据4月13日RT报道，国际石油公司的石油储备在过去5年里锐减，现在已对整个石油市场的稳定带来威胁。
未来几年，如果国际石油公司的储备量继续下降，全球石油市场的主体结构将发生重大调整。由于非常艰难的经济环境和激进投资的增长造成的油气行业的投资减少，导致了该行业新项目的大量减少，以及现有或潜在资源开发不足。花旗银行(Citibank)在最近的一份研究报告中警告称，壳牌(Shell)、埃克森(Exxon)和雪佛龙(Chevron)等国际石油公司的石油储量或者说石油资源开采“寿命”将大幅下降。
根据花旗集团的数据，自2015年以来，国际石油公司总体储量水平下降了25%，可获得的资源开采时间不足10年。金融市场似乎低估了这些问题，分析师无法接受国际石油公司的未来正在受到威胁。一家石油公司只有在拥有储量并能在很长一段时间内将产量保持在目标水平的情况下才能继续存在。如果储量和产量下降，它就没有了一个可持续发展的未来。花旗银行在其研究报告中称，国际石油公司储备下降是当前市场面临的一个迫在眉睫的挑战，行业巨头的年度报告显示，这些曾经辉煌的公司现在陷入了困境。花旗银行则指出，低油价是这一日益严重的问题背后的主要驱动因素。
该银行表示:“储量与盈利之间的这种关系是无法回避的，因此我们认为，分析储量趋势是衡量一家公司健康状况的一个极其重要的指标。”
随着需求的复苏和油价的攀升，2021年这些公司将有大量潜在的财富可以利用。然而，问题仍然在于，这些公司是会投资于新的资源储量和产量开发项目，还是会将其用于支付股息。一些分析师已经宣称，目前的储备危机不是真正的问题，因为多数国际石油公司正在经历着能源转型阶段。而为了实现能源转型，这些公司需要大量现金来应对计划中的数十亿美元的风能、太阳能和氢项目支出，同时也要让投资者和股东满意。正如花旗银行所言:“国际石油公司最近所说的‘黑换绿’指的是石油和天然气活动产生的80%的现金流，预计到2030年为70%，将转向绿色能源。”不过，值得注意的是，如果石油储量不够高，不足以维持“正常”的油气运营，那么能源转型可能需要打上一个问号。
花旗报告称，在石油行业有两组不同的国际石油公司，其中6家的储量开采时间约为10.5年，3家的储量开采时间约为8年。一组公司包括道达尔、英国石油、雪佛龙、埃尼、康菲石油和埃克森美孚。第二组是Repsol、挪国油（Equinor）和壳牌。
此外，还应评估迫使国际石油公司下调准备金率的地缘政治因素。通过对独立油气巨头实施净零排放政策，投资正在逐步转变。石油巨头们的储量下降和降低投资组合风险的需要，让他们无法像曾经那样充满活力地追求新的资源开发机会。清洁能源倡议、ESG投资和可持续发展目标都对国际石油公司及其维持储量和产量的能力产生了直接的负面影响。
这一发展带来的一个主要影响是，在国际石油公司努力保持开采储量的同时，一些国家石油公司却设法保持了足够的储量。沙特阿美、ADNOC、IOC和NOC等主要国家石油公司正在考虑将可开采储量时间提高至25年。如果国际石油公司的产量被削减或限制，那么来自国家石油公司的石油产量将大幅增加。此外，每桶石油的利润率也是一个主要的投资影响因素，因为国际石油公司一直在关注更具挑战性的环境，如深水、海上、北极或页岩区，而国有石油公司仍拥有大量常规储量。沙特阿美石油公司与壳牌石油公司的利润率显示，对国家石油公司未来的开发或生产能力进行投资或融资将更具吸引力。
全球油气供应为非油气生产经济体提供了安全保障，但这一体系目前正面临威胁。能源转型的风险仍在评估中，但全球能源市场的选择已经转向严重依赖国有石油公司的石油生产，单这不太可能是最佳解决方案。在国际石油公司和国家石油公司共同努力维持石油市场平衡的结构下，能源和产品的供应稳定性得到了支持。但如果没有10年以上的开采储备，这种稳定结构就会受到威胁。
王佳晶 摘译自 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.
免责声明：本网转载自其它媒体的文章，目的在于弘扬石化精神，传递更多石化信息，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敬意。如果您认为本站文章侵犯了您的版权，请与我们联系，我们将第一时间删除。
