Natural gas won’t help save the planet, says new peer-reviewed report

Originally posted at tcktcktck.org

A global fracking boom will not reduce carbon emissions and fight climate change, according to new peer-reviewed research in the journal Nature.

In fact an increase in fracking for natural gas is likely to increase carbon emissions as renewable energy will be squeezed out of the market due to price competition.

This would stifle the transition away from dirty fossil fuels and towards clean energy sources that must happen in order to contain global temperature rise to safe levels, warn the international team of researchers behind the report.

Whilst some supporters of fracking hail it as a ‘bridge fuel’ in the move away from dirty energy  the new report warns the expansion of natural gas would lead to continued fossil fuel domination of global energy markets.

As a result, carbon emissions would ultimately continue to rise, as burning natural gas still produces large amounts of carbon dioxide.

In addition to this, if natural gas were to become the dominant source of energy, greater amounts of methane – a particularly dangerous gas that produces 21 times more warming than carbon dioxide – would be leaking from drilling operations.

According to experts, the extra levels of methane would significantly impact climate change.

Indeed, many argue that natural gas production and consumption is just as high a level of greenhouse gas emissions as other fossil fuels, including coal.

The new report predicted that an unrestricted natural gas boom could actually increase carbon emissions by up to 11%.  It is suggested that the low price of energy could encourage the greater use of energy and disregard for energy efficiency measures.

Haewon McJeon, an economist at the US department of energy’s Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), lead the research for the said:

New technology could double or triple the global natural gas production by 2050. Greenhouse gas emissions would continue to grow in the absence of climate policies that promote lower carbon energy sources.

Another member of the team, Nico Bauer of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Change said:

The high hopes that natural gas will help reduce global warming because of lower emissions than coal turn out to be misguided because market effects dominate.

The additional gas supply boosts its deployment, but the substitution of coal is rather limited and it might also substitute low-emission renewable s and nuclear, according to our calculations.

The researchers emphasise that sound policy, not natural gas, is the best way to reduce carbon emissions and fight climate change.

They recommended that a global price be put on carbon pollution, and an international climate deal be agreed upon.

Study: US, China co-operation could help close the emissions gap

Originally posted at tcktcktck.org

If the US and China were to adopt global best practice in their domestic climate policies, together, the world’s two largest emitters could close the 2020 emissions gap by 23%, according to new research.

In new analysis, the Climate Action Tracker – a joint programme by Climate Analytics, Ecofys and the Pik Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research – showed that by swiftly enacting deep cuts in energy from high-carbon fuels, the two countries could reduce emissions by 2.8 gigatonnes by 2020.

Jointly responsible for 35% of global emissions, this could significantly close the “emissions gap” – the difference between cuts needed to keep below 2ºC of warming and that current pledged by governments – according to the new research.

Bill Hare of Climate Analytics, said:

The US and China produce 35% of global emissions and have been making efforts to work with each other on climate change. If they scaled up action to adopt the most ambitious policies from across the world, they would both be on the right pathway to keep warming below 2ºC.

This needs to include dramatically reducing their use of coal, in order to achieve the deep decarbonisation needed of getting C02 emissions from coal back to 1990 levels by 2030.

The research comes as countries, including the US and China meet in Bonn for the latest round of the UN climate change negotiations, to set out the elements of the next global climate agreement, to be agreed in Paris in 2015.

As part of the agreement countries have a deadline to set out their national climate action pledges – their Intended Nationally Determined Contributions – by March next year. The US and China will be closely watching each other’s proposals, while observers see the co-ordinated effort the countries have show in recent months as a sign of positive momentum towards the new deal in 2015.

Climate Action Tracker’s research examined the action of both countries in their most energy-intensive sectors; electricity production, industry, buildings and transport.

They then compared the two countries and looked that what each country could achieve if they were to adopt global best practice in those areas, showing there are lessons the two countries could learn from one another.

Dr Niklas Höhne, of Ecofys:

We looked at how well both the US and China would do if they each adopted a ‘best of the two’ practice in electricity production, industry, buildings and transport. We found this, alone, would set them in a better direction. They could both learn from each other in most sectors.

If they did this, in relative terms, China could reduce emissions from its current policy projections by 1.2% in 2020 and 20% in 2030 – and 3.2% and 16% for the US.

And by going for global best practice the carbon savings could be even greater.

Both governments have managed to reduce their emissions for electricity production, but both are also expected to deploy more coal in the future – plans which remain incompatible with a 2ºC global warming limit.

With currently implemented policies, it appears that the share of coal in China is likely to be around 50% by 2050, whilst in the US coal is  projected to make up around 35% of total energy production.

And while the deployment in renewable energy is also increasing in both countries, it is not happening fast enough.

The new research shows that if the US and China were to increase their share in renewables at around 1.3% per year – that’s the average trend seen in Germany and the UK – it could make a difference.

Buildings also create a significant amount of emissions. In China, there are large amounts of buildings being erected annually, which gives the opportunity to make them energy efficient from the start, and both the US and China have minimum energy performance standards for new and refurbished buildings.

Car ownership is ten times as high in the USA compared to China, but the difference is declining. If both countries were to implement China’s vehicle emissions standards – which are slightly stronger – emissions reductions would be seen.

By moving to globally best practice – e.g. emission standard for cars as in the EU, increase of share of electric cars as in Norway – this reduction would be bigger.

The US and China have made some efforts to lightly coordinate their policies (such as their agreement on HFCs and announcements on mitigation).

