???? 據(jù)4月13日RT報道，國際石油公司的石油儲備在過去5年里銳減，現(xiàn)在已對整個石油市場的穩(wěn)定帶來威脅。

????未來幾年，如果國際石油公司的儲備量繼續(xù)下降，全球石油市場的主體結(jié)構(gòu)將發(fā)生重大調(diào)整。由于非常艱難的經(jīng)濟環(huán)境和激進投資的增長造成的油氣行業(yè)的投資減少，導(dǎo)致了該行業(yè)新項目的大量減少，以及現(xiàn)有或潛在資源開發(fā)不足。花旗銀行(Citibank)在最近的一份研究報告中警告稱，殼牌(Shell)、埃克森(Exxon)和雪佛龍(Chevron)等國際石油公司的石油儲量或者說石油資源開采“壽命”將大幅下降。

????根據(jù)花旗集團的數(shù)據(jù)，自2015年以來，國際石油公司總體儲量水平下降了25%，可獲得的資源開采時間不足10年。金融市場似乎低估了這些問題，分析師無法接受國際石油公司的未來正在受到威脅。一家石油公司只有在擁有儲量并能在很長一段時間內(nèi)將產(chǎn)量保持在目標水平的情況下才能繼續(xù)存在。如果儲量和產(chǎn)量下降，它就沒有了一個可持續(xù)發(fā)展的未來。花旗銀行在其研究報告中稱，國際石油公司儲備下降是當(dāng)前市場面臨的一個迫在眉睫的挑戰(zhàn)，行業(yè)巨頭的年度報告顯示，這些曾經(jīng)輝煌的公司現(xiàn)在陷入了困境。花旗銀行則指出，低油價是這一日益嚴重的問題背后的主要驅(qū)動因素。

????該銀行表示:“儲量與盈利之間的這種關(guān)系是無法回避的，因此我們認為，分析儲量趨勢是衡量一家公司健康狀況的一個極其重要的指標。”

????隨著需求的復(fù)蘇和油價的攀升，2021年這些公司將有大量潛在的財富可以利用。然而，問題仍然在于，這些公司是會投資于新的資源儲量和產(chǎn)量開發(fā)項目，還是會將其用于支付股息。一些分析師已經(jīng)宣稱，目前的儲備危機不是真正的問題，因為多數(shù)國際石油公司正在經(jīng)歷著能源轉(zhuǎn)型階段。而為了實現(xiàn)能源轉(zhuǎn)型，這些公司需要大量現(xiàn)金來應(yīng)對計劃中的數(shù)十億美元的風(fēng)能、太陽能和氫項目支出，同時也要讓投資者和股東滿意。正如花旗銀行所言:“國際石油公司最近所說的‘黑換綠’指的是石油和天然氣活動產(chǎn)生的80%的現(xiàn)金流，預(yù)計到2030年為70%，將轉(zhuǎn)向綠色能源。”不過，值得注意的是，如果石油儲量不夠高，不足以維持“正常”的油氣運營，那么能源轉(zhuǎn)型可能需要打上一個問號。

????花旗報告稱，在石油行業(yè)有兩組不同的國際石油公司，其中6家的儲量開采時間約為10.5年，3家的儲量開采時間約為8年。一組公司包括道達爾、英國石油、雪佛龍、埃尼、康菲石油和埃克森美孚。第二組是Repsol、挪國油（Equinor）和殼牌。

????此外，還應(yīng)評估迫使國際石油公司下調(diào)準備金率的地緣政治因素。通過對獨立油氣巨頭實施凈零排放政策，投資正在逐步轉(zhuǎn)變。石油巨頭們的儲量下降和降低投資組合風(fēng)險的需要，讓他們無法像曾經(jīng)那樣充滿活力地追求新的資源開發(fā)機會。清潔能源倡議、ESG投資和可持續(xù)發(fā)展目標都對國際石油公司及其維持儲量和產(chǎn)量的能力產(chǎn)生了直接的負面影響。

????這一發(fā)展帶來的一個主要影響是，在國際石油公司努力保持開采儲量的同時，一些國家石油公司卻設(shè)法保持了足夠的儲量。沙特阿美、ADNOC、IOC和NOC等主要國家石油公司正在考慮將可開采儲量時間提高至25年。如果國際石油公司的產(chǎn)量被削減或限制，那么來自國家石油公司的石油產(chǎn)量將大幅增加。此外，每桶石油的利潤率也是一個主要的投資影響因素，因為國際石油公司一直在關(guān)注更具挑戰(zhàn)性的環(huán)境，如深水、海上、北極或頁巖區(qū)，而國有石油公司仍擁有大量常規(guī)儲量。沙特阿美石油公司與殼牌石油公司的利潤率顯示，對國家石油公司未來的開發(fā)或生產(chǎn)能力進行投資或融資將更具吸引力。

????全球油氣供應(yīng)為非油氣生產(chǎn)經(jīng)濟體提供了安全保障，但這一體系目前正面臨威脅。能源轉(zhuǎn)型的風(fēng)險仍在評估中，但全球能源市場的選擇已經(jīng)轉(zhuǎn)向嚴重依賴國有石油公司的石油生產(chǎn)，單這不太可能是最佳解決方案。在國際石油公司和國家石油公司共同努力維持石油市場平衡的結(jié)構(gòu)下，能源和產(chǎn)品的供應(yīng)穩(wěn)定性得到了支持。但如果沒有10年以上的開采儲備，這種穩(wěn)定結(jié)構(gòu)就會受到威脅。

????王佳晶 摘譯自 RT

????原文如下：

????Big Oil’s dwindling reserves are a major problem

????The oil reserves of international oil companies have collapsed over the last 5 years, and now the stability of the entire oil market is under threat.

