associated with the write-off of the carrying value of our Chilean oil and gas property leases relinquished during 2011, and $49 million was associated with impairments of new venture seismic activity in countries where Apache is pursuing exploration opportunities but has not yet established a presence.
Other asset depreciation increased $59 million over 2010 primarily on higher other asset balances from 2010 acquisitions.2010 vs.  2009 Recurring full-cost depletion expense increased $659 million on an absolute dollar basis: $342 million on higher rate and $317 million from additional production.
Our full-cost depletion rate increased $1.58 to $11.92 per boe as costs to acquire, find, and develop reserves exceeded our historical cost basis.
In 2009, additional depletion expense of approximately $2.8 billion was associated with a non-cash write-down of the carrying value of our March 31, 2009, proved oil and gas property balances in the U. S.  and Canada.
Lease Operating Expenses Lease operating expenses (LOE) include several components: direct operating costs, repair and maintenance, and workover costs.
Direct operating costs generally trend with commodity prices and are impacted by the type of commodity produced and the location of properties (i. e. , offshore, onshore, remote locations, etc.
).
Fluctuations in commodity prices impact operating cost elements both directly and indirectly.
They directly impact costs such as power, fuel, and chemicals, which are commodity price based.
Commodity prices also affect industry activity and demand, thus indirectly impacting the cost of items such as labor, boats, helicopters, materials, and supplies.
Oil, which contributed nearly half of our production, is inherently more expensive to produce than natural gas.
Repair and maintenance costs are typically higher on offshore properties, which account for all of our production in Australia and the North Sea and 86 percent of our production from the U. S.  Gulf Coast regions, and in areas with remote plants and facilities.
Workovers accelerate production; hence, activity generally increases with higher commodity prices.
Foreign exchange rate fluctuations generally impact the Company’s LOE, with a weakening U. S.  dollar adding to per-unit costs and a strengthening U. S.  dollar lowering per-unit costs in our international regions.
The following table details the LOE rate impact by component:
## Table 0 ##
2011 vs.  2010 Our 2011 LOE increased $573 million from 2010, or 28 percent.
On a per-unit basis, LOE increased 13 percent due to higher costs on the items listed above.
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)
## Table 1 ##
(1) 2013 includes proved reserves of 271 Bcf as of December 31, 2013 attributable to a noncontrolling interest in Egypt.
Commodity Prices Risk: Certain commodities the Company uses in the production of its products are exposed to market price risks.3M manages commodity price risks through negotiated supply contracts, price protection agreements and forward physical contracts.
The Company uses commodity price swaps relative to natural gas as cash flow hedges of forecasted transactions to manage price volatility.
Generally, the length of time over which 3M hedges its exposure to the variability in future cash flows for its forecasted natural gas transactions is 12 months.3M also enters into commodity price swaps that are not designated in hedge relationships to offset, in part, the impacts of fluctuations in costs associated with the use of certain precious metals.
The dollar equivalent gross notional amount of the Company’s natural gas commodity price swaps designated as cash flow hedges and precious metal commodity price swaps not designated in hedge relationships were $19 million and $2 million, respectively, at December 31, 2013.
Value At Risk: The value at risk analysis is performed annually.
A Monte Carlo simulation technique was used to test the Company’s exposure to changes in currency rates, interest rates, and commodity prices and assess the risk of loss or benefit in aftertax earnings of financial instruments (primarily debt), derivatives and underlying exposures outstanding at December 31, 2013.
The model (third-party bank dataset) used a 95 percent confidence level over a 12-month time horizon.
The exposure to changes in currency rates model used 18 currencies, interest rates related to four currencies, and commodity prices related to five commodities.
This model does not purport to represent what actually will be experienced by the Company.
This model does not include certain hedge transactions, because the Company believes their inclusion would not materially impact the results.
Foreign exchange rate risk of loss or benefit increased in 2013, primarily due to increases in exposures, which is one of the key drivers in the valuation model.
Interest rate volatility remained stable in 2013 because interest rates are currently very low and are projected to remain low, based on forward rates.
The following table summarizes the possible adverse and positive impacts to after-tax earnings related to these exposures.
