Post by account_disabled on Feb 27, 2024 22:43:02 GMT -7
What is the climate impact of the use of natural gas ? Is it as clean as it looks, or not? Is it considered the best alternative?
Recent research shows different perspectives on the use of natural gas. The study was led by Professor Claudia Kemfert from the German Institute for Economic Research (DIW) and the Leuphana University of Lüneburg in collaboration with:
Franziska Hoffart from Ruhr-Universität Bochum,
Fabian Präger from Technische Universität Berlin
Isabell Braunger and Hanna Brauers from the University of Flensburg.
The energy crisis is only part of the problem
The German government faces the challenge of reducing energy dependence on Russia and continuing to ensure affordable and secure energy supplies in line with climate goals, in the wake of the offensive war waged by Russia.
climate impact of the use of natural gas
Efforts are currently unde C Level Executive List rway to offset Russian natural gas , the supply of which is uncertain and limited, by establishing new gas trade relationships and new infrastructure.
Claudia Kemfert, who leads the study, explains: “Fossil natural gas is neither clean nor safe. By holding onto fossil natural gas for too long, Germany found itself in an energy crisis. The country can now only emerge from this crisis by taking decisive steps for consistent decarbonisation towards a full supply of renewable energy.”
The researchers challenge widespread assumptions about natural gas from five perspectives and focus on the risks associated with further expansion of natural gas infrastructure and continued intensive use of natural gas.
What would the climate impact of the use of natural gas be like?
Although many still cling to the idea that natural gas is clean, extensive research shows that the climate impact of using natural gas is significantly underestimated and that the fossil fuel is not in itself the best alternative to using coal and the oil.
climate impact of the use of natural gas«The climate impact of the use of natural gas lies not only in CO ; There is also methane, a very effective greenhouse gas, which escapes unburned into the atmosphere throughout the entire value chain through fugitive emissions. Until now, these emissions have not been sufficiently taken into account and have so far been underestimated,” says Fabian Präger.
Additionally, the researchers postulate that an expansion of natural gas infrastructure can lead to path dependencies (“lock-in effects”) and economic climate risks, such as the premature loss of value of fossil assets (“stranded assets”). «Investments in fossil energy infrastructure entrench dependence on fossil fuels and emissions for decades.
Therefore, huge economic costs and fossil path dependencies are created, delaying the phase-out of fossil energy and the development of a percent renewable energy system. Infrastructure that is incompatible with climate goals is threatened with early closure with economic losses,” highlights Franziska Hoffart.
Five measures to reduce the climate impact of the use of natural gas
The researchers propose five measures to avoid these risks:
Managing methane emissions along the natural gas value chain
Review of scenario analysis assumptions based on new research findings on natural gas-related greenhouse gas emissions
Replace the bridging technology narrative with clear and decisive decarbonization criteria
Prevent further natural gas blockages and methane leaks
Serious and rigorous consideration of climate-related risks in energy infrastructure planning
“We hope to use these findings to add a critical perspective to the public and academic discussion about the future of fossil natural gas and infrastructure,” says Isabell Braunger. «The document is not only aimed at the scientific community, but, more importantly, at governments developing strategies to mitigate greenhouse gases. After all, investments in natural gas infrastructure can delay the energy transition and carry enormous economic risks,” says Hanna. Brauers.
Recent research shows different perspectives on the use of natural gas. The study was led by Professor Claudia Kemfert from the German Institute for Economic Research (DIW) and the Leuphana University of Lüneburg in collaboration with:
Franziska Hoffart from Ruhr-Universität Bochum,
Fabian Präger from Technische Universität Berlin
Isabell Braunger and Hanna Brauers from the University of Flensburg.
The energy crisis is only part of the problem
The German government faces the challenge of reducing energy dependence on Russia and continuing to ensure affordable and secure energy supplies in line with climate goals, in the wake of the offensive war waged by Russia.
climate impact of the use of natural gas
Efforts are currently unde C Level Executive List rway to offset Russian natural gas , the supply of which is uncertain and limited, by establishing new gas trade relationships and new infrastructure.
Claudia Kemfert, who leads the study, explains: “Fossil natural gas is neither clean nor safe. By holding onto fossil natural gas for too long, Germany found itself in an energy crisis. The country can now only emerge from this crisis by taking decisive steps for consistent decarbonisation towards a full supply of renewable energy.”
The researchers challenge widespread assumptions about natural gas from five perspectives and focus on the risks associated with further expansion of natural gas infrastructure and continued intensive use of natural gas.
What would the climate impact of the use of natural gas be like?
Although many still cling to the idea that natural gas is clean, extensive research shows that the climate impact of using natural gas is significantly underestimated and that the fossil fuel is not in itself the best alternative to using coal and the oil.
climate impact of the use of natural gas«The climate impact of the use of natural gas lies not only in CO ; There is also methane, a very effective greenhouse gas, which escapes unburned into the atmosphere throughout the entire value chain through fugitive emissions. Until now, these emissions have not been sufficiently taken into account and have so far been underestimated,” says Fabian Präger.
Additionally, the researchers postulate that an expansion of natural gas infrastructure can lead to path dependencies (“lock-in effects”) and economic climate risks, such as the premature loss of value of fossil assets (“stranded assets”). «Investments in fossil energy infrastructure entrench dependence on fossil fuels and emissions for decades.
Therefore, huge economic costs and fossil path dependencies are created, delaying the phase-out of fossil energy and the development of a percent renewable energy system. Infrastructure that is incompatible with climate goals is threatened with early closure with economic losses,” highlights Franziska Hoffart.
Five measures to reduce the climate impact of the use of natural gas
The researchers propose five measures to avoid these risks:
Managing methane emissions along the natural gas value chain
Review of scenario analysis assumptions based on new research findings on natural gas-related greenhouse gas emissions
Replace the bridging technology narrative with clear and decisive decarbonization criteria
Prevent further natural gas blockages and methane leaks
Serious and rigorous consideration of climate-related risks in energy infrastructure planning
“We hope to use these findings to add a critical perspective to the public and academic discussion about the future of fossil natural gas and infrastructure,” says Isabell Braunger. «The document is not only aimed at the scientific community, but, more importantly, at governments developing strategies to mitigate greenhouse gases. After all, investments in natural gas infrastructure can delay the energy transition and carry enormous economic risks,” says Hanna. Brauers.