????In the coming years, the power structure of global oil markets is set for a major shakeup if the reserve life of International Oil Companies (IOCs) continues to decline. The dwindling of investments, caused by a very tough economic environment and the growth of activist investing, has resulted in a major decline in new projects and the underdevelopment of existing or prospective opportunities. Citibank warned in a recent research note that IOCs, such as Shell, Exxon, and Chevron, are looking at a major decline of reserve/production life spans.

????According to Citi, the overall average reserves in place have fallen by 25% since 2015, with less than 10 years of total annual production available. These issues appear to have been under-assessed by financial markets, with analysts unable to accept that the very future of IOCs is under threat. An oil company can only exist if it has reserves and is able to keep production at targeted levels for a long period of time. If reserves and production dwindle, it is not only the attractiveness of such an independent oil company that comes into question but its existence. In its research note, Citibank described falling IOC reserves as “an impending challenge” and the annual reports from the industry giants suggest that these once-great companies are now in trouble. According to Citibank, it is low oil prices that are the primary driver behind this growing problem.

????“There is no circumventing this relationship between reserves and earnings, so we believe that analyzing reserve trends is an extremely important indicator of a company’s health,” said Citi.

????As demand recovers and oil prices climb, there are plenty of potential financial windfalls in 2021 for these companies to take advantage of. The question remains, however, over whether or not the companies will invest in new production and reserves or will they use it to pay dividends. Some analysts have already claimed that the current reserve crisis is no real issue, as most IOCs are going through an energy-transition phase. However, to invest in the energy transition these companies need plenty of cash to cope with the planned multi-billion-dollar wind, solar, and hydrogen projects, while also keeping investors and shareholders happy. As stated by Citibank, “the latest words from an IOC board chairman, ‘Black pays for green’, refer to the 80% of the CFFO (cash flow from operations) generated from oil and gas activities, which is expected to be above 70% by 2030.” If reserves are not high enough to sustain “normal” oil and gas operations, the time frame for energy transition success then becomes a major issue too.

????Citi reported that it has two distinct groups of IOCs in the oil sector, with six of them having a reserve lifespan of around 10.5 years and three of them with a reserve lifespan of roughly eight years. The first group consists of Total, BP, Chevron, ENI, ConocoPhillips, and ExxonMobil. The second group consists of Repsol, Equinor, and Shell.

????Assessments should also be made about the geopolitical factors forcing reserve ratios of IOCs down. By enforcing net-zero policies on independent oil and gas majors, an incremental shift in investment is underway. IOCs, due to their falling reserves and the need to de-risk their portfolios, are now unable to pursue new opportunities with the same vigor as they once would. Clean energy initiatives, ESG investment, and the Sustainable Development Goals are all having a direct negative impact on IOCs and their ability to maintain reserves and production.

????One major impact of this development is that as IOCs are struggling to keep production reserves in place, National Oil Companies (NOCs) have managed to maintain their impressive reserves. Major producers such as Aramco, ADNOC, IOC, and NOC, are looking at reserve and production ratios that go beyond 25 years. If IOC production is culled or choked, the demand for oil from NOCs will increase substantially. Profit margins per barrel are also a major investment issue, as IOCs have been looking at the more challenging environments, such as deepwater, offshore, Arctic, or shale, while NOCs still have major conventional reserves in place. Margins of Aramco’s barrels vs Shell show a clear picture. Investing in or financing the future developments or production capabilities of NOCs will be much more attractive. Power is clearly shifting away from NOCs.

????Global hydrocarbon supply provides security for non-hydrocarbon producing economies, but that system is now under threat. Energy transition risks are still being assessed, but the option of a global energy market that has shifted to rely heavily on NOCs for oil is unlikely to be an optimal solution. Energy and product stability has been supported by a mixed power structure in which IOCs and NOCs work together to maintain an equilibrium. Without reserves of more than 10 years, that stability is under threat.

免責(zé)聲明：本網(wǎng)轉(zhuǎn)載自其它媒體的文章，目的在于弘揚石化精神，傳遞更多石化信息，并不代表本網(wǎng)贊同其觀點和對其真實性負責(zé)，在此我們謹向原作者和原媒體致以敬意。如果您認為本站文章侵犯了您的版權(quán)，請與我們聯(lián)系，我們將第一時間刪除。