UK gas ‘must completely decarbonize’ to hit climate goals

Posted: February 17, 2019 by oldbrew in climate, Emissions, Energy, ideology
Tags: , ,

As if current UK energy policy wasn’t already full of subsidies, more are now demanded to play around with the gas supply, in pursuit of deluded climate policies.

Total decarbonisation of UK gas is vital in the next three decades if the country is to meet its emissions reduction targets.

That’s the conclusion of a report published today by independent, liberal conservative think-tank Bright Blue, reports PEI.

The study assesses how to decarbonize gas in the UK by increasing the supply of low carbon gases and by reducing demand for gas in the heat sector.

It also calls for new government investment and incentives for decarbonization to be an urgent priority for regulator Ofgem in its next price control framework for gas from April 2021.

Wilf Lytton, Bright Blue senior researcher and co-author of the report, said: “UK gas must be completely decarbonised during the coming three decades if this country is to meet its current and likely future legal emissions reduction target.

“But existing gas regulations that were designed decades ago, and a lack of investment and incentives, are hampering deeper decarbonization. Now, with time running out, the government and Ofgem should approach the task of decarbonizing gas with the same fervour as it has applied to delivering low carbon and affordable electricity.

“It is an urgent priority to ensure that Ofgem’s next price control framework from April 2021 includes stronger incentives and greater investment to support deeper decarbonization.

In particular, Lytton said that Ofgem should introduce a new low-carbon gas obligation. “This will enable the UK to decarbonize the gas network at the lowest possible cost, without distorting the market and removing the need to subsidise alternatives to natural gas.”

Bