• Natural Gas News

    The Role of Shale in Climate Change

    old

Summary

Kevin Anderson believes that that with a stringent and appropriate regulatory and monitoring regime, the environmental implications of shale gas extraction could be brought to levels similar to those considered acceptable with regards to the extraction of conventional natural gas

by:

Posted in:

Natural Gas & LNG News, Shale Gas , Environment

The Role of Shale in Climate Change

At the 2011 Shale Gas Environmental summit in London, Kevin Anderson, professor, Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research posed a simple question: “How will this relatively new fossil fuel help us to avoid or exacerbate dangerous climate change?”

In order to help answer this crucial question, Anderson, who has been highly critical of expanded shale gas development, first of all pointed out critical climate change issues and how shale gas can be related to it.

“There are two main externality issues that I have been looking at recently and these are environmental issues at a local and regional level and also climate change globally,” said the professor.

“I take the view that with a stringent and appropriate regulatory and monitoring regime, the environmental implications of shale gas extraction could be brought to levels similar to those considered acceptable with regards to the extraction of conventional natural gas.”

Having said that, he doesn’t believe that regulatory regimes have yet been implemented to the level he is personally satisfied with and that this should be acted upon sooner rather than later.

Even still, from an emissions perspective, Anderson believes that shale gas could indeed be a “game changer” when compared to other conventional fossil fuels – with a specific focus on non-OECD (non-Annex 1) nations.

“By and large, the use of gas particularly for power generation and even in transport in non-Annex 1 industrialising nations is infinitely better than the use of fossil fuels such as coal and oil. What’s more, it is also more efficient than coal and oil.”

However, this does not go to say that gas combustion is good for climate change, “and this is what people say to me. Well they are wrong,” he said.

“Gas causes emissions. And the climate doesn’t care whether they come from the UK or the US and it certainly doesn’t care whether it comes from coal or shale. It just looks at the total number of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.”

In order to discover whether shale gas will substitute coal or oil, Anderson said we must first of all ask ourselves a very simple question: What level of climate change are we trying to avoid?

“From an international perspective, we are looking to hold the increase in global temperature below 2 degrees Celsius, and take action to meet this objective consistent with science and on the basis of equity,” he said.

“If we stick to the 2 degrees Celsius threshold,” which Anderson believes is highly unlikely, “shale gas - only as a temporary measure - may be a substitute in new non-Annex 1 infrastructures that use coal.”

And he also believes that as an option, it is extremely short lived and that OECD (Annex 1) countries have to increasingly realise that investing capital into other low carbon options should be what we are looking towards.

“Remember that gas is not low carbon – it is just less high carbon than coal. Describing it as a low carbon fuel is completely wrong because it is an appalling fuel in terms of carbon emissions.”

And this he said, should be the key focus and that no broad-brush approach should be used in terms of the world as a whole.