新的油氣勘探投資正在復蘇，未來四年平均每年將達到220億美元

油氣勘探支出的復蘇是在能源轉型的雙重壓力下發(fā)生的

碳氫化合物需求的預期增長和能源安全的相對重要性是石油公司加大油氣勘探支出的兩個原因

中國石化新聞網(wǎng)訊 據(jù)油價網(wǎng)2023年8月19日報道，多年來，油氣勘探投資不足一直是能源安全的一個障礙。

各行各業(yè)的高管，都警告稱，除非對新油氣勘探的投資反彈，否則全球范圍內的能源安全將受到威脅。

伍德麥肯茲最近給這些高管帶來了一些好消息：新的油氣勘探投資正在復蘇，未來四年平均每年將達到220億美元，盡管其中數(shù)十億美元將被用于擺脫碳氫化合物的轉型。

與此同時，這種轉變與石油和天然氣公司新油氣勘探支出的反彈之間存在聯(lián)系。這種聯(lián)系與轉型給勘探和生產(chǎn)公司帶來的新要求有關——例如，專注于低排放資產(chǎn)的壓力，以及更嚴格的環(huán)境要求，這將使一些油氣發(fā)現(xiàn)變得不可行。

伍德麥肯茲全球勘探研究主管朱莉·威爾遜表示：“盡管這種反彈可能會讓一些人感到意外，但必須放在大背景下看待。2006年至2014年期間，油氣勘探經(jīng)歷了繁榮，按2023年計算的油氣勘探支出達到了790億美元的峰值?！?/p>

“但在之前的6年里，每年油氣勘探平均支出為270億美元。雖然支出會增加，但不會回到接近過去高點的水平，而且可能會有一個增加上限。”

換句話說，由于油氣勘探支出的復蘇是在能源轉型的雙重壓力下發(fā)生的，它將受到轉型的限制。然而，盡管存在諸多限制，油氣勘探支出仍在進行，這很能說明問題。因為自今年年初以來，要求終結碳氫化合物行業(yè)的呼聲越來越高。

事實上，一個名為“國際石油變革”的活動組織最近抨擊《通脹削減法案》是“美國歷史上對化石燃料行業(yè)最大的施舍之一”。 

根據(jù)該活動組織所說，這項法案為石油和天然氣行業(yè)提供了數(shù)百億美元的贈品，規(guī)定擴大化石燃料租賃，并鼓勵危險和未經(jīng)證實的技術，以保持化石燃料行業(yè)的業(yè)務，如碳捕獲和儲存(CCS)，氫氣和直接空氣捕獲(DAC)，這項法案將無法實現(xiàn)我們需要的一個宜居的未來。

事實上，《通脹削減法案》已經(jīng)為碳捕獲和儲存技術撥款。它也有更多的錢花在風能、太陽能、電動汽車和充電基礎設施上，歐盟也是如此。盡管最近出現(xiàn)了各種挑戰(zhàn)，但西方肯定會全力投入能源轉型。

如果在這種背景下投資石油和天然氣勘探，那么一定有一個很好的原因，而這個原因不是石油和天然氣公司去年歷史最高的利潤。利潤只是原因的一部分，但不是全部，全部就是能源安全。

去年將歐洲天然氣價格推至天價的天然氣短缺，提醒了許多支持轉型的人，轉型并不能真正增強能源安全。在某種程度上，這是可能的，但這需要時間，需要更多的資金，還需要解決風能、太陽能和電動汽車的幾個主要問題。然而，目前唯一能保證能源安全的能源來源是碳氫化合物。

并不是只有倡導轉型的人意識到了這一現(xiàn)實。石油和天然氣行業(yè)本身可能已經(jīng)暫時忘記了這一點，并在去年敲響了警鐘。所以現(xiàn)在，勘探支出在上升。油氣行業(yè)正在將其與實現(xiàn)轉型目標聯(lián)系起來。

“我們需要繼續(xù)投資石油和天然氣，以確保能源轉型以一種平衡的方式進行，同時提供負擔得起的、越來越低碳的能源。殼牌公司天然氣和上游綜合總監(jiān)Zoe Yujnovich在7月份曾表示：“我們將通過將投資重點放在最有利可圖、最具碳競爭力的項目上，為這一平衡轉型做出助力。”

轉型設備的原材料是用碳氫化合物燃料驅動的機器生產(chǎn)的。設備本身是使用碳氫化合物的能源生產(chǎn)的——比如太陽能電池板和煤電爐——設備中也有碳氫化合物成分——比如風力渦輪機葉片和環(huán)氧樹脂。

