长期液化天然气合同是天然气市场的未来

据油价网7月18日消息称，几年前，欧盟领导人心满意足地坐下来，看着他们费尽心思打造的天然气现货市场，就像一台运转良好的机器。汽油很便宜，而且供应充足。然后，突然之间，事情发生了巨大的变化。现货天然气市场是欧盟最大的自豪之一，因为它试图从产能大国手中夺取对自己能源供应的控制权。欧盟已经拒绝了与产能大国的天然气长期交易，因为欧盟正在迈向可再生能源的未来，不希望承担以固定价格购买产能大国天然气的义务。欧盟认为，它不需要那么多天然气。

然而，欧盟并不是唯一一个利用液化天然气现货市场灵活价格的国家。许多人都想，天然气储量丰富，价格低廉——至少在一段时间内，到处都是买方市场。一些认真的消费者，那些有长期天然气消费计划的人，仍然选择长期合同，与现货交易相比，长期合同的最大优势也是它的最大缺点：价格。现在看来，这些认真的消费者是对的。

随着全球天然气需求的持续增长，新天然气生产投资的减少、液化设施的交付周期长以及减排压力越来越大，导致天然气供应紧张。作为能源转型的典范，欧洲惊恐地发现，它没有足够的风能和太阳能发电能力来取代天然气的消耗——尤其是在风速较低和阳光较少的季节。

几种因素的融合造成了类似于电影《世界末日》中的情节。事实上，欧洲天然气市场的发展在许多方面都是灾难性的：价格不断刷新纪录，随着发电成本随天然气价格上涨，消费者的能源账单正在无情地上涨，而发展中国家正被迫停电，因为欧洲正在抢夺现货市场上的每一滴液化天然气。

随着这个全球最新的液化天然气增长市场让人们认识到，市场需要确保长期天然气供应，长期合同正悄悄从现货市场夺回地盘。

今年早些时候，法国Engie公司与美国NextDecade公司签订了一份长期液化天然气供应协议，几个月前该公司退出了合同，原因是法国政府担心该公司的液化天然气生产设施的碳排放足迹超标。

德国公用事业公司EnBW与Venture Global签署了一份类似的长期液化天然气供应协议，欧洲最大的经济体迫切希望摆脱对产能天然气的依赖，即使这意味着在所有气候优先事项上都要做出180度的转变。

这是整个欧盟的一个趋势。澳大利亚正在经历浮式再气化装置的短缺，因为它们被运往德国，而德国没有固定的液化天然气进口终端。但目前德国正在建设，而且速度很快。波兰的液化天然气终端正在满负荷运转。西班牙、英国和荷兰正在以创纪录的速度进口液化天然气。

与此同时，随着欧盟即将迎来可能是迄今为止最难熬的一个冬天，对建设更多液化天然气进口基础设施的呼吁也在加剧。在这种情况下，卡塔尔坚称，渴望获得卡塔尔液化天然气的欧洲买家必须做出长期承诺，这有什么奇怪的吗?

卡塔尔目前正在进行一项雄心勃勃的产能提升项目，该项目将使其每年出口1.1亿吨过冷液化气，高于目前约7000万吨的产能。

像这样的项目需要数十亿美元的投资。事实上，North Field扩建耗资接近290亿美元。这类巨额投资需要预期收益的稳定性作为保证，而长期承购交易正是这种保证。

能源转型是长期液化天然气合同重新流行起来的另一个原因。多年来，关注气候变化的智库一直警告说，随着世界从石油和天然气转向石油和天然气行业，石油和天然气行业可能会背负数十亿美元的搁浅资产。如今，石油和天然气行业对自己的投资决策变得不信任和谨慎。长期承诺让企业相信投资新天然气生产是值得的。

不是每个人都喜欢这种场景。事实上，环保主义者非常不喜欢这种现状。关于搁浅资产的警告并未消失。然而，现实情况是，即使是最雄心勃勃的过渡政府，比如德国当前的联合政府，似乎也意识到能源安全比减排更重要。