## Table 2 ##
In addition to the possible adverse and positive impacts discussed in the preceding table related to foreign exchange rates, recent historical information is as follows.3M estimates that year-on-year currency effects, including hedging impacts, had the following effects on net income attributable to 3M: 2013 ($74 million decrease) and 2012 ($103 million decrease).
This estimate includes the effect of translating profits from local currencies into U. S.  dollars; the impact of currency fluctuations on the transfer of goods between 3M operations in the United States and abroad; and transaction gains and losses, including derivative instruments designed to reduce foreign currency exchange rate risks and the negative impact of swapping Venezuelan bolivars into U. S.  dollars.3M estimates that year-on-year derivative and other transaction gains and losses had the following effects on net income attributable to 3M: 2013 ($12 million decrease) and 2012 ($49 million increase).
An analysis of the global exposures related to purchased components and materials is performed at each year-end.
A one percent price change would result in a pre-tax cost or savings of approximately $76 million per year.
The global energy exposure is such that a 10 percent price change would result in a pre-tax cost or savings of approximately $45 million per year.
Note 20 – Fair Value of Financial Instruments (SFAS 107 Disclosure) SFAS No.107, “Disclosures About Fair Value of Financial Instruments” (SFAS 107), requires the disclosure of the estimated fair value of financial instruments including those financial instruments for which the Corporation did not elect the fair value option.
The fair values of such instruments have been derived, in part, by management’s assumptions, the estimated amount and timing of future cash flows and estimated discount rates.
Different assumptions could significantly affect these estimated fair values.
Accordingly, the net realizable values could be materially different from the estimates presented below.
In addition, the estimates are only indicative of the value of individual financial instruments and should not be considered an indication of the fair value of the Corporation.
The provisions of SFAS 107 do not require the disclosure of the fair value of lease financing arrangements and nonfinancial instruments, including goodwill and intangible assets such as purchased credit card, affinity and trust relationships.
The following disclosures represent financial instruments in which the ending balance at December 31, 2007 are not carried at fair value in its entirety on the Corporation’s Consolidated Balance Sheet.
Short-term Financial Instruments The carrying value of short-term financial instruments, including cash and cash equivalents, time deposits placed, federal funds sold and purchased, resale and certain repurchase agreements, commercial paper and other short-term investments and borrowings, approximates the fair value of these instruments.
These financial instruments generally expose the Corporation to limited credit risk and have no stated maturities or have short-term maturities and carry interest rates that approximate market.
In accordance with SFAS 159, the Corporation elected to fair value certain structured reverse repurchase agreements.
See Note 19 – Fair Value Disclosures to the Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information on these structured reverse repurchase agreements.
Loans Fair values were estimated for certain groups of similar loans based upon type of loan and maturity.
The fair value of these loans was determined by discounting estimated cash flows using interest rates approximating the Corporation’s current origination rates for similar loans and adjusted to reflect the inherent credit risk.
Where quoted market prices were available, primarily for certain residential mortgage loans and commercial loans, such market prices were utilized as estimates for fair values.
In accordance with SFAS 159, the Corporation elected to fair value certain large corporate loans which exceeded the Corporation’s single name credit risk concentration guidelines.
See Note 19 – Fair Value Disclosures to the Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information on loans for which the Corporation adopted the fair value option.
Substantially all of the foreign loans reprice within relatively short timeframes.
Accordingly, for foreign loans, the net carrying values were assumed to approximate their fair values.
Deposits The fair value for certain deposits with stated maturities was calculated by discounting contractual cash flows using current market rates for instruments with similar maturities.
The carrying value of foreign time deposits approximates fair value.
For deposits with no stated maturities, the carrying amount was considered to approximate fair value and does not take into account the significant value of the cost advantage and stability of the Corporation’s long-term relationships with depositors.
In accordance with SFAS 159, the Corporation elected to fair value certain long-term fixed rate deposits which are economically hedged with derivatives.
See Note 19 – Fair Value Disclosures to the Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information on these long-term fixed rate deposits.
Long-term Debt The Corporation uses quoted market prices for its long-term debt when available.
When quoted market prices are not available, fair value is estimated based on current market interest rates for debt with similar maturities.
