欧洲面临能源密集型企业大批撤离

能源成本高企正在迫使欧洲企业转移到美国等能源成本更低的国家和地区

《通货膨胀削减法案》可能使化工、电池和清洁能源行业受益

制造业和化肥生产等行业特别容易受到能源价格高企的影响

据油价网9月25日报道，欧洲能源成本飙升导致众多企业倒闭，并有可能导致整个欧盟陷入经济衰退。然而，并非所有企业都接受这种命运。一些企业正在迁往能源成本更低的国家和地区：美国钢铁巨头安赛乐米塔尔9月早些时候表示，该公司将把德国一家钢铁厂和另一家同样位于德国的钢铁厂的钢铁产量削减一半。该公司表示，这一决定是基于高气价。 

另外，安赛乐米塔尔最近警告称，预计今年第四季度的钢铁产量将再减少150万吨，原因再次是气价过高和需求下滑。  

与此同时，安塞乐米塔尔今年早些时候宣布，计划扩大在得克萨斯州的业务，并将该州描述为一个“提供高度竞争性能源的地区，最终将提供具有竞争力的氢气”。据《华尔街日报》的大卫·乌伯特的一篇报道，安塞乐米塔尔只是开始看到在美国发展带来好处的欧洲企业之一。 

乌伯特援引业内高管的话说，这并不是一个很难做出的决定。从根本上说，根据这份报告，这是一个简单的两难选择，是在面对过高的能源账单时退缩，还是转移到一个能源更便宜，并能为某些行业提供新的激励措施的环境中。 

化工、电池、绿色能源——这些领域都将从美国8月份通过的《通货膨胀削减法案》中大幅受益。难怪，活跃在这些领域的企业认为，在美国无论是搬迁还是扩张均是一个好主意。  

与此同时，在欧洲，越来越多的企业正在转向生存模式。这是因为，对他们中的很多企业来说，是时候与公用事业公司续签供电合同了。由于能源通胀，这一价格将远远高于今年的合约价格，在法国和德国，前一年的合约价格已超过1000美元。  

《纽约时报》的利兹·奥尔德曼在最近的一篇报道中写道，由于对能源的需求更高，制造业和化肥生产等能源密集型企业特别容易受到高能源成本的影响。她举了玻璃制造专业生产商弓箭（Arc International）的例子，该公司也在关闭生产部门，以应对更高的能源成本。 

欧盟委员会已经承诺通过限制使用非天然气主要能源的发电企业的收入，以及对石油、天然气和煤炭公司的“超额”利润征税来提供帮助。根据欧盟委员会的说法，在当前情况下攫取现金是错误的，尽管利润本身是好的。

欧盟委员会计划将筹集1400亿欧元分配给陷入困境的家庭和企业。然而，批评人士指出，这不足以挽救欧洲能源密集型企业免于破产。行业协会欧洲铝业甚至表示，高能源成本可能导致欧洲铝业的崩溃。 

耐火制品制造商RHI Magnesita的首席执行官告诉《华尔街日报》：“我认为我们会勉强度过两个冬天。然而，如果天然气价格不降下来，企业将开始寻找其他地方。” 

企业收拾行装，前往能源成本更低的国家和地区，似乎是欧洲各国政府（尤其是能源部门）青睐的政策的又一个意外后果。这也是欧盟作为一个有竞争力的工业化国家能否在未来生存下去的又一个风险。这一风险给欧盟各国政府和布鲁塞尔管理机构带来了另一个短期内需要解决的难题。

李峻 编译自 油价网

原文如下：

Europe Faces An Exodus Of Energy-Intensive Industries

·     Very high energy costs are forcing European companies to cheaper places like the U.S.

·     The Inflation Reduction Act could benefit chemicals, batteries and clean energy industries.

·     Industries such as manufacturing and fertilizer production are especially vulnerable to high energy prices.

Soaring energy costs in Europe are shutting down businesses and threatening a bloc-wide recession. Yet not everyone accepts this fate. Some companies are moving to cheaper locations: the U.S. Steel giant ArcelorMittal said earlier this month that it would slash by half production at a steel mill in Germany and a unit at another plant, also in Germany. The company said it had based the decision on high gas prices.

Separately, ArcelorMittal more recently warned it expected its steel output for the fourth quarter of the year to be 1.5 million tons lower than it was in the final quarter of 2023, again citing excessive prices along with slumping demand.

At the same time, ArcelorMittal earlier this year announced it had plans to expand a Texas operation, describing the state as a “region that offers highly competitive energy and, ultimately, competitive hydrogen.” It is just one of the Europe-based companies that are beginning to see the benefits of growing in the United States, according to a report by the Wall Street Journal’s David Uberti.

Uberti cites industry executives as saying that it has not exactly been a difficult decision to make. Basically, according to the report, it comes to a simple dilemma between folding in the face of exorbitant energy bills and moving to a much cheaper energy environment, complete with fresh incentives for certain industries.

Chemicals, batteries, green energy—these are all areas set to benefit substantially from the Inflation Reduction Act passed last month. No wonder, then, that companies active in these areas see it as a good idea to either move or expand in the United States.

Meanwhile, in Europe, more and more companies are switching into survival mode. That’s because, for a lot of them, the time is coming to renew their electricity supply contracts with utilities. Thanks to energy inflation, these are set to be much higher than the contracts for the current year, with front-year prices reaching over $1,000 in France and Germany.

The New York Times’ Liz Alderman wrote in a recent story that energy-intensive industries such as manufacturing and fertilizer production were especially vulnerable precisely because of their higher energy needs. She cited the case of a glass-making major, Arc International, which is also shutting down production units to cope with higher energy costs.

The European Commission has promised to help by capping the revenues of electricity generators that use a primary source of energy other than gas, and taxing the “excessive” profits of oil, gas, and coal companies. According to the EC, raking in cash under the current circumstances was wrong, even though profits in themselves were something good.

Plans are to collect some 140 billion euros—almost equal to the same sum in dollars—to distribute among households and struggling businesses. Critics, however, note that this will not be enough to save companies from going under. European Aluminium, the industry association, even said energy costs could result in the breakdown of the aluminum industry in Europe.

“I think we’ll muddle through two winters,” the chief executive of refractory products maker RHI Magnesita told the Wall Street Journal. However, if gas doesn’t get cheaper, Stefan Borgas said, “companies will start to look elsewhere.”

It looks like businesses packing and leaving for cheaper jurisdictions is yet another unintended consequence of the policies favored by European governments, especially in the energy department. It is also one more risk for the survival of the bloc as a competitive industrialized formation in the future. And this risk presents one more conundrum for governments and the administration in Brussels to solve in short order.