据美国钻井网站2022年9月16日报道，根据挪威著名能源研究和商业情报公司雷斯塔能源公司（Rystad）的最新研究，欧盟应对欧洲地区能源危机的紧急措施可能达不到其预期目标，至少在可再生能源方面是这样。欧盟临时限制超边际电力生产商收入的提议，旨在攫取可再生能源生产商的暴利。在当前高电价时期，可再生能源生产商正受益于较低的生产成本。
然而，Rystad的最新研究显示，在欧盟已安装的可再生能源装机容量中，约60%的收入来自于早在能源危机之前就签订的固定费率合同——价格通常低于当前的现货价格。根据欧盟委员会的数据，通过实施低碳和燃煤发电的收入上限，估计可以获得1166亿美元的收入，但欧盟所描述的暴利只占可再生能源生产商的40%。
Rystad预计，投资者和开发商将被吓跑，这可能导致投资减少、项目推迟，以及对仍在开发的项目重新谈判长期合同。考虑到欧盟委员会为可再生能源制定了雄心勃勃的新目标，似乎也应该解决该行业面临的实际问题：许可、拍卖价格和供应链支持——就像美国在最近的《通货膨胀削减法案》中所做的那样。
Rystad可再生能源分析师维克多·西涅斯表示：“虽然欧盟前所未有的干预是必要的，但只是暂时的，对中长期供应缺口问题毫无帮助。可再生能源行业是欧洲生产廉价和安全电力的最佳行业，但这一政策降低了私营部门电力供应商的投资能力。可再生能源产业不仅帮助欧洲保持电力供应，而且还为欧洲买单。如果可再生能源要在欧洲的电力结构中占据适当的位置，那么在不太遥远的未来它们将需要相应的支持。
近几个月来，欧洲电力价格达到了历史最高水平，8月份的平均价格接近500美元/兆瓦时，创纪录的日价格和周价格接近700美元/兆瓦时。 因此，无论电力公司出售电力的市场时间框架如何，欧盟及其成员国的目标是对可再生电力的利润设定上限——提议为180欧元/兆瓦时（179.4美元/兆瓦时）。 这一上限将适用于风能、太阳能、生物质能、核能、燃煤和一些水力发电厂。 超过价格上限的收入将被重新分配给成员国，用于帮助因能源账单飙升而面临财务压力的家庭和企业。
虽然收入上限将适用于所有可再生能源工厂，但只有约40%的可再生能源工厂从当前的危机中受益。自2000年以来，大多数欧洲国家的政府都制定了补贴政策，以鼓励可再生能源的发展。这些方案被称为“上网电价”（FiT）、“溢价补贴”（FiP）和“差价合同”（CfD），由于相对于平均电价，它们提供了利润丰厚的承付电价，因此得到了早期可再生能源开发商的广泛认可。这些补贴占该地区装机容量的一半以上，支持分布在不同的计划中。这些双边协议的价格平均低于目前的电价。自2015年以来，欧盟各国政府认为这些补贴对可再生能源生产商来说过于有利可图，并逐渐用拍卖取代了这些补贴。欧洲的大多数拍卖都通过FiT、FiP和CfD等方案授予容量，但允许政府根据竞标过程提供具有竞争力的电价。其他拍卖方案提供固定补贴，生产者必须在现货市场上出售生产的电力。
Rystad估计，目前17%的装机容量通过拍卖计划获得补贴，尤其是在德国、西班牙和法国。此外，2010年以后，电力购买协议（PPA）开始流行起来，这些协议是与企业、公用事业公司或政府签订的。PPA允许根据当时的市场条件商定固定的关税，占欧盟目前可再生能源装机容量的11%。最后，剩余产能（14%）直接从现货市场获得收入。这些发电厂可能是在21世纪初启动的，补贴合同已到期的发电厂，或者是选择了现货市场并结合对冲策略的发电厂，或者是最近押注电价足够高以实现盈利的发电厂。
在这些不同的机制中，两种收入来源是理解当前形势的关键：固定收入和市场收入。固定收入来自固定关税合同，如FiT、CfD或PPA合同。总的来说，这些合同占欧盟可再生能源装机总量的60%，约170吉瓦，主要分布在德国、法国和西班牙之间。运营这种产能的生产商无法从高电价中获得暴利，因为它们有义务将高于协商价格的收入重新分配给协议中的交易对方。
另一方面，当前的市场状况已经导致了一个重大转变——在政府必须向可再生能源开发商支付高于市场的固定价格20年之后，政府现在开始盈利。在法国，政府在2000年至2015年期间为陆上风电提供了FiT补贴，平均电价为82.3美元/兆瓦时，持续时间为15年。根据上月的平均电价，法国政府的平均利润接近500美元/兆瓦时。最近，法国能源监管委员会（CRE）宣布，2022年和2023年的可再生能源收入预计将达到85亿美元。这是这些收入首次出现正增长，这直接反映了当前的趋势。
由于执行管理市场的政策本身就很复杂，因此欧盟委员会决定不论收入的种类和市场的具体情况，都建议一个固定的上限，这一决定使人们对其影响产生了很大的混淆。在人们敦促可再生能源解决能源和气候双重危机之际，这一政策却向该行业发出了负面信号。
李峻 编译自 油价网
原文如下：
EU Revenue Cap Could Hinder European Renewable Energy Ambitions
The European Union’s emergency measures to tackle the region’s energy crisis may fall short of their intended goals, at least where renewable energy ambitions are concerned, according to Rystad Energy research. The EU’s proposal to temporarily cap the revenues of inframarginal electricity producers is aimed at capturing the windfall profits of renewable energy producers, which are benefitting from low production costs during this episode of high electricity prices.