The book and fair values of certain financial instruments at December 31, 2007 and 2006 are presented in the table below.
## Table 3 ##
## Table 4 ##
The strategy for GCSBB is to attract, retain and deepen customer relationships.
We execute this strategy through our ability to offer a wide range of products and services through a franchise that stretches coast to coast through 32 states and the District of Columbia.
We also provide credit card products to customers in Canada, Ireland, Spain and the United Kingdom.
In the U. S. , we serve approximately 59 million consumer and small business relationships utilizing our network of 6,139 banking centers, 18,685 domestic branded ATMs, and telephone and Internet channels.
GCSBB is made up of three businesses: Deposits and Student Lending, Card Services and MHEIS.
GCSBB, specifically the Card Services business, is presented on a managed basis.
For a reconciliation of managed GCSBB to held GCSBB, see Note 22 – Business Segment Information to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
Net income decreased $5.1 billion, or 55 percent, to $4.2 billion compared to 2007 as growth in noninterest income and net interest income was more than offset by higher provision for credit losses and an increase in noninterest expense.
Net interest income increased $5.1 billion, or 18 percent, to $33.9 billion due to higher margin on ALM activities and the impact of the Countrywide and LaSalle acquisitions.
In addition, average loans and leases, and average deposits increased $56.2 billion and $40.3 billion, or 19 percent and 12 percent.
Noninterest income increased $5.4 billion, or 28 percent, due to increased mortgage banking income and insurance premiums primarily as a result of the Countrywide acquisition, and higher service charges.
In addition, noninterest income benefited from the $388 million gain from the Visa IPO transactions and $283 million gain on the sale of a card portfolio.
Provision for credit losses increased $13.9 billion to $26.8 billion compared to $12.9 billion in 2007, driven by increases of $8.2 billion and $5.3 billion in Card Services and MHEIS.
For further discussion related to Card Services and MHEIS, see their respective discussions beginning on pages 35 and 36.
Noninterest expense increased $4.6 billion, or 23 percent, to $24.9 billion, primarily driven by the Countrywide and LaSalle acquisitions.
Deposits and Student Lending Deposits and Student Lending includes the results of consumer deposits activities which include a comprehensive range of products to consumers and small businesses.
In addition, Deposits and Student Lending includes our student lending and small business banking results, excluding business card, and the net effect of our ALM activities.
Debit Card results are also included in Deposits and Student Lending.
Our deposit products include traditional savings accounts, money market savings accounts, CDs and IRAs, and noninterest- and interestbearing checking accounts.
Deposit products provide a relatively stable source of funding and liquidity.
We earn net interest spread revenues from investing this liquidity in earning assets through client-facing lending and ALM activities.
The revenue is allocated to the deposit products using our funds transfer pricing process which takes into account the interest rates and maturity characteristics of the deposits.
Deposits also generate fees such as account service fees, non-sufficient fund fees, overdraft charges and ATM fees, while debit cards generate merchant interchange fees based on purchase volume.
We added 2.2 million net new retail checking accounts in 2008.
These additions resulted from continued improvement in sales and service results in the Banking Center Channel and Online, and the success of new Affinity relationships and products such as Keep the ChangeTM.
During 2008, our active online banking customer base grew to 28.9 million subscribers, an increase of 5.1 million net subscribers from 2007.
In addition, our active bill pay users paid $309.7 billion worth of bills online during 2008.
We continue to migrate qualifying affluent customers and their related deposit balances to GWIM.
In 2008 and 2007, a total of $20.5 billion and $11.4 billion of deposits were migrated from Deposits and Student Lending to Premier Banking and Investments (PB&I) within GWIM.
The increase was mainly due to the initial migration of legacy LaSalle accounts and the acceleration of moving qualified clients into PB&I as part of our growth initiatives for our mass affluent and retirement customers.
After migration, the associated net interest income, service charges and noninterest expense are recorded in GWIM.
Net income increased $497 million, or nine percent, to $6.2 billion compared to 2007 driven by higher noninterest income and net interest income partially offset by increases in noninterest expense and provision for credit losses.
