Quote:
Originally Posted by Azure
And yet renewables will never equal zero emissions, as there are raw materials needed to produce solar panels, wind turbines, etc.
|
What's your point? Fossil fuel infrastructure also uses raw materials. The point is to get to net zero, not absolute zero.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Azure
I know on a carbon emissions level it is less than lots other forms of energy, say burning coal for electricity, but always interesting to see the dogmatic stupidity that there is no possible way that natural gas can be produced with less emissions in 10 years than right now. And that includes downstream & upstream emissions.
Are natural gas plants not more efficient in 2023 than they were in 1985?
|
I'm not sure why I'm biting here but it's possible to have legitimate concerns about expanding natural gas without it being 'dogmatic stupidity'. A couple legitimate concerns about natural gas:
1) Upstream methane emissions, which are now understood to be higher than previously reported
https://www.nature.com/articles/nature19797
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-87610-3
https://theconversation.com/the-us-n...-matters-98918
2) While LNG does help lower emissions today, the infrastructure has a lifespan of decades and locks in those emissions. (Or it would have to be decommissioned early and replaced with renewables, not likely) It's because of this reason that it's generally understood that significant LNG expansion will not help achieve a 1.5C or 2C warming level.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41560-022-01060-3
https://www.reuters.com/business/cop...rt-2022-11-10/
Quote:
LNG can help in the near-term. There is significant coal-based generation remaining in the world today that could be substituted by natural gas. However, in a 1.5-degree or 2-degree compatible world — as is called for under the Paris agreement — all coal-based generation would be replaced by natural gas or renewables by 2030 or 2038, making the coal-to-gas transition argument moot.
To remain on a Paris-compliant pathway, the world would need to replace these natural gas plants with lower-emitting generation. This effectively creates an expiry date for the use of LNG as a climate solution.
In short, LNG expansion makes a below 3 C increase more likely and a 2 C or below increase less likely. Warming above 2 C will result in dramatically worse consequences for Alberta and the world.
|
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calga...blem-1.6480377