US research claims the use of natural gas as a “bridge fuel” between traditional coal-fired power stations and renewables-based generation is seriously flawed.
It asserts that the environmental footprint of gas when used for power generation may be as bad as coal.
Gas is promoted by industry as a bridge fuel that allows society to continue to use fossil fuels while reducing greenhouse gas emissions compared to coal or oil.
Cornell University Professor of Ecology and Environmental Biology Robert Howarth, along with co-authors and Cornell colleagues Tony Ingraffea and Renee Santoro, challenged that view in 2011 with their landmark paper in the peer-reviewed journal Climatic Change.
Among their recommendations was a call for better measurements on methane emissions, from sources independent of industry.
The most comprehensive study to date of methane emissions in the US has just been published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. This research, led by Scot Miller of Harvard, concludes that the US Environmental Protection Agency has severely underestimated the extent of methane emissions, particularly from the oil and gas industry.
“Using this new information as well as other independent studies on methane emissions published since 2011, and the latest information on the climate influence of methane compared to carbon dioxide from the latest synthesis report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change released in September, it is clear that natural gas is no bridge fuel,” said Howarth.
“When used to generate electricity, natural gas likely has a greenhouse gas footprint similar to that for coal.
“It should be clear that the bridge-fuel argument just doesn’t hold up.”
The inference is that Europe will be little different to the US as intensive and growing use is made of natural gas to generate electricity including in the UK.
New US research claims that the use of natural gas as a ‘bridge fuel’ between traditional coal-fired power stations and renewables-based generation is seriously flawed.
Moreover, it asserts that the environmental footprint of gas when used for power generation may be as bad as coal.
Natural gas is widely promoted by industry as a bridge fuel that allows society to continue to use fossil fuels while reducing greenhouse gas emissions compared to coal or oil.
Cornell University Professor of Ecology and Environmental Biology Robert Howarth, along with co-authors and Cornell colleagues Tony Ingraffea and Renee Santoro, challenged that view in 2011 with their landmark paper in the peer-reviewed journal Climatic Change.
Among their recommendations was a call for better measurements on methane emissions, from sources independent of industry.
The most comprehensive study to date of methane emissions in the US has just been published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. This research, led by Scot Miller of Harvard, concludes that the US Environmental Protection Agency has severely underestimated the extent of methane emissions, particularly from the oil and gas industry.
The inference is that the situation for Europe will be little different to the US as intensive and growing use is made of natural gas to generate electricity including in the UK.
“Using this new information as well as other independent studies on methane emissions published since 2011, and the latest information on the climate influence of methane compared to carbon dioxide from the latest synthesis report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change released in September of this year, it is clear that natural gas is no bridge fuel,” said Howarth at the study’s launch.
“When used to generate electricity, natural gas likely has a greenhouse gas footprint similar to that for coal. However, when used for domestic heating of water, the greenhouse gas footprint off natural gas is at least two-times larger than that of using modern electric-driven heat pumps.
Howarth added that each unit of methane emitted is far more important in causing global climate change over the critical few decades ahead.
“It should be clear that the bridge-fuel argument just doesn’t hold up. And the oil and gas industry is the major source of these methane emissions.”
Recommended for you