Net interest income increased $846 million, or eight percent, driven by a higher contribution from our ALM activities and growth in average deposits partially offset by the impact of competitive deposit pricing.
Average deposits grew $34.2 billion, or 11 percent, due to organic growth, including customers’ flight-to-safety, as well as the acquisitions of Countrywide and LaSalle.
Organic growth was partially offset by the migration of customer relationships and related deposit balances to GWIM.
Noninterest income increased $952 million, or 11 percent, to $9.3 billion driven by higher service charges of $800 million, or 13 percent, primarily as a result of increased volume, new demand deposit account growth and the addition of LaSalle.
Additionally, debit card revenue growth of $241 million, or 11 percent, was due to new account and card growth, increased usage and the addition of LaSalle.
Provision for credit losses increased $413 million, or 69 percent, to $1.0 billion principally driven by deterioration in the small business lending portfolio due to the impacts of a slowing economy and seasoning of the portfolio reflective of growth.
In addition, the provision for credit losses increased due to losses on overdraft accounts.
Noninterest expense increased $458 million, or five percent, to $9.9 billion compared to 2007, primarily due to the acquisitions of LaSalle and Countrywide, combined with an increase in accounts and transaction volumes.
The table below presents the allowance and the carrying value of outstanding loans and leases by portfolio segment at December 31, 2011 and 2010.
Allowance and Carrying Value by Portfolio Segment
## Table 5 ##

Tables referenced above, in order (Table 0 first):
<table><tr><td colspan="2"> For the Year Ended December 31,2011</td><td colspan="2"> For the Year Ended December 31,2010</td></tr><tr><td></td><td> Per boe</td><td></td><td> Per boe</td></tr><tr><td>2010 LOE</td><td>$8.47</td><td>2009 LOE</td><td>$7.81</td></tr><tr><td>Acquisitions, net of associated production</td><td>-0.02</td><td>Acquisitions, net of associated production</td><td>0.27</td></tr><tr><td>FX impact</td><td>0.23</td><td>FX impact</td><td>0.22</td></tr><tr><td>Labor and pumper costs</td><td>0.21</td><td>Equipment rental</td><td>0.22</td></tr><tr><td>Workover costs</td><td>0.18</td><td>Workover costs</td><td>0.16</td></tr><tr><td>Chemicals, power, and fuel</td><td>0.13</td><td>Stock-based compensation</td><td>0.14</td></tr><tr><td>Transportation</td><td>0.11</td><td>Labor and pumper costs</td><td>0.08</td></tr><tr><td>Other</td><td>0.12</td><td>Material</td><td>0.07</td></tr><tr><td>Other decreased production</td><td>0.11</td><td>Chemicals, power, and fuel</td><td>0.07</td></tr><tr><td>2011 LOE</td><td>$9.54</td><td>Other</td><td>0.20</td></tr><tr><td></td><td></td><td>Other increased production</td><td>-0.77</td></tr><tr><td></td><td></td><td>2010 LOE</td><td>$8.47</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="7">Natural Gas (Millions of cubic feet)</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>United States</td><td>Canada</td><td>Egypt-1</td><td>Australia</td><td>North Sea</td><td>Argentina</td><td>Total-1</td></tr><tr><td> Proved developed reserves:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>December 31, 2010</td><td>2,284,116</td><td>2,181,615</td><td>748,573</td><td>682,763</td><td>4,144</td><td>462,206</td><td>6,363,417</td></tr><tr><td>December 31, 2011</td><td>2,215,973</td><td>2,108,801</td><td>700,866</td><td>675,618</td><td>105,028</td><td>447,132</td><td>6,253,418</td></tr><tr><td>December 31, 2012</td><td>2,353,587</td><td>1,734,657</td><td>690,436</td><td>596,052</td><td>93,319</td><td>365,054</td><td>5,833,105</td></tr><tr><td>December 31, 