However,  there is still a long way to go.

According to the IEA,  the US must decarbonise by 80% by 2030 , China by 60-70%. Yet current policies in both countries are inadequate to meet the necessary limit; the US has pledged to reduce coal by about 20% and China is stabilising coal use by 2030.

Both of these are far from the deep reductions needed.

China’s coal use dips for the first time this century

Originally posted at tcktckck.org

The world’s biggest polluter has dropped its coal usage for the first time this century.

Despite its economy growing 7.4% this year and its energy consumption rising by 4%, China’s coal consumption has decreased by roughly 2%.

Currently, China burns nearly half of the coal used worldwide each year, making the country a major contributor to climate change. For this reason, the recent decline in coal use could signal a significant turning point for climate change and the future of the planet.

According to Greenpeace energy analysts, in the first half of the decade, China’s coal consumption had  more than doubled. This year, however, coal imports dropped to just 0.9%—a massive decline from 13.3% in 2013.

This trend looks set to continue, with China stating at the UN Climate summit that it intends to reduce its coal usage as soon as possible and pledging US $6 million to support South-South cooperation to work on climate change.

Initial proposals made by the Chinese National Energy Agency aim to limit the growth in coal consumption to just 2%. Under this plan, renewable energy would be deployed far and wide, with wind power capacity more than doubling and solar capacity projected to increase fivefold between 2013-2020.

At the regional level, there has also been significant progress to tackle climate change: 12 of China’s 44 provinces, representing 44% of the country’s coal usage, have pledged to limit their coal consumption. China has also launched eight regional carbon markets that are preparing the country for national emissions trading scheme that will be announced as early as 2016.

Lauri Myllyvirta at Greenpeace East Asia said:

The significance is that if the coal consumption growth we have seen in China in the last 10 years went on, we would lose any hope of bringing climate change under control. The turnaround now gives a window of opportunity.

The decline is likely to have a ripple effect on global coal consumption. Indonesia and Australia, two exporters that have profited hugely from Chinese coal demands, are likely to be affected greatly by China’s declining need for the emission-intensive fossil fuel, meaning a smaller global demand for coal in the long term.

The drop will also have a positive effect on the citizens of China, as dangerous domestic air pollution will likely decline as less coal is burnt.

Li Shuo, Greenpeace senior climate and energy campaigner, said:

Five years after Copenhagen, China is in a vastly different position. Domestic air pollution is forcing the country to embark on a new path away from coal and 2014 saw the lowest coal consumption growth in a decade.

If China succeeds in decreasing its reliance on dirty energy sources like coal, it will reap benefits of a clean energy economy while avoiding the health problems that have been increasingly plaguing the country’s urban and industrial areas.

Pressure on Church of England as Oxford diocese divests

Originally posted at tcktcktck.org

Oxford has become the first Church of England diocese to commit to divestment, this week, calling on the Church of England as a whole to join the growing movement in moving its money out of  dirty fossil fuels.

The Oxford Diocese resolution calls for divestment from coal and tar sands ‘at the earliest opportunity’, from oil within three years and natural gas within five.

The Diocese also pledged to explore re-investment opportunities in the renewable energy sector.

The motion was led by Reverend Darrell Hannah, a trustee of Operation Noah.

Operation Noah’s Vice-Chair, Mark Letcher, said:

This resolution demonstrates how seriously local churches and dioceses are taking the issue of disinvestment. Following recent commitments from the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, a national pension fund in Sweden, and the University of Glasgow, the decision today increases the pressure on the Church of England – which still has over £60 million invested in fossil fuel companies – to disinvest.

The move means that the Church of England is facing both top-down and bottom-up pressure to make its own commitment to the divestment movement.

Earlier this year, the World Council of Churches announced its commitment to divest from fossil fuels and urged its members to follow suit.

This week’s decision in Oxford  was made by a vote of 52 in favour, 37 against, and seven abstaining.

It demonstrates how the divestment movement is gaining serious support from members of the Church. The vote was inspired by a similar motion passed earlier this year by Bracknell Deanery .

The Diocese of Oxford joins a number of faith communities pledging to divest, including the Church of Sweden, the British Quakers, the Uniting Church of Australia, and the US United Church of Christ,  as well as numerous institutional investors, private investors and academic institutions.

Ellie Roberts, divestment campaigner for Operation Noah said:

We are delighted that Oxford has joined faith communities from all regions of the globe in refusing to profit from or provide finance to the fossil fuel industry. Fossil fuel companies continue to base their business strategies on ever greater expansion and use of fossil fuel reserves, despite the fact that the vast majority of existing reserves must remain in the ground to preserve the viability of our planet. By disinvesting, Churches are sending the clearest possible signal to fossil companies that they need to completely rethink their business strategies now.

The resolution follows the Inter-Faith Summit on Climate Change- held this September in New York-  where a statement was signed by 30 religious leaders urging international governments to take action against the negative effects climate change has on the world’s poorest communities.

The former Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, has also called on governments – particularly those in the industrialised West – to have compassion for ‘today’s poorest and tomorrow’s children’, and take strong action to tackle climate change.

“It is those suffering the most who carry the least historic responsibility for our situation,” he said.

“With actors who have traditionally dragged their feet taking the lead, and with the urgency for action in developing nations beyond any serious doubt, it is now those who have traditionally been more proactive – European nations in particular – who need to step up to the mark.”