm David Burwell from the Carnegie Endowment Climate and Energy Program. Listening to you, it's kind of strange to think you're working for an oil and gas company given your focus on renewables and moving to natural gas off of oil. It's very hard in our country or in working with IOCs to get diversification in their energy mix. It's very much focused on just oil and gas. And there are some obvious reasons for that, particularly shareholder value and the fact that they are not very convergent or have much expertise in non-fossil fuels. So I guess this is kind of a rhetorical question. My thought is, so what's the difference about Pertumia? Do you not have upstream activities that much so that you don't need that? Or is it because you're a state-owned entity and you don't have shareholders? But there's got to be something different as to why you seem to act so differently about your future energy mix than most IOCs. Thank you, David. We do have shareholders and we have a lot of shareholders. And currently Pertumia is producing of about 500,000 barrels of oil equivalent in 2012. And we plan to reach 800 by 2015. Currently we have a huge initiative of improve oil recovery and enhance oil recovery of 200,000 barrels of our existing fields. And we also try to expedite our geothermal activities to produce 100,000 barrels of equivalent. So we are an oil and gas company. But we are realistic. We see that with the demand that is growing, 250 million people, we know that we cannot rely just on oil and gas. We have to use other sources of energy. And being a state-owned company, I think we need to be the locomotive of the country to provide energy for Indonesia. So IOCs does not have that responsibility, so to say, but as a state-owned enterprise, I think we need to be able to fulfill the energy requirements for the country. And that's why we have a mix of oil and gas, CBM, geothermal and also renewables. Thank you. Ibu, I wanted to ask, since you're here and CSIS plays, I think we try to play an important role in advising US policy. We have a strong framework with Indonesia. I see Ambassador Hume is in the audience, a former US ambassador to Indonesia. Ted Oceus is the former Deputy Chief of Mission here. Both men should be thanked for their role in setting up this comprehensive partnership framework with Indonesia. One of the things that we're working on here at CSIS is a set of recommendations on how to put the muscles on that great framework. Are there things that you think the American government, the US government or American companies could do better or some vision that we could have in the energy sector to support your vision for Indonesia? I mean, you've laid out a very good vision here. I think it's in many ways compelling to Americans from a policy standpoint, the issues that you've outlined. How can we best help? What's your advice? I think the Americans can best help if, you know, the information of the export policy of shell gas because then, you know, it will impact on our development of, you know, a huge Natuna field which is a 40 billion US dollar project, you know. Should the US takes that window of opportunity to place the policy for export, then probably we will wait until, we will wait to develop Natuna because we do have a cheap, I will consider cheap, you know, compared to the price of gas from the Natuna field at the wellhead. So, you know, all the, this framework will help us, you know, define what projects to develop if we have the early information from how the US government will imply on the export of the shell gas. Thank you. Well, ladies and gentlemen, I hope you'll join me in thanking Ibu Karan for her presentation. Thank you very much. And if I may, I'd like to do a quick commercial. We, following you from Jakarta to the United States is Minister Marty and Minister Pernomo and a large group of Indonesians coming for the Indonesia Conference at CSIS and that'll be held on May 15 or 16. And we really look forward to that. I hope you'll all come and join that. And Ibu Karan and I are gonna do an interview after this program and it'll be up on the CSIS Asia blog, which is called Cogetasia. So I hope you'll all tune into that if you're interested in what she has to say. So thank you again for coming today. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.