Natural gas ushered in the best developmental window of opportunity, and the momentum of clean energy consumption increased.

Add Date:2018/8/16    Views: 1031

China is about to usher in the best window for natural gas development, but the best development window is not the best price change window. Excessively high prices will be a critical blow to industrial users of “coal to gas”, which will curb the consumption of natural gas and is not conducive to the implementation of the great policy of green development.
 
Historical review and realistic thinking
 
A few days ago, the National Development and Reform Commission issued a unified policy for natural gas prices, government pricing and limited market regulation for residential gas use, and non-domestic gas for listing transactions. This document can be said to be a milestone in the marketization of natural gas prices in China. To discuss this policy at this important turning point, it is necessary to do some review and thinking.
  In the 1990s, the gas fields of the Ordos Basin and the Tarim Basin were developed successively, and the Shaanxi-Beijing pipeline and the West-East Gas Pipeline were successively built. The prelude to the large-scale utilization of natural gas in China has been opened since then, which can be called the first take-off in the history of natural gas development in China. After nearly 30 years of development, China's natural gas industry has begun to take shape, with consumption reaching 237.3 billion cubic meters in 2017. In the vertical view, we have achieved gratifying results, but there are still many gaps in the horizontal direction. The gasification rate of residents is one of the signs of national modernization. China is 50%, and developed countries are generally 80-90%. The proportion of natural gas is an important indicator of the country's green development. China is 7%, and the world average is 24%. The United States has a slightly smaller land area than China, with natural gas consumption of about 810 billion cubic meters and a population of about a quarter of China's. The economic volume is twice that of China, and natural gas consumption is 3.4 times that of China. Obviously there is still huge room for the development and utilization of natural gas in China.
Whether the development of natural gas in China can achieve a second take-off, we must carefully analyze the changes in the two take-off environment. The main consumers of natural gas development for the first time are urban residents, industrial users with high added value, urban transportation and other users. The main consumers of the second development today are township residents with poor economic conditions, industrial users with low added value of products, and heavy-duty freight vehicles and ships. The main driving force for the first development is the superiority of natural gas as a fuel. The second development is the compulsive side of environmental policy; the first development is planned to supply government pricing, the second development is facing higher prices regulated by the market, or more difficult to predict the price of listed transactions; the first development contradiction between supply and demand is not Too prominent, the second development of supply and demand contradictions. Therefore, the supply environment, policy environment, and consumption environment have undergone major changes. Ignoring these changes or not knowing the related problems caused by these changes, the second take-off of China's natural gas development will be more or less restricted, and even difficult to take off.
                                                                             
  
Is the best development window period the best price change window?
 
President Xi said at the National Ecological Environmental Protection Conference held in mid-May "Overall, China's ecological environment quality has continued to improve, and there has been a steady and positive trend, but the results are not stable. Ecological civilization construction is under pressure. The key period of carrying forward the weight has entered the critical period of providing more high-quality ecological products to meet the needs of the people's growing and beautiful ecological environment, and also to the window period that has the ability to solve the outstanding problems of the ecological environment. "Instructions should be the guide and motivation for China's clean energy development and reform. This "three phases" is the best opportunity for natural gas development.
       How big is the plate of this historical opportunity? The investigation team of loose coal management consisting of Tsinghua University and the Development Research Center of the State Council pointed out that the annual consumption of loose coal in the country is about 750 million tons, including civil loose coal, industrial boilers and industrial small furnaces. 750 million tons of coal is equivalent to 600 billion cubic meters of natural gas. In the face of huge development space, the energy industry must have a strong sense of the times, a sense of mission, and a sense of responsibility. Our energy policy is also not allowed to make mistakes.
 Is China's natural gas marketization conditions mature? There are two conditions for marketization. One is that the supply is greater than the demand (at least the basic balance); the other is that there are more upstream entities (that is, more players). In the United States, for example, there are more than 8,000 upstream oil and gas explorations in the United States, and about 6,400 natural gas extractions, and we only have three. Although China is open upstream, but the opening time is too late, it is still unable to form a competitive situation; the United States lists about 200 listed transactions every day, we only have three at present; the main pipeline of the United States is nearly 600,000 kilometers, we are 70,000 kilometers, the second level of the United States The pipeline is more than 3.5 million kilometers, we only have 30,000 to 40,000 kilometers; US natural gas can be transported to any demand point from any gas recovery point (gas source point), our pipe network is basically not connected; the United States 1821 drill Out of the first gas well, the 1931 elderly pipeline began to take shape, at which time the natural gas pricing was upstream monopoly pricing. In 1938, the federal government promulgated the Natural Gas Act of 1938, entering the period of government supervision until 1977. For 39 years, the government has regulated prices on the one hand, and on the other hand has continuously created conditions for marketization. The history of China's natural gas development is short-lived. On the one hand, the more important aspect is that we have been verbally shouting market-oriented reforms, and actions have not created anything of value for marketization. The marketization under the "high monopoly + huge shortage" will have a restraining effect on the development of natural gas in China, and the high-priced gas source may be a fatal blow to industrial users of coal-to-gas. Going to the winter trading of the Shanghai Stock Exchange to get started, but the gas shortages and the rising price of LNG that occurred in the future may not be expected by all parties.
    