2013</td><td>2,005,966</td><td>1,294,420</td><td>621,825</td><td>626,543</td><td>88,177</td><td>289,133</td><td>4,926,064</td></tr><tr><td> Proved undeveloped reserves:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>December 31, 2010</td><td>988,869</td><td>1,310,352</td><td>328,344</td><td>805,735</td><td>—</td><td>70,465</td><td>3,503,765</td></tr><tr><td>December 31, 2011</td><td>760,238</td><td>1,438,710</td><td>282,100</td><td>893,966</td><td>3,414</td><td>90,427</td><td>3,468,855</td></tr><tr><td>December 31, 2012</td><td>832,320</td><td>403,227</td><td>205,055</td><td>1,074,018</td><td>18,985</td><td>97,496</td><td>2,631,101</td></tr><tr><td>December 31, 2013</td><td>667,160</td><td>439,037</td><td>190,355</td><td>975,224</td><td>18,988</td><td>121,584</td><td>2,412,348</td></tr><tr><td> Total proved reserves:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Balance December 31, 2010</td><td>3,272,985</td><td>3,491,967</td><td>1,076,917</td><td>1,488,498</td><td>4,144</td><td>532,671</td><td>9,867,182</td></tr><tr><td>Extensions, discoveries and other additions</td><td>169,506</td><td>505,049</td><td>77,049</td><td>148,640</td><td>475</td><td>81,274</td><td>981,993</td></tr><tr><td>Purchase of minerals in-place</td><td>67,595</td><td>8,838</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>104,658</td><td>—</td><td>181,091</td></tr><tr><td>Revisions of previous estimates</td><td>-7,716</td><td>-133,359</td><td>-37,623</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>1,107</td><td>-177,591</td></tr><tr><td>Production</td><td>-315,631</td><td>-230,880</td><td>-133,377</td><td>-67,554</td><td>-835</td><td>-77,493</td><td>-825,770</td></tr><tr><td>Sale of properties</td><td>-210,528</td><td>-94,104</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>-304,632</td></tr><tr><td>Balance December 31, 2011</td><td>2,976,211</td><td>3,547,511</td><td>982,966</td><td>1,569,584</td><td>108,442</td><td>537,559</td><td>9,722,273</td></tr><tr><td>Extensions, discoveries and other additions</td><td>365,863</td><td>252,130</td><td>55,967</td><td>176,969</td><td>16,397</td><td>2,623</td><td>869,949</td></tr><tr><td>Purchase of minerals in-place</td><td>313,885</td><td>2,503</td><td>—</td><td>1,745</td><td>8,494</td><td>—</td><td>326,627</td></tr><tr><td>Revisions of previous estimates</td><td>-156,840</td><td>-1,443,989</td><td>-13,974</td><td>101</td><td>—</td><td>496</td><td>-1,614,206</td></tr><tr><td>Production</td><td>-312,600</td><td>-219,849</td><td>-129,468</td><td>-78,329</td><td>-21,029</td><td>-78,128</td><td>-839,403</td></tr><tr><td>Sale of properties</td><td>-612</td><td>-422</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>-1,034</td></tr><tr><td>Balance December 31, 2012</td><td>3,185,907</td><td>2,137,884</td><td>895,491</td><td>1,670,070</td><td>112,304</td><td>462,550</td><td>8,464,206</td></tr><tr><td>Extensions, discoveries and other additions</td><td>306,721</td><td>359,493</td><td>44,382</td><td>13,351</td><td>2,750</td><td>16,515</td><td>743,212</td></tr><tr><td>Purchase of minerals in-place</td><td>855</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>10,680</td><td>—</td><td>11,535</td></tr><tr><td>Revisions of previous estimates</td><td>61,247</td><td>109,551</td><td>2,413</td><td>-101</td><td>32</td><td>49</td><td>173,191</td></tr><tr><td>Production</td><td>-285,187</td><td>-181,593</td><td>-130,106</td><td>-81,553</td><td>-18,601</td><td>-68,397</td><td>-765,437</td></tr><tr><td>Sale of properties</td><td>-596,417</td><td>-691,878</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>-1,288,295</td></tr><tr><td>Balance December 31, 2013</td><td>2,673,126</td><td>1,733,457</td><td>812,180</td><td>1,601,767</td><td>107,165</td><td>410,717</td><td>7,338,412</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td>Adverse impact on after-tax earnings</td><td>Positive