However, research by Rystad Energy reveals that about 60% of the total installed renewable energy capacity in the EU derives its revenues from fixed-rate contracts agreed well before the energy crisis – with prices generally below current spot prices. According to the EU Commission, an estimated $116.6 billion would likely be collected by implementing a revenue cap on low carbon and coal power generation, but the windfall profits described by the EU account for only 40% of renewable energy producers.
Rystad expects investors and developers to be scared off, which could lead to lower investments, delays to projects, and the renegotiation of long-term contracts for projects still under development. Given the Commission’s ambitious new targets for renewables, it would seem sensible to also tackle the actual issues facing the sector: permitting, auction prices, and supply chain support – as the USA did with the recent Inflation Reduction Act.
“The EU’s unprecedented intervention, while necessary, is temporary and does nothing for the medium to long term supply gap issue. The renewable industry is Europe’s best shot at producing affordable and secure power, but this policy reduces the private sector power providers ability to invest. The renewable power industry is not only helping to keep the lights on in Europe, but also picking up the bill too. If renewables are to take their proper place in Europe’s power mix, they will need support in turn in the not-too-distant future,” Victor Signes, analyst for renewables at Rystad Energy, said.
In recent months, power prices have reached record-high levels, averaging at almost $500/MWh in August, and record daily and weekly prices at nearly $700/MWh. Consequently, the EU and its member countries are aiming to implement a cap on renewables profits – proposed at €180/MWh ($179.4/MWh) regardless of the market timeframe in which the company sells the electricity. This cap would apply to wind, solar, biomass, nuclear, lignite and some hydroelectric plants. Revenues above the price cap will be redirected to member states and used to help households and businesses facing financial stress due to soaring energy bills.
While the revenue cap would apply to all renewable energy plants, only about 40% are benefiting from the current crisis. Since 2000, most European governments have put in place subsidy policies to incentivize renewable energy development. These schemes, known as feed-in-tariff (FiT), feed-in-premium (FiP), and contract-for-differences (CfD), have been widely subscribed to by early renewable energy developers, as they offered lucrative offtake tariffs relative to average electricity prices. These subsidies account for more than half of the region’s installed capacity, with support distributed across the different schemes. The prices of these bilateral agreements are on average lower than current electricity prices. Since 2015, governments considered these subsidies too lucrative for renewable producers and gradually replaced them with auctions. Most auctions in Europe award capacities with schemes like FiT, FiP, and CfD but allow governments to offer these competitive tariffs based on a bidding process. Other auction schemes provide fixed subsidies and producers must sell the produced power on the spot market.
Rystad Energy estimates that 17% of the total capacity installed today is subsidized through auction schemes, notably in Germany, Spain, and France. In addition, power purchase agreement (PPAs) gained popularity after 2010, and were either concluded with companies, utilities, or governments. PPAs allow for fixed tariffs negotiated according to market conditions at the time and represent 11% of total renewable energy capacity installed today in the EU. Finally, the remaining capacity (14%) receives revenues directly from the spot market. These may be plants that started up in the early 2000s and for which the subsidy contract has since expired or have opted for the spot market combined with a hedging strategy or, more recently, that have bet on a sufficiently high power price to reach profitability.
Among these different mechanisms, two types of revenue streams are key to understanding the current situation: fixed revenues and market-based revenues. Fixed revenues come from fixed tariff contracts like the FiT, CfD, or PPA contracts. In total, these contracts represent 60% of the total installed renewables capacity in the EU or around 170 GW, mainly distributed between Germany, France, and Spain. Producers operating this capacity cannot make windfall profits on high electricity prices, as they are obliged to redistribute revenues above the negotiated price to the counterparty in the agreement.
On the other hand, current market conditions have led to a significant shift – after 20 years of governments having to pay a fixed above-market price to renewable energy developers, governments are now making a profit. In France, the government offered FiT subsidies for onshore wind between 2000 to 2015, with an average tariff of $82.3/MWh and a duration of 15 years. based on last month's average electricity price, the French government made an average profit of close to $500/MWh. More recently, the French Energy Regulatory Commission (CRE) announced that renewable energy revenues for 2022 and 2023 are expected to total $8.5 billion for the state budget. This is the first time that these revenues are positive, which directly reflects the current trend.
As the implementation of policies to manage the market is inherently complex, the Commission decision to propose a constant cap regardless of the types of revenues and market specificities has led to great confusion over its impacts. At a time when renewables are being urged to address the dual energy and climate crisis, this policy sends out a negative signal to the sector.
免责声明：本网转载自其它媒体的文章，目的在于弘扬科技创新精神，传递更多科技创新信息，宣传国家科技政策，展示国家科技形象，增强国家科技软实力，参与国际科技舆论竞争，提高国际科技话语权，并不代表本网赞同其观点和对其真实性负责，在此我们谨向原作者和原媒体致以崇高敬意。如果您认为本网文章及图片侵犯了您的版权，请与我们联系，我们将第一时间删除。