                                                                                      
  
The exchange of market economy goods is based on equality and voluntariness. Does the trading of natural gas in China conform to the basic laws of the market economy? The surge in demand for natural gas in China is the result of the high pressure of environmental protection policy. It is not based on the economics of commodities or the consciousness of consumers' environmental awareness. It is not equal or voluntary. Imagine leaving the environmental policy. What kind of commodity is natural gas? The self-respect of suffocation hinders the coordinated development of society.
  The best window for natural gas development is not the best commercial period for natural gas price reform. Marketization is a means rather than an end. The only criterion for judging whether this method is appropriate or not is whether it can promote the large-scale utilization of natural gas, and whether it can contribute to the implementation of the basic national policy of "ecological civilization, green development, beautiful China, and happiness for all". Help China's social economy to develop in a healthy and comprehensive manner. The wrong means of acting as a purpose, showing off the gimmicks forgot to plant the land (Ren Zhengfei), this is the sorrow of China's natural gas development and reform journey.


The foothold of natural gas reform should be the overall interests of the country.
 
Over the years, the introduction of China's natural gas policy has basically made a fuss around the upstream. This unified policy of gas prices still cannot be out of this model, although some officials have posted it "helping to protect residents' gas consumption and healthy development of the industry. The sensitive label reflects the changes in supply and demand, resource optimization and efficient conservation in the market, but it can't cover the real purpose behind it, that is, the reform is to raise prices, and the optimal allocation of resources is straightforward.
 If China's natural gas prices are indeed low, such as the above-mentioned officials said that the price is upside down, can not reflect the cost and other issues, there are reasons to raise prices. But can't help but ask, where does the profit that the oil companies hand over to the SASAC come from? It may be a fact that the price of an imported pipeline is upside down and the LNG purchase price of a ship is high, but it is not convincing to enlarge the local phenomenon to a general phenomenon. Even if there is an upside down phenomenon, because China is a socialist market economy, the state has the obligation to take measures to control the basic living materials of the people and the basic production materials of the industry. For example, it is a correct and reasonable choice for the state-owned enterprises to lose subsidies or reduce profits.
 According to the relevant data, the cost of natural gas is the largest cost of manufacturing, accounting for 30-40%. Mr. Cao Dewang, Chairman of Fuyao Glass once said: "The cost of manufacturing in China is too high. The US natural gas is equivalent to 7 cents per cubic meter. China sells 2 blocks 2, this is still the premise that the government is very favorable to me; electricity price, about 3 yuan in the United States, more than 6 hair in China." Ma Xingrui, governor of Guangdong Province, raised the hope that the price of industrial gas will fall within 2 yuan during the People's Congress this year. Guangdong is an economically developed region, not to mention other regions. The price of LNG going to winter and spring has caused 70% of coal-to-gas users to stop production, and 70% of LNG heavy trucks have been shut down. 90% of LNG power boats are suspended, and fuel costs have become a watershed in the manufacturing and transportation industries. However, these phenomena are a good thing in the eyes of some experts and scholars. They believe that high-value fuels should be used to stop product companies with low added value. An official scholar published an article in "Southern Energy Watch", arguing that the high price of Hainan ticket in this spring is the same as the price of LNG in winter, which is the inevitable result of the market economy. However, he forgot that the people’s travel to Hainan was voluntary. The use of gas by enterprises was persecution. Hainan’s tourism was not always going, and the use of gas by enterprises was happening every day. We must be soberly aware that in addition to Huawei's few high-tech products such as mobile phones and high-speed rail, most of the products with low value-added exports are foreign exchange. It is these small and medium-sized enterprises that pay 50% of domestic tax revenue and 80% of the employed population. The real economy is an important pillar of our national economy. Any policy that adversely affects the development of the real economy will have serious consequences for the overall resumption of the national economy. Which network economy, data economy, and financial economy do not use fuel, but their contribution to the national economy can't be 50%.
                                                                   
  
Considering the overall interests of the country, the large-scale use of clean energy is conducive to the control of the atmospheric environment from the source, and is conducive to the health of the people. At least the school does not have a holiday, the vehicle can not be banned, the enterprise does not close, and its social benefits are immeasurable. Political account. Even if the economic account is not only a small account, the cheap and cheap fuel is conducive to the manufacturing industry to reduce production costs, improve product competitiveness, so that the state fiscal tax increases, the national economy total income. Based on China’s consumption of more than 230 billion cubic meters of natural gas last year, each party’s gas is reduced by 0.5 yuan, or 115 billion yuan. It accounts for about one thousandth of the total income of the national economy last year. However, the resulting national fiscal revenue is far less than 115 billion, which may be several times the return. Regardless of the point of view, reducing the price of water and raising fish is a good thing for the country and the people. However, the reality is that the Ministry of Finance can't subsidize the money bag, and the State-owned Assets Supervision and Administration Commission pays profits on the success or failure of the oil company. The Development and Reform Commission will put the burden of insurance on the shoulders of oil companies. Fish and bear's paw can't have both, the interests of the department (industry interests) and the national interests, the interests of the front and the long-term interests should be clear and clear. Oil companies should also consider achieving good economic returns. The low unit price may be more worthwhile than the unit price.