即使是那些最坚定地要实现向可再生能源转型的国家，也不得不注意到工业集团的警告：如果没有天然气，企业将被迫关闭，经济最终将崩溃。他们已经开始通过签订长期液化天然气供应合同来加强本国的能源安全，而他们不久前还在回避签订这些合同。

曹海斌 摘译自 油价网

原文如下：

Long Term LNG Contracts Are The Future For Natural Gas Markets

Several years ago, the leaders of the European Union sat back contentedly and watched the spot market for the natural gas they had put so much effort into working like a well-oiled machine. Gas was cheap and there was plenty of it to go around. Then, all of a sudden, things changed dramatically. The spot gas market was one of the European Union's great points of pride as it sought to wrest control of its own energy supply from the larger producer . The EU had snubbed Gazprom's long-term deals, not wanting to get saddled with the obligation to buy he larger producer  gas at a certain locked-in price as it was moving towards a renewable energy future. It didn't need so much gas, the EU thought.

Yet the EU was not the only one taking advantage of flexible prices on the LNG spot market. Everyone was. Gas was abundant, and prices were low—it was a buyers' market all around, at least for a while. Some serious consumers, those who had long-term plans for gas consumption, still opted for long-term contracts, whose biggest advantage over spot deals is also its biggest drawback: the price. It now turns out these serious consumers were right.

A decline in investments in new gas production, long lead times on liquefaction facilities, and growing pressure on emission reduction collided to result in tight gas supply as demand continued to grow globally. Europe, the poster child of the energy transition, was horrified to learn it did not have enough wind and solar generation capacity to replace gas consumption—especially amid low wind speeds and during the less sunny seasons. 

The convergence of factors resembles a plot for an apocalyptic movie. Indeed, developments in the European gas market have been in many ways apocalyptic: prices have been breaking record after record, energy bills for consumers are rising inexorably as the cost of producing electricity rises with gas prices, and developing nations are being forced into blackouts because Europe is taking every drop of LNG that is available on the spot market.

Long-term contracts are quietly reclaiming territory from the spot market as the world's newest LNG growth market realizes it will need to secure long-term gas supplies.

French Engie earlier this year sealed a long-term LNG supply deal with U.S. NextDecade months after it walked out on the contract because the French government had concerns about the emissions footprint of the company's LNG production facility.

German utility EnBW signed a similarly long-term LNG supply deal with Venture Global, as Europe's biggest economy urgently seeks to wean itself off the larger producer  gas even if it means doing a U-turn on all its climate priorities.

This is a trend across the whole of the EU. Australia is experiencing a shortage of floating regasification units because they are being sent to Germany, which has zero stationary LNG import terminals. But it is building some, and fast. Poland's LNG terminal is operating at full capacity. Spain, the UK, and the Netherlands are importing LNG at record rates.

Calls for more LNG import infrastructure, meanwhile, are intensifying as the bloc inches closer to what may turn into one of its hardest winters yet. In this context, is it any wonder that Qatar has insisted that European buyers eager to get their hands on some Qatari LNG must make long-term commitments?

Qatar is currently in the middle of an ambitious capacity boost project that should allow it to export 110 million tons of superchilled liquefied gas annually, up from a current capacity of some 70 million tons.

Projects like this require billions in investments. Indeed, the North Field expansion has a price tag of close to $29 billion. This kind of investment needs guarantees it will not go to waste, and long-term offtake deals are just that kind of guarantee.

The energy transition is another reason long-term LNG contracts are back in fashion. After years of warnings from climate-focused think tanks that the oil and gas industry risks getting saddled with billions in stranded assets as the world moves on from oil and gas, that same oil and gas industry has become mistrustful and careful with its investment decisions. Long-term commitments are the way to convince companies investing in new gas production is worth it.

Not everyone likes it. Indeed, environmentalists very much dislike this current state of affairs. Warnings about stranded assets have not disappeared. The reality, however, is that even the most ambitious transition governments, such as Germany's current coalition, appear to have realized that energy security is more important than emission reduction.

Even those most determined to effect a transition to renewables have had to heed warnings from industrial groups saying that without gas, companies will have to shut down, and the economy will eventually collapse. And they have started working on boosting their countries' energy security through long-term LNG supply contracts that they shunned until just a while ago.