海上风能将成为石油巨头们的下一个押注

据钻机地带10月21日报道，全球知名咨询公司伍德麦肯兹（Wood Mackenzie）近日表示，到2030年，海上风电的年度支出将从2020年的不到200亿美元增至近1200亿美元，这将是石油巨头们的下一个押注。

据伍德麦肯兹称，石油巨头们可以达到他们所需要的规模，但这需要时间。包括Ørsted、RWE和Iberdrola在内的公用事业公司已经锁定了到2026年的大部分海上风能管道。

但英国、美国和日本等许多政府都在加快租赁拍卖和集中招标，以推动净零碳排放。石油巨头正在为租赁选择权支付高价，通常与现有公司合作，并准备参与本世纪二十年代末的下一波大型项目。

伍德麦肯兹选择每十亿焦耳当量的经营现金流作为衡量生产石油、天然气和电力的能源公司的通用指标。当电子取代大能源生产组合中的碳氢化合物分子时，将电力、石油和天然气转换为一次能源当量单位可以进行直接比较。

海上风电的运营现金利润率比未来上游油气开发项目高出25%。它们甚至超过了油气勘探开发利润率最高的资产类别深水项目。海上风电项目的长寿命也使其有别于大多数深水和传统上游项目。该项目寿命通常估计为30年，发电量稳定，几乎没有下降。只有国内天然气和液化天然气项目接近类似的情况。

这种较高的利润率和较长的使用寿命意味着在该项目的整个生命周期内产生的现金流更高。从2025年到2040年，海上风电投资组合将为每十亿焦耳当量提供4美元的平均运营现金流利润率。对于Dogger Bank等3.6吉瓦的大型项目，这相当于在15年内产生约90亿美元的实际现金流。

假设油价为每桶60美元，同样规模的深水、液化天然气和常规项目在同一时期内将分别产生80亿美元、60亿美元和50亿美元的收益。

为了与其他投资选择竞争资本，我们认为大型石油公司需要实现10%以上的内部收益率。关键在于如何在稳定的现金流和较高的风险之间取得平衡。

利用杠杆和资产循环，基准数字可以提高到10%左右。更高的商业价格敞口、建设“电转x”项目(如绿色氢气)、电力交易以及与零售相结合的方法，都提供了进一步的好处。

例如，道达尔能源正在指导其可再生能源投资组合中70%的电力购买协议和30%的商业敞口。大多数传统合同倾向于将价格锁定15年，只留下“尾款”——以及付出比真正价值更多的钱——暴露在批发价格中。

伍德麦肯兹的分析表明，如果各大型公司捕获了25%的海上风电需求，到2050年，这些电子就可以取代它们在实现净零排放过程中损失的约三分之一的油气分子。太阳能和陆上风能可能会填补剩余的缺口，但在加速的能源转型中，海上风能的贡献可能会更高。

据伍德麦肯兹称，随着各大巨头从大型石油公司转变为能源巨头，一个精心策划、多元化的海上风电投资组合有望实现完整的一揽子计划，但他们需要说服投资者，他们可以在海上风电领域遵循“付费参与”的策略。这通常会在上游造成糟糕的结果，扼杀回报，摧毁价值。

郝芬 译自 钻机地带

原文如下：

Offshore Wind To Be The Next Bet For Oil Majors

Annual spending on offshore wind will rise from less than $20 billion in 2020 to almost $120 billion in 2030 and it will be the next bet for oil majors, Wood Mackenzie said.

According to Woodmac, majors can achieve the scale they need but it will take time. Utilities, including Ørsted, RWE, and Iberdrola, have locked in much of the offshore wind pipeline through 2026.

But the UK, Europe, the US, and Japan are among a host of governments accelerating lease auctions and centralized tenders in the push for net zero. The majors are paying up for lease options, often partnering with incumbents and positioning to participate in the next wave of big projects later this decade.

Woodmac chose operating cash flow per gigajoule equivalent (GJe) as a common metric to benchmark energy companies producing both oil and gas and power. As electrons replace hydrocarbon molecules in Big Energy production portfolios, converting power and oil and gas into units of primary energy equivalent allows a direct comparison.

Offshore wind’s operating cash margins are 25 percent higher than those of future upstream oil and gas developments. They even trump deepwater projects, E&P’s highest margin asset class. The long life of offshore wind projects also sets them apart from most deepwater and conventional upstream developments. Project lives are typically estimated at 30 years, delivering steady output with little decline in power generation. only domestic gas and LNG projects come close to having a similar profile.

This combination of higher margins and long life means superior cash flow generation through the project’s life. An offshore wind portfolio will deliver an average operating cash flow margin of $4 per GJe from 2025 to 2040. For a giant 3.6 GW project such as the UK’s Dogger Bank, that equates to around $9 billion of cash flow generation in real terms over 15 years.

Deepwater, LNG, and conventional projects of comparable scale would generate $8 billion, $6 billion, and $5 billion, respectively, over the same period, assuming $60 per bbl.

To compete for capital against alternative investment options, we think the majors need to deliver IRRs above 10 percent. The trick will be to get the balance right between the stability of cash flows and higher risk.

Using leverage and asset rotation, the baseline numbers can be boosted to around 10 percent. Higher merchant price exposure, building power-to-x projects – such as green hydrogen, power trading, and an integrated approach with retail all offer further upsides.

TotalEnergies, for example, is guiding for a 70 percent power purchase agreement and 30 percent merchant exposure in its renewable portfolio going forward. Most legacy contracts have tended to lock in prices for 15 years, leaving only the ‘tail’ – and more recently the nose – exposed to wholesale prices.

Woodmac analysis suggests that if the majors capture 25 percent of offshore wind demand, those electrons could replace about a third of the oil and gas molecules they lose by 2050 in the push to net zero. Solar and onshore wind might fill the rest of the gap but the contribution from offshore wind could be even higher in an accelerated energy transition.

As the majors morph from Big Oil to Big Energy, a well-curated and diversified offshore wind portfolio holds the promise of the full package, Woodmac claimed, but they will need to convince investors they can navigate the “pay to play” strategy in offshore wind. That’s often ended badly in upstream, killing returns, and destroying value.