Exported gas produces far worse emissions than coal, major study finds
www.theguardian.com
Research challenges idea that sending liquefied natural gas around the world is cleaner alternative to burning coal
  • marcos@lemmy.worldEnglish
    151·
    2 months ago

    Yet another study that didn’t bother looking at emissions in mining and processing of coal, just on the ones from natural gas.

    • Justin@lemmy.jlh.nameEnglish
      41·
      2 months ago

      What emissions are there from drilling natural gas, aside from aquifer and river pollution?

      The main concern with natural gas are that the leaks cause 81x the greenhouse effect than if the gas was just burned. And liquifying methane and tanking it onto ships causes a lot of leaks, more than the leaks caused normally by pipelines. Natural gas is just as bad as coal if not worse.

      https://youtu.be/K2oL4SFwkkw?feature=shared&t=71

      • marcos@lemmy.worldEnglish
        2·
        2 months ago

        Coal mining releases a great deal of methane and other green-house gasses. It’s not clear whether it’s more or less than the LPG entire chain.

        A serious paper would compare the entire picture of both. Or at least look at one and refrain from opining about the other.

      • rbesfe@lemmy.caEnglish
        11·
        2 months ago

        Natural gas is absolutely not as bad or worse than coal, if you look at the whole picture. The big problem with coal wasn’t the greenhouse emissions, it was all the other emissions. Radioactive particulates anyone?

        • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.caEnglish
          2·
          2 months ago

          Maybe I’m stupid but I don’t see that in the abstract. I just see a GWP_20 potential for coal in the abstract. Further down there’s this table:

          It seems like they’re not just counting the combustion emissions in that number.

          Then there’s also this, which explicitly talks about fuel development emissions:

          The carbon-dioxide emissions just from combustion are substantially greater for coal, 99 g CO2/MJ versus 55 g CO2/MJ for LNG. Total carbon-dioxide emissions from coal, including emissions from developing and transporting the fuel, are also greater than for LNG, but the difference is less, 102.4 g CO2/MJ for coal versus 83.1 g CO2/MJ for LNG (Table 4). This is because of greater energy costs and, therefore, higher emissions of carbon dioxide for developing and transporting the LNG compared with coal. Methane emissions for LNG are substantially larger than for coal, 76.5 g CO2-equivalent/MJ for LNG compared with only 17.3 g CO2-equivalent/MJ for coal (Table 4). As presented in Section 2, this result for methane emissions for coal is quite robust across regions, including China and Poland.55, 56 Consequently, total greenhouse gas emissions are 33% larger for LNG than for coal for the cases of average tanker-cruise lengths, 160 g CO2-equivalent/MJ for LNG versus 120 g CO2-equivalent/MJ for coal (Table 4).

          Did you look at the paper or am I grossly misunderstanding something?

    • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.caEnglish
      3·
      2 months ago

      Posting this further up for visibility.

      Maybe I’m stupid but there’s this table:

      It seems like they’re not just counting the combustion emissions in that number.

      Then there’s also this, which explicitly talks about fuel development emissions:

      The carbon-dioxide emissions just from combustion are substantially greater for coal, 99 g CO2/MJ versus 55 g CO2/MJ for LNG. Total carbon-dioxide emissions from coal, including emissions from developing and transporting the fuel, are also greater than for LNG, but the difference is less, 102.4 g CO2/MJ for coal versus 83.1 g CO2/MJ for LNG (Table 4). This is because of greater energy costs and, therefore, higher emissions of carbon dioxide for developing and transporting the LNG compared with coal. Methane emissions for LNG are substantially larger than for coal, 76.5 g CO2-equivalent/MJ for LNG compared with only 17.3 g CO2-equivalent/MJ for coal (Table 4). As presented in Section 2, this result for methane emissions for coal is quite robust across regions, including China and Poland.55, 56 Consequently, total greenhouse gas emissions are 33% larger for LNG than for coal for the cases of average tanker-cruise lengths, 160 g CO2-equivalent/MJ for LNG versus 120 g CO2-equivalent/MJ for coal (Table 4).

      Did you look at the paper or am I grossly misunderstanding something?