換句話說，新的石油和天然氣勘探支出正在反彈，因為首先，需求趨勢已經(jīng)非常清楚地表明，世界對碳氫化合物的渴求不是在下降，而是在上升；其次，因為從碳氫化合物的能源轉型仍然依賴碳氫化合物。

隨著投資者紛紛涌向政府轉型努力帶來的新機會，這一領域投資支出肯定會有一個上限。然而，這個上限到底有多高，還有待觀察。最重要的是，能源安全將永遠壓倒一切。

李峻 譯自 油價網(wǎng)

原文如下：

Net-Zero Goals Won’t Slow Down Oil Exploration

·     WoodMac: investment in new oil and gas exploration is recovering and is set to average $22 billion annually over the next four years.

·     The recovery in exploration spending is taking place amid a double-down on the transition.

·     The expected rise in hydrocarbons demand and the relative importance of energy security are two reasons why oil companies are spending more on exploration.

Underinvestment in oil and gas exploration has been a scarecrow for energy security for several years now.

Various industry executives, have warned that unless investment in new exploration rebounds, energy security will be compromised on a global scale.

Wood Mackenzie recently had some good news for these executives: investment in new oil and gas exploration is recovering and is set to average $22 billion annually over the next four years. Despite the billions being channeled into the transition away from hydrocarbons.

At the same time, there is a connection between the transition and the rebound in new exploration spending in oil and gas. That connection has to do with the new demands that the transition has created for exploration and production companies – pressure to focus on assets with a low emissions profile, for instance, and stricter environmental requirements that would make some discoveries unviable.

“While this rebound might surprise some, it must be seen in context. Exploration went through a boom during 2006-2014 and spend peaked at US$79 billion (in 2023 terms),” Julie Wilson, Wood Mac’s director of global exploration research, said.

“But in the prior six years, the average was US$27 billion per year in 2023 terms. While spending will increase, it won’t return to anywhere close to past highs and there will likely be a ceiling on the increase.”

In other words, as the recovery in spending is taking place amid a double-down on the transition, it will be constrained by that transition. Yet it is taking place despite the constraints, which is quite telling. Because the calls to end the hydrocarbons industry have only been growing louder since the start of the year.

Indeed, one campaign group dubbed Oil Change International slammed the Inflation Reduction Act as being “one of the biggest handouts to the fossil fuel industry in US history.

According to that group, “With tens of billions dollars in giveaways for the oil and gas industry, provisions expanding fossil fuel leasing, and incentives for dangerous and unproven technologies designed to keep the fossil fuel industry in business like Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS), hydrogen, and Direct Air Capture (DAC), this law will not accomplish what we need to have a livable future.”

Indeed, the IRA has money allocated for carbon capture and storage tech. It also has a lot more money to be spent on wind, solar, EVs, and charging infrastructure, and so does the EU. The West is definitely going all in on the energy transition, despite all the challenges that have emerged recently.

If spending oil new oil and gas exploration is taking place in this context, then there must be a very good reason for it, and that reason is not the record profits oil and gas companies made last year. They are part of the reason but not the whole of it. The whole of it is energy security.

The gas squeeze that pushed European prices sky-high last year reminded a lot of people embracing the transition that it does not really enhance energy security. It could, at some point, but that would take time, a lot more money and solving several major problems with wind, solar, and EVs. Right now, however, the only sources of energy that do provide energy security are the hydrocarbon sort.

The transition advocates were not the only ones reminded of that fact of life. The oil and gas industry itself may have temporarily forgotten it and got a wake up call last year. So now, spending is on the rise. And the industry is tying it to achieving transition goals. 

“Continued investments in oil and gas will be needed to make sure that the energy transition happens in a balanced way with a secure supply of affordable and increasingly lower-carbon energy. We will contribute to this balanced transition by focusing our investments on the most profitable and carbon-competitive projects,” Shell’s Integrated Gas and Upstream Director, Zoe Yujnovich, said last month.

The raw materials for the transition equipment are produced using machines that run on hydrocarbon fuels. The equipment itself is produced using energy from hydrocarbons—think solar panels, and coal powered furnaces—and there are hydrocarbon ingredients in that equipment—think wind turbine blades and epoxy resins.

In other words, spending on new oil and gas exploration is rebounding because, first, demand trends have demonstrated quite clearly that the world’s thirst for hydrocarbons is not falling but rising and, second, because the energy transition away from hydrocarbons depends on them. 

There could certainly be a ceiling somewhere in there as investors flock to new opportunities arising from governments’ transition efforts. Yet just how high this ceiling will be remains to be seen. Ultimately, energy security would always trump everything else, however noble it might be.