impact on after-tax earnings</td></tr><tr><td>(Millions)</td><td>2013</td><td>2012</td><td>2013</td><td>2012</td></tr><tr><td>Foreign exchange rates</td><td>$-111</td><td>$-97</td><td>$119</td><td>$105</td></tr><tr><td>Interest rates</td><td>-2</td><td>-2</td><td>1</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>Commodity prices</td><td>-2</td><td>-9</td><td>3</td><td>7</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="4"> December 31</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="2"> 2007</td><td colspan="2">2006</td></tr><tr><td>(Dollars in millions)</td><td> Book Value</td><td> Fair Value</td><td>Book Value</td><td>Fair Value</td></tr><tr><td> Financial assets</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Loans<sup>-1</sup></td><td>$842,392</td><td>$847,405</td><td>$675,544</td><td>$679,738</td></tr><tr><td> Financial liabilities</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Deposits</td><td>805,177</td><td>806,511</td><td>693,497</td><td>693,041</td></tr><tr><td>Long-term debt</td><td>197,508</td><td>195,835</td><td>146,000</td><td>148,120</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="2"> December 31</td><td colspan="2"> Average Balance</td></tr><tr><td>(Dollars in millions)</td><td> 2008</td><td>2007</td><td> 2008</td><td>2007</td></tr><tr><td>Total loans and leases</td><td>$365,198</td><td>$325,759</td><td>$350,264</td><td>$294,030</td></tr><tr><td>Total earning assets<sup>-1</sup></td><td>434,568</td><td>381,520</td><td>401,671</td><td>357,639</td></tr><tr><td>Total assets<sup>-1</sup></td><td>511,401</td><td>445,319</td><td>471,223</td><td>409,999</td></tr><tr><td>Total deposits</td><td>393,165</td><td>346,908</td><td>370,961</td><td>330,661</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="4">December 31, 2011</td></tr><tr><td>(Dollars in millions)</td><td>HomeLoans</td><td>Credit Cardand OtherConsumer</td><td>Commercial</td><td>Total</td></tr><tr><td>Impaired loans and troubled debt restructurings<sup>-1</sup></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Allowance for loan and lease losses<sup>-2</sup></td><td>$1,946</td><td>$2,410</td><td>$545</td><td>$4,901</td></tr><tr><td>Carrying value<sup>-3</sup></td><td>21,462</td><td>7,100</td><td>8,113</td><td>36,675</td></tr><tr><td>Allowance as a percentage of carrying value</td><td>9.07%</td><td>33.94%</td><td>6.71%</td><td>13.36%</td></tr><tr><td>Collectively evaluated for impairment</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Allowance for loan and lease losses</td><td>$10,674</td><td>$6,159</td><td>$3,590</td><td>$20,423</td></tr><tr><td>Carrying value<sup>-3, 4</sup></td><td>344,821</td><td>202,010</td><td>302,089</td><td>848,920</td></tr><tr><td>Allowance as a percentage of carrying value<sup>-4</sup></td><td>3.10%</td><td>3.05%</td><td>1.19%</td><td>2.41%</td></tr><tr><td>Purchased credit-impaired loans</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Valuation allowance</td><td>$8,459</td><td>n/a</td><td>n/a</td><td>$8,459</td></tr><tr><td>Carrying value gross of valuation allowance</td><td>31,801</td><td>n/a</td><td>n/a</td><td>31,801</td></tr><tr><td>Valuation allowance as a percentage of carrying value</td><td>26.60%</td><td>n/a</td><td>n/a</td><td>26.60%</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Allowance for loan and lease losses</td><td>$21,079</td><td>$8,569</td><td>$4,135</td><td>$33,783</td></tr><tr><td>Carrying value<sup>-3, 4</sup></td><td>398,084</td><td>209,110</td><td>310,202</td><td>917,396</td></tr><tr><td>Allowance as a percentage of carrying value<sup>-4</sup></td><td>5.30%</td><td>4.10%</td><td>1.33%</td><td>3.68%</td></tr></table>

Question: What's the total amount of the Carrying value in table 2 in the years where Carrying value is greater than 21000? (in millions)
Answer: 21462