PRODUCT/ SERVICES

Nuclear power is highly demanded since a few decades ago. Inevitably, its variety rage of uses from supporting nuclear transport modes such as ships and submarines, medical applications for X-rays and chemotherapy treatments, space and futuristic applications, food and agriculture for sterilization and radiation to lastly, also most importantly, in generating electricity. According to Green World Investor (2011), the World Nuclear Association (WNA) has researched that there are a total of 16 countries which depend vastly on nuclear power for at least a quarter of their countries electricity. Among these countries, France has the hugest demand in nuclear power; France derives 80% of its power from nuclear power. WNA also updates that there are now over 440 commercial nuclear power reactors operating in 30 countries to serve those countries such as Belgium, Bulgaria, South Korea, Switzerland, Japan, Finland and Germany who are extremely dependent on nuclear power. Today, the demand for nuclear energy is still on the rise from year to year especially in many developed countries due to advancement of technologies and innovations. The persistent and uncontrolled building of new nuclear power stations and reactors over the past decades has raised the environmental issues (disposal of radioactive waste as main concern) and climate change. Besides, the long-term and large and costly investments in building new nuclear power plant has shuddered some investors decision to involve in such risky act. In fact, many countries like Austria, Sweden, Italy and Germany began to phase-out since late 1970s. After Fukushima nuclear disaster in March 2011, Germany has shut down eight nuclear reactors. While numerous nuclear plants are phasing out, it would be a very great timing and opportunity to replace them with the natural gas plants.

Natural gas has been one of the worlds best energy supplies catering for demands in different sectors which include transportation, residential and commercial, self generation, nonenergy, industrial and lastly, power stations. It functions not only as a source of heat, but also as raw material to serve its consumers. Hence, it is highly demanded all around the world, letting alone the benefits it can grant economically and environmentally. There is a high possibility that natural gas would replace the primary energy such as oil and coal in the near future. In fact, natural gas holds an upper hand against other fossil fuel because it releases lesser carbon dioxide during combustion. Today, long-term oil reserves that would bring upon more negative environment impact to the green Earth are restricted, accelerating the transformation of hydrogen fuel cells in energy production. Based on findings by Economides and Wood (n.d), natural gas is the cleanest and most hydrogen-rich of all the hydrocarbon energy sources besides its high energy conversion efficiencies for power generation. In addition, the convenience natural gas can provide via underground pipelines supply gas make it even more user friendly. The energy supply can be delivered to homes or commercial places without time constraints. Most likely, natural gas will gain significant market share in the energy mix for power generation and transportation fuels.

Economics Justifications The tragedy in Fukushima nuclear plant, the costs of nuclear is more expensive than natural gas, which make it more relevant to invest in natural gas. Based on the facts provided by the managing director of equity research at investment banking group Jefferies, Mr Fremont (2011) explained that the estimated cost of building a nuclear plant varies from $4,500 per kW to $6,350 per kW, far more expensive than building a natural gas plant which only costs around

$950 per kW. Hence, the price of nuclear soars to offset the capital costs. The other factors that stimulate the increment of nuclear price are due to the depletion of nuclear energy resources, high decommissioning costs and retirement of plentiful of nuclear reactors. The profits that could be generated from the natural gas production by BP will certainly outrun the profits, or perhaps the losses made in nuclear production in the next 10 years when natural gas is anticipated to evolve into the worlds main source of energy. The experts in many countries have the consensus that the best alternative to replace nuclear energy is natural gas. Consequently, the demand of natural gas would rise potentially among the European countries and Japan, the worlds leading consumer of LNG. The UK National Balancing Point has spotted the increment in natural gas price since 2010 and predicted to rise higher in the coming years. This is a very good financial opportunity for BP to dominate in the market of supplying and distributing the natural gas to consumers globally. There are a few cost factors that need to be taken into account in building natural gas plants in UK. These cost factors comprises of capital costs, fuel costs, waste disposal costs, transportation costs, subsidies and taxes, etc. In fact, replacing the nuclear plants to natural gas plants would seem too costly to endure in short-run; however the profits or revenues in natural gas production could be more than expected in the long-run. Today, UK still does import natural gas by pipelines from Norway, Belgium and Netherlands, and LNG by ship. It would be beneficial if BP would provide the supply of natural gas domestically to reduce the transportation costs and thus, may invest more in other related areas in a pursuit of better operation. In addition, building natural gas is also considered as a main infrastructure development with the support from UK Government. This huge project would contribute to the countrys economy and encourage FDI, if turn out to be a successful one.

Entry mode The Greenfield Strategy We would suggest BP to adopt the Greenfield strategy to venture in this natural gas plant building. This strategy requires searches for a few suitable virgin green sites for the entirely new natural gas plant construction. The Greenfield investment must undergo a series of comprehensive and constructive planning from the process of land acquiring, new facilities construction, staffing to launching of new operation. At the first stage, BP should contemplate whether to lease or buy a land, depending on the budget allocation of the project. Since this is the pilot natural gas investment, BP could probably want to lease some lands from the Government to carry out this operation in order to reduce the costs and perceived risk. The advantage of implementing Greenfield strategy is to enable BP to select the geographical sites that best meet the nature and development of natural gas plants. BP will then be able to construct modern and up-do date facilities such as underground natural gas storage, CO2- sand fracturing to ease the natural gas flow rate from underground formation and 3D and 4D Seismic Imaging to observe the potential underground resources spot. As BPs target market focuses on UK, possibility of accessing the approvals from local and national regulations for the natural gas plants operation is higher than launching the operation in other foreign countries. Assuming that UK government partially or fully supports this huge profitable project, BP might get some subsidies from the government in this natural gas investment. For such a sophisticated and complex business, adoption of Greenfield strategy would encourage a clean schedule for management, financial statement, organizational cultures and other considerations.

New investment in building natural gas plants requires ample of labor resources. Greenfield approach promotes more job opportunities to the local communities, uplifting the economy and development of the country. Having the locals to help on the project is more beneficial in order to prevent diverse cultural issues in the organization. On top of that, additional costs on employees cultural trainings and seminars can be saved.