Climate change legislation or regulations restricting emissions of "greenhouse gases" could result in increased operating costs and reduced demand for the oil, natural gas and natural gas liquids we produce. The threat of climate change continues to attract considerable attention in the United States and in foreign countries. Numerous proposals have been made and could continue to be made at the international, national, regional and state levels of government to monitor and limit existing emissions of GHGs as well as to restrict or eliminate such future emissions. As a result, our operations as well as the operations of our oil and natural gas exploration and production customers are subject to a series of regulatory, political, litigation, and financial risks associated with the production and processing of fossil fuels and emission of GHGs. In the United States, no comprehensive climate change legislation has been implemented at the federal level. However, following the U.S. Supreme Court finding that GHG emissions constitute a pollutant under the Clean Air Act, the EPA has adopted regulations that, among other things, establish construction and operating permit reviews for GHG emissions from certain large stationary sources, require the monitoring and annual reporting of GHG emissions from certain petroleum and natural gas system sources in the United States, implement New Source Performance Standards directing the reduction of methane from certain new, modified, or reconstructed facilities in the oil and natural gas sector, and together with the DOT, implement GHG emissions limits on vehicles manufactured for operation in the United States. Additionally, various states and groups of states have adopted or are considering adopting legislation, regulations or other regulatory initiatives that are focused on such areas as GHG cap and trade programs, carbon taxes, reporting and tracking programs, and restriction of emissions. At the international level, there is an agreement, the United Nations-sponsored “Paris Agreement,” for nations to limit their GHG emissions through non-binding, individually-determined reduction goals every five years after 2020, although the United States has announced its withdrawal from such agreement, effective November 4, 2020. Governmental, scientific, and public concern over the threat of climate change arising from GHG emissions has resulted in increasing political risks in the United States, including climate change related pledges made by certain candidates seeking the office of the President of the United States in 2020. Two critical declarations made by one or more candidates running for the Democratic nomination for President include threats to take actions banning hydraulic fracturing of oil and natural gas wells and banning new leases for production of minerals on federal properties, including onshore lands and offshore waters. Other actions that could be pursued by presidential candidates may include the imposition of more restrictive requirements for the establishment of pipeline infrastructure or the permitting of LNG export facilities, as well as the reversal of the United States’ withdrawal from the Paris Agreement in November 2020. Litigation risks are also increasing, as a number of cities and other local governments have sought to bring suit against the largest oil and natural gas exploration and production companies in state or federal court, alleging, among other things, that such companies created public nuisances by producing fuels that contributed to global warming effects, such as rising sea levels, and therefore are responsible for roadway and infrastructure damages, or alleging that the companies have been aware of the adverse effects of climate change for some time but defrauded their investors by failing to adequately disclose those impacts. There are also increasing financial risks for fossil fuel producers as shareholders currently invested in fossil-fuel energy companies concerned about the potential effects of climate change may elect in the future to shift some or all of their investments into non-energy related sectors. Institutional lenders who provide financing to fossil-fuel energy companies also have become more attentive to sustainable lending practices and some of them may elect not to provide funding for fossil fuel energy companies. Additionally, the lending practices of institutional lenders have been the subject of intensive lobbying efforts in recent years, oftentimes public in nature, by environmental activists, proponents of the international Paris Agreement, and foreign citizenry concerned about climate change not to provide funding for fossil fuel producers. Limitation of investments in and financings for fossil fuel energy companies could result in the restriction, delay or cancellation of drilling programs or development or production activities. The adoption and implementation of new or more stringent international, federal or state legislation, regulations or other regulatory initiatives that impose more stringent standards for GHG emissions from the oil and natural gas sector or otherwise restrict the areas in which this sector may produce oil and natural gas or generate GHG emissions could result in increased costs of compliance or costs of consuming, and thereby reduce demand for, oil and natural gas. Additionally, political, litigation and financial risks may result in us restricting or cancelling production activities, incurring liability for infrastructure damages as a result of climatic changes, or having an impaired ability to continue to operate in an economic manner. One or more of these developments could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operation. Finally, 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 and other climatic events. If any such effects were to occur, they could adversely affect our results of operations. Our oil, natural gas and natural gas liquids are primarily sold in two geographic markets in Texas which each have a fixed amount of storage and processing capacity. As a result, if such markets become oversupplied with oil, natural gas and/or natural gas liquids, Our oil, natural gas and natural gas liquids are sold in a limited number of geographic markets so an oversupply in any of those areas could have a material negative effect on the price we receive. 30