目前投资潮汐能正当其时

　　中国石化新闻网讯 据油价网2021年10月12日报道，潮汐能似乎无法走出其婴儿期进入市场。 这种零碳、可再生的能源生产方式有很大的潜力为电网提供大量的能源，特别是在欧洲和亚洲，而不会对它们的碳足迹做出贡献(或甚至可能降低碳足迹)。 然而，对潮汐能不利的因素可能比它有利的因素要多。 由于未被证实的利润率，银行似乎不愿意支持潮汐能项目，环保人士也不完全赞同。

　　如果潮汐能能够起步并扩大规模，在能源市场上具有竞争力，那么潮汐能将对脱碳运动做出重大贡献。 欧盟观察员最近的一份报告称：“由于欧盟朝着到2030年前可再生能源占总能源结构40%的目标迈进，潮汐能可能成为一个更绿色、更可持续经济的游戏规则改变者。”“到2050年前，潮汐能可以提供100吉瓦的电力——相当于欧洲目前电力消耗的10%。”

　　由于水的密度比空气大，潮汐能有潜力比风能更强大和多产。 更重要的是，潮汐不受阻碍太阳能和风能的可变性问题的限制。 虽然这两种形式的可再生能源的提取都取决于天气和一天中的时间，但潮汐是非常可靠的，它依赖于由月球引力控制的自然、一致和恒定的潮汐周期。 正因为如此，流向电网的潮汐能可以像从化石燃料中获得的能量一样稳定，而无需存储能量。

　　然而，潮汐能有一些主要的环境问题。 虽然潮汐对气候有利，不排放温室气体，并可能抵消潮汐可能取代的能源生产所产生的排放，但如果潮汐的设计和管理不当，对海洋环境会造成相当大的威胁。 潮汐涡轮机严重破坏了它们从中提取能量的潮汐流，并可能伤害被困在叶片中的海洋生物。

　　除了由涡轮机驱动的“发电机”，还有其他形式的潮汐能。 其他两种重要的形式是拦河坝，它本质上是一个水坝，和潮汐泻湖。 拦河坝通过破坏海洋生态系统和产生大量淤泥而产生严重的负面环境外部性。 在法国布列塔尼的一个这样的系统已经导致该地区一种当地比目鱼的灭绝。 潮汐泻湖是一种对环境友好得多的潮汐能源形式，它发生在受保护的人造海岸池中，但其能源容量要低得多。

　　尽管存在这些明显的缺点，但仍有一些地区，尤其是英国和中国周边地区，特别适合推广潮汐能。许多气候倡导者认为，我们不能不推广潮汐能，因为它具有很高的潜力，可以实现可靠的、零排放的发电。 但是建造新的潮汐能发电厂是一项昂贵的风险投资，到目前为止，银行似乎不相信他们能获得足够的投资回报。

　　《欧盟观察报》报道称：“为了起步，潮汐公司需要各国政府引入收入支持计划、有保障的价格和像样的银行贷款利率。” 到目前为止，潮汐还没有这些条件。 但随着欧盟艰难应对能源危机，银行可能会更愿意支持新形式的能源生产，尤其是像潮汐能这样可靠的能源。 虽然建造潮汐的成本很高，但基础设施可以使用很长时间，资产寿命约为120年。 当前的能源短缺，加上迫切需要降低全球温室气体排放，可能是潮汐能在能源市场上找到竞争优势所需的最后推动力。

　　李峻 编译自 油价网

　　原文如下：

　　Is It Time To Invest In Tidal Energy?

　　Tidal energy seems unable to break out of its infancy and into the market. The zero-carbon, renewable form of energy production has major potential for contributing a significant amount of energy to the grid, particularly in Europe and Asia, without contributing to (or possibly even lowering) their carbon footprints. However, there may be more working against tidal energy than it has going for it. Banks seem unwilling to back tidal ventures due to unproven profit margins, and environmentalists aren’t totally sold on it either.

　　Tidal energy could make a significant contribution to the decarbonization movement if it’s able to get off the ground and scale up to become competitive in the energy market. “Tidal energy could be a game-changer for a greener, more sustainable economy as the EU [European Union] moves towards a target of 40-percent renewables in its overall energy mix by 2030,” touts a recent report by the EU observer. “It could deliver 100 GW of capacity by 2050 – equivalent to 10 percent of Europe's electricity consumption today.”

　　Since water is denser than air, tidal energy has the potential to be much more powerful and productive than wind. What’s more, tidal isn’t restricted by the same issues of variability that impede solar and wind energy. While both of those forms of renewable energy extraction depend on the weather and the time of day, tidal is extremely reliable, relying on the natural, consistent, and constant cycles of tides that are controlled by the gravitational pull of the moon. Because of this, the flow of tidal energy to the grid could be as consistent as energy derived from fossil fuels, without necessitating energy storage.

　　However, there are some major environmental downsides to tidal energy. While it is a boon for the climate, releasing zero greenhouse gases and potentially offsetting emissions that would result from the energy production that tidal could displace, tidal poses a considerable threat to oceanic environments if it is not designed and managed with utmost care. Tidal turbines severely disrupt the same tidal streams that they are extracting energy from and can harm marine life that gets caught in the blades.

　　There are other forms of tidal energy besides “generators” powered by turbines. The other two significant forms are barrages, which is essentially a dam, and tidal lagoons. Barrages can have severe negative environmental externalities by disrupting marine ecosystems and creating large amounts of silt. One such system in Brittany, France has already led to the extinction of a local flatfish in the area. Tidal lagoons are a much more environmentally friendly form of tidal energy, taking place in protected, man-made coastal pools, but have a much lower energy capacity.

　　Despite these significant downsides, there are regions, particularly around the UK and China, which are particularly well suited to tidal energy expansion, and many climate advocates argue that we can’t afford to not expand tidal energy due to its high potential for dependable, zero-emissions power production. But building new tidal energy plants is an expensive venture, and so far banks seem unconvinced that they’ll get a significant enough return on investment.

　　“To get off the ground, tidal companies need national governments to introduce revenue support schemes, guaranteed prices, and decent bank loan rates,” EU Observer reports. So far, tidal has none of that. But as the European Union struggles through an energy crisis that is set to worsen over the winter months, banks may become more amenable to backing new forms of energy production, especially ones that are as reliable as tidal energy. And while building up tidal is pricey, the infrastructure lasts for a long time, with an asset life of around 120 years. The current energy squeeze, paired with the urgent need to lower global greenhouse gas emissions, could be the final push needed to give tidal a chance to find a competitive edge in energy markets.