Russian gas: Gazprom Bomb G Putin (Arte Thema)

[Christophe]

I post it here too: nuclear-fossil-energy/price-of-electricity-in-europe-and-france-t2218.html

Gas, oil, electricity: understanding current (and future?) tensions, with Maxence Cordiez

[Christophe]

Replacing Russian gas with American LNG, the worst climate scenario

To ensure our energy security, the European Union is turning to liquefied natural gas (LNG). The European Commission has just signed an agreement with the United States to ensure a stable supply until 2030. New infrastructures will thus see the light of day on the continent. But LNG has a greater carbon impact than gas transported by pipeline. This strategy could therefore undermine our climate objectives.

On the sidelines of the European summit held on March 24 and 25, the European Commission and the United States signed an agreement to deliver an additional 15 billion cubic meters of liquefied natural gas (LNG) this year, an increase by 70% compared to the current supply, and up to 50 billion thereafter each year by 2030. Faced with the war in Ukraine, this is the main path chosen by Brussels to ensure the continent's energy security. The objective is thus to no longer depend on Russian fossil fuels by 2027.

At the same time, France, which already has four land LNG terminals, is working on a fifth installation in the port of Le Havre, floating this time, according to information from Les Echos. France would thus become the third largest country in terms of LNG import capacity in Europe. Germany also announced the construction of its first LNG terminal. An LNG race that worries about the climate.

"Our desire for energy independence from Russia should not come at the expense of the climate", warns Alexandre Joly, senior consultant at the firm Carbone 4. Last October, he co-published a comparative analysis the upstream carbon footprint (from extraction to the place of delivery) of natural gas transported by pipeline and liquefied natural gas for France. It appears that LNG emits two and a half times more CO2 equivalent than gas transported by pipeline. In question, the preparation of the natural gas (purification and liquefaction) with a view to its transport by LNG tanker, then the transport itself by ship, and finally the regasification of the liquid gas.

EU could do without Russian gas without building new infrastructure

Thus, American liquefied natural gas appears to be the worst solution in terms of climate with an upstream carbon footprint ten times greater than, for example, Norwegian or Dutch gas transported by pipeline. It is also twice as emitting as Russian LNG, due to the greater distance traveled, which implies higher methane leaks, but also due to the extractive mode. American LNG is often made from shale gas extracted by hydraulic fracturing, "a process that requires an additional input of energy in order to fracture the rock and which results in also higher methane releases compared to a conventional configuration", explains Carbone 4.

"Brussels justifies the use of LNG as a short-term solution to respond to the crisis, but that does not hold up because the contracts and the investments committed will lock us into our addiction to fossil fuels for several more years. not achieve our climate objectives when we know that we must get out of fossil fuels within 13 years", reacts Lorette Philippot of the association Les Amis de la Terre. She is also concerned about the authorization procedures for new infrastructures which are to be lightened by Brussels.

Yet according to a new study by think tanks Ember, E3G, RAP and Bellona, ​​the European Union could do without its Russian gas imports by 2025 without building new LNG terminals. Two-thirds of imports could be reduced through energy efficiency measures, electrification of uses and by increasing the production of renewable electricity. The remaining third could be transported through the network of existing gas pipelines. Brussels specifies, however, that all the necessary infrastructure works (terminals, interconnectors) will be carried out in the most "green" way possible, using "clean" energy, and that the new infrastructures must be able to be converted, in the long term, to hydrogen.

Concepción Alvarez @conce1

Infog_GNL_Impact_carbone.png (353.87 KiB) Viewed 922 times

https://www.novethic.fr/actualite/infog ... 50687.html

[Christophe]

What hypocrisy!!

“It is important that all French people act now, by slightly lowering their heating or by preferring showers to baths…”

Interview with Laurence Poirier-Dietz, General Manager of GRDF

https://www.lesechos.fr/industrie-servi ... nt-1396725

[sicetaitsimple]

[I]Replacing Russian gas with American LNG, the worst climate scenario

The article is well done, but only compares the "upstream emissions" part.
If we add the (approximately) 200g/kWh related to combustion, we come to 258g for "American" LNG and 223g/kWh for gas supplied by pipe.
About + 15%. This is certainly not negligible, but the x2,5 factor presented is a bit alarmist if you read too quickly.

[Christophe]

[I]Replacing Russian gas with American LNG, the worst climate scenario

The article is well done, but only compares the "upstream emissions" part.
If we add the (approximately) 200g/kWh related to combustion, we come to 258g for "American" LNG and 223g/kWh for gas supplied by pipe.
About + 15%. This is certainly not negligible, but the x2,5 factor presented is a bit alarmist if you read too quickly.

It's true but we should also talk about the price...certainly more than +15% compared to gas pipelines...

In addition, LNG ports are not everywhere and even quite rare...building others will also cost (money + co2)...

Transporting methane is also rather dangerous…although I believe there have never been any serious accidents…

In short, not a good deal to have sanctioned Russia…

[sicetaitsimple]

It's true but we should also talk about the price...certainly more than +15% compared to gas pipelines...

I don't know and neither do you. Maybe it lines up for "spot" transactions. Moreover, long-term contracts live their life with price adjustments linked to formulas aimed at more or less linking long-term prices to the reality of the short term.
So pure speculation on your part.

[Christophe]

You are right...yes yes...

I'm not even sure that there are enough LNG carriers in the world to compensate for the end of Yamal and Nord Stream 1...in permanent rotation...

LNG carriers are quite rare…

Do you have the orders of magnitude?

And US methane is weed gas?

[ABC2019]

In short, not a good deal to have sanctioned Russia…

and it is you who denounces the capitalists who think only of their profits?

[ABC2019]

You are right...yes yes...

I'm not even sure that there are enough LNG carriers in the world to compensate for the end of Yamal and Nord Stream 1...in permanent rotation...

the solution is to apply the Paris agreements, - 5% per year...

[Christophe]

In short, not a good deal to have sanctioned Russia…

and it is you who denounces the capitalists who think only of their profits?

Decidedly you have not matured psychologically in 3 months of forced vacation... must say that you were already rotten before...

Because your little defamatory cabal on the oleocene, just pitiful...