Summary:
-
According to a study that the AUN News looked at, up to ten times as much carbon is released when pipeline gas is made and moved as when LNG is made and moved. There are concerns that the additional carbon may undermine attempts to slow global warming.
-
There are worries that the conflict in Ukraine has slowed down efforts to cut carbon emissions.
-
LNG, a liquid form of natural gas, is being brought into the UK and Europe at a rate that has never been seen before.
-
There are plans to develop over 20 other LNG facilities across Europe; however, none are currently planned for the United Kingdom.
-
By purchasing this gas from Russia, the UK and Europe are contributing to the cost of the invasion of Ukraine and making it more challenging to win the battle against climate change.
According to new research, Europe’s increasing reliance on liquefied natural gas (LNG) is having a negative impact on the environment.
Because of the war in Ukraine, which has cut off Russian pipeline supplies, LNG imports have gone through the roof.
According to an analysis reviewed by AUN News, pipeline gas creates up to ten times as many carbon emissions during production and transportation as LNG.
There are concerns that the additional carbon may undermine attempts to slow global warming.
-
UN issues a warning as a vital climate threshold disappears.
-
The woman removing oil from a field
-
Prioritize climate change or prepare for disaster, according to the UN head
The COP27 climate conference will be held in Egypt next week. There are worries that the conflict in Ukraine has slowed down efforts to cut carbon emissions.
LNG, a liquid form of natural gas, is being brought into the UK and Europe at a rate that has never been seen before. This is because of worries about the availability of energy.
In the first nine months of this year, 65% more LNG cargo was brought in than in the first nine months of 2021.
It is produced by cooling fossil gas to -160 °C in enormous refrigerators.
The gas liquefies, shrinks, and gets 600 times smaller, which makes it much easier to move around.
Even though the emissions from burning the gas are the same, whether piped or liquid, it takes much more energy to make and move the fluid.
“We see about 7 kg of CO2 per barrel for piped gas from Norway, while we estimate the average for LNG imports into Europe is over 70, so about 10 times lower for piped gas versus LNG,” said Patrick King from Rystad.
Let’s say that Russia cuts off all of its gas supply by the end of the year and that all of the extra gas needs to come from LNG sources. In that case, compared to 2021, the amount of CO2 that is imported from upstream will go up by 35 million metric tons.
The additional CO2 is the same as adding 16 million cars to the UK’s roadways for two years.
Some observers see this rush for LNG as the triumph of short-term thinking.
According to Dr. Paul Balcombe of the Queen Mary University of London, the best way to turn a poor situation around is to create incentives to lower our gas consumption. Although he wasn’t involved in this latest study, he has previously examined LNG emissions.
“Energy efficiency needs to be improved, as does renewable energy sources.” “We need to think about the slightly longer term, which will have much better effects on costs, finances, and the environment than LNG, which is just a short-term solution.”
Environmental activists are concerned that accepting additional LNG might not be a one-time thing. There are plans to develop over 20 other LNG facilities across Europe; however, none are currently planned for the United Kingdom.
Eilidh Robb, a Friends of the Earth Europe member, admitted that “it’s extremely frightening, to be honest.”
The problem is that the terminals can last up to 40 years, which means a very long lock-in effect for these fossil fuels we are trying to get rid of. To make these terminals economically feasible, countries must agree to long contracts to bring in the gas.
The origin of these goods is another issue. Around 16% of the liquid, according to Rystad, is imported from Russia.
By purchasing this gas from Russia, the UK and Europe are contributing to the cost of the invasion of Ukraine and making it more challenging to win the battle against climate change.
Analysis by: Advocacy Unified Network
