implementation of the revised NAAQS could result in stricter permitting requirements, delay or prohibit our ability to obtain such permits, and result in increased expenditures for pollution control equipment, the costs of which could be significant. In response to findings that emissions of carbon dioxide, methane and other greenhouse gases (“GHGs”) endanger public health and the environment, the EPA has adopted regulations under existing provisions of the Clean Air Act that, among other things, establish Prevention of Significant Deterioration (“PSD”), construction and Title V operating permit reviews for certain large stationary sources. Facilities required to obtain PSD permits for their GHG emissions also will be required to meet “best available control technology” standards for these emissions. EPA rulemakings related to GHG emissions could adversely affect our operations and restrict or delay our ability to obtain air permits for new or modified sources. In addition, the EPA has adopted rules requiring the annual reporting of GHG emissions from certain petroleum and natural gas system sources in the U.S., including, among others, onshore and offshore production facilities, which include certain of our operations. Also, as noted above, the EPA has promulgated a New Source Performance Standard related to methane emissions from the oil and natural gas source category. While Congress has considered legislation related to the reduction of GHG emissions in the past, no significant legislation to reduce GHG emissions has been adopted at the federal level. In the absence of Congressional action, a number of state and regional GHG restrictions have emerged. At the international level, the United States joined the international community at the 21st Conference of the Parties of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in Paris, France. The Paris Agreement entered into force in November 2016. Although this agreement does not create any binding obligations for nations to limit their GHG emissions, it does include pledges from participating nations to voluntarily limit or reduce future emissions. In June 2017, President Trump stated that the United States would withdraw from the Paris Agreement, but may enter into a future international agreement related to GHGs. The Paris Agreement provides for a four-year exit process beginning when it took effect in November 2016, which would result in an effective exit date of November 2020. The United States’ adherence to the exit process is uncertain, and the terms on which the United States may reenter the Paris Agreement or a separately negotiated agreement are unclear at this time. Although it is not possible at this time to predict how legislation or new regulations that may be adopted to address GHG emissions would impact our business, any such future laws and regulations imposing reporting obligations on, or limiting emissions of GHGs from, our equipment and operations could require us to incur costs to reduce emissions of GHGs associated with our operations. Restrictions on emissions of methane or carbon dioxide that may be imposed could adversely impact the demand for, price of and value of our products and reserves. As our operations also emit greenhouse gases directly, current and future laws or regulations limiting such emissions could increase our own costs. Currently, our operations are not adversely impacted by existing federal, state and local climate change initiatives and, at this time, it is not possible to accurately estimate how potential future laws or regulations addressing greenhouse gas emissions would impact our business. Notwithstanding potential risks related to climate change, the International Energy Agency estimates that global energy demand will continue to represent a major share of global energy use through 2040, and other private sector studies project continued growth in demand for the next two decades. However, recent activism directed at shifting funding away from companies with energy-related assets could result in limitations or restrictions on certain sources of funding for the energy sector. Finally, it should also be noted that many scientists have concluded that increasing concentrations of GHGs in the Earth’s atmosphere may produce climate changes that have significant physical effects, such as increased frequency and severity of storms, floods, droughts and other climatic events; if any such effects were to occur, they could have an adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations. Oil and natural gas exploration, development and production activities on federal lands are subject to the National Environmental Policy Act (“NEPA”). NEPA requires federal agencies, including the Department of the Interior, to evaluate major agency actions that have the potential to significantly impact the environment. The process involves the preparation of either an environmental assessment or environmental impact statement depending on whether the specific circumstances surrounding the proposed federal action will have a significant impact on the human environment. The NEPA process involves public input through comments which can alter the nature of a proposed project either by limiting the scope of the project or requiring resource-specific mitigation. NEPA decisions can be appealed through the court system by process participants. This process may result in delaying the permitting and development of projects, increase the costs of permitting and developing some facilities and could result in certain instances in the cancellation of existing leases. Various federal and state statutes prohibit certain actions that adversely affect endangered or threatened species and their habitat, migratory birds, wetlands, and natural resources. These statutes include the Endangered Species Act (“ ESA ”), the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the Clean Water Act. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (“ FWS ”) may designate critical habitat areas that it believes are necessary for survival of threatened or endangered species. As a result of a 2011 settlement agreement, the FWS was Climate Change National Environmental Policy Act Threatened and endangered species, migratory birds and natural resources 17