據油價網7月18日消息稱，幾年前，歐盟領導人心滿意足地坐下來，看著他們費盡心思打造的天然氣現貨市場，就像一臺運轉良好的機器。汽油很便宜，而且供應充足。然后，突然之間，事情發生了巨大的變化。現貨天然氣市場是歐盟最大的自豪之一，因為它試圖從產能大國手中奪取對自己能源供應的控制權。歐盟已經拒絕了與產能大國的天然氣長期交易，因為歐盟正在邁向可再生能源的未來，不希望承擔以固定價格購買產能大國天然氣的義務。歐盟認為，它不需要那么多天然氣。

然而，歐盟并不是唯一一個利用液化天然氣現貨市場靈活價格的國家。許多人都想，天然氣儲量豐富，價格低廉——至少在一段時間內，到處都是買方市場。一些認真的消費者，那些有長期天然氣消費計劃的人，仍然選擇長期合同，與現貨交易相比，長期合同的最大優勢也是它的最大缺點：價格?，F在看來，這些認真的消費者是對的。

隨著全球天然氣需求的持續增長，新天然氣生產投資的減少、液化設施的交付周期長以及減排壓力越來越大，導致天然氣供應緊張。作為能源轉型的典范，歐洲驚恐地發現，它沒有足夠的風能和太陽能發電能力來取代天然氣的消耗——尤其是在風速較低和陽光較少的季節。

幾種因素的融合造成了類似于電影《世界末日》中的情節。事實上，歐洲天然氣市場的發展在許多方面都是災難性的：價格不斷刷新紀錄，隨著發電成本隨天然氣價格上漲，消費者的能源賬單正在無情地上漲，而發展中國家正被迫停電，因為歐洲正在搶奪現貨市場上的每一滴液化天然氣。

隨著這個全球最新的液化天然氣增長市場讓人們認識到，市場需要確保長期天然氣供應，長期合同正悄悄從現貨市場奪回地盤。

今年早些時候，法國Engie公司與美國NextDecade公司簽訂了一份長期液化天然氣供應協議，幾個月前該公司退出了合同，原因是法國政府擔心該公司的液化天然氣生產設施的碳排放足跡超標。

德國公用事業公司EnBW與Venture Global簽署了一份類似的長期液化天然氣供應協議，歐洲最大的經濟體迫切希望擺脫對產能天然氣的依賴，即使這意味著在所有氣候優先事項上都要做出180度的轉變。

這是整個歐盟的一個趨勢。澳大利亞正在經歷浮式再氣化裝置的短缺，因為它們被運往德國，而德國沒有固定的液化天然氣進口終端。但目前德國正在建設，而且速度很快。波蘭的液化天然氣終端正在滿負荷運轉。西班牙、英國和荷蘭正在以創紀錄的速度進口液化天然氣。

與此同時，隨著歐盟即將迎來可能是迄今為止最難熬的一個冬天，對建設更多液化天然氣進口基礎設施的呼吁也在加劇。在這種情況下，卡塔爾堅稱，渴望獲得卡塔爾液化天然氣的歐洲買家必須做出長期承諾，這有什么奇怪的嗎?

卡塔爾目前正在進行一項雄心勃勃的產能提升項目，該項目將使其每年出口1.1億噸過冷液化氣，高于目前約7000萬噸的產能。

像這樣的項目需要數十億美元的投資。事實上，North Field擴建耗資接近290億美元。這類巨額投資需要預期收益的穩定性作為保證，而長期承購交易正是這種保證。

能源轉型是長期液化天然氣合同重新流行起來的另一個原因。多年來，關注氣候變化的智庫一直警告說，隨著世界從石油和天然氣轉向石油和天然氣行業，石油和天然氣行業可能會背負數十億美元的擱淺資產。如今，石油和天然氣行業對自己的投資決策變得不信任和謹慎。長期承諾讓企業相信投資新天然氣生產是值得的。

不是每個人都喜歡這種場景。事實上，環保主義者非常不喜歡這種現狀。關于擱淺資產的警告并未消失。然而，現實情況是，即使是最雄心勃勃的過渡政府，比如德國當前的聯合政府，似乎也意識到能源安全比減排更重要。

即使是那些最堅定地要實現向可再生能源轉型的國家，也不得不注意到工業集團的警告：如果沒有天然氣，企業將被迫關閉，經濟最終將崩潰。他們已經開始通過簽訂長期液化天然氣供應合同來加強本國的能源安全，而他們不久前還在回避簽訂這些合同。

曹海斌 摘譯自 油價網

原文如下：

Long Term LNG Contracts Are The Future For Natural Gas Markets

Several years ago, the leaders of the European Union sat back contentedly and watched the spot market for the natural gas they had put so much effort into working like a well-oiled machine. Gas was cheap and there was plenty of it to go around. Then, all of a sudden, things changed dramatically. The spot gas market was one of the European Union's great points of pride as it sought to wrest control of its own energy supply from the larger producer . The EU had snubbed Gazprom's long-term deals, not wanting to get saddled with the obligation to buy he larger producer  gas at a certain locked-in price as it was moving towards a renewable energy future. It didn't need so much gas, the EU thought.

Yet the EU was not the only one taking advantage of flexible prices on the LNG spot market. Everyone was. Gas was abundant, and prices were low—it was a buyers' market all around, at least for a while. Some serious consumers, those who had long-term plans for gas consumption, still opted for long-term contracts, whose biggest advantage over spot deals is also its biggest drawback: the price. It now turns out these serious consumers were right.

A decline in investments in new gas production, long lead times on liquefaction facilities, and growing pressure on emission reduction collided to result in tight gas supply as demand continued to grow globally. Europe, the poster child of the energy transition, was horrified to learn it did not have enough wind and solar generation capacity to replace gas consumption—especially amid low wind speeds and during the less sunny seasons. 

The convergence of factors resembles a plot for an apocalyptic movie. Indeed, developments in the European gas market have been in many ways apocalyptic: prices have been breaking record after record, energy bills for consumers are rising inexorably as the cost of producing electricity rises with gas prices, and developing nations are being forced into blackouts because Europe is taking every drop of LNG that is available on the spot market.

Long-term contracts are quietly reclaiming territory from the spot market as the world's newest LNG growth market realizes it will need to secure long-term gas supplies.

French Engie earlier this year sealed a long-term LNG supply deal with U.S. NextDecade months after it walked out on the contract because the French government had concerns about the emissions footprint of the company's LNG production facility.

German utility EnBW signed a similarly long-term LNG supply deal with Venture Global, as Europe's biggest economy urgently seeks to wean itself off the larger producer  gas even if it means doing a U-turn on all its climate priorities.

This is a trend across the whole of the EU. Australia is experiencing a shortage of floating regasification units because they are being sent to Germany, which has zero stationary LNG import terminals. But it is building some, and fast. Poland's LNG terminal is operating at full capacity. Spain, the UK, and the Netherlands are importing LNG at record rates.

Calls for more LNG import infrastructure, meanwhile, are intensifying as the bloc inches closer to what may turn into one of its hardest winters yet. In this context, is it any wonder that Qatar has insisted that European buyers eager to get their hands on some Qatari LNG must make long-term commitments?

Qatar is currently in the middle of an ambitious capacity boost project that should allow it to export 110 million tons of superchilled liquefied gas annually, up from a current capacity of some 70 million tons.

Projects like this require billions in investments. Indeed, the North Field expansion has a price tag of close to $29 billion. This kind of investment needs guarantees it will not go to waste, and long-term offtake deals are just that kind of guarantee.

The energy transition is another reason long-term LNG contracts are back in fashion. After years of warnings from climate-focused think tanks that the oil and gas industry risks getting saddled with billions in stranded assets as the world moves on from oil and gas, that same oil and gas industry has become mistrustful and careful with its investment decisions. Long-term commitments are the way to convince companies investing in new gas production is worth it.

Not everyone likes it. Indeed, environmentalists very much dislike this current state of affairs. Warnings about stranded assets have not disappeared. The reality, however, is that even the most ambitious transition governments, such as Germany's current coalition, appear to have realized that energy security is more important than emission reduction.

Even those most determined to effect a transition to renewables have had to heed warnings from industrial groups saying that without gas, companies will have to shut down, and the economy will eventually collapse. And they have started working on boosting their countries' energy security through long-term LNG supply contracts that they shunned until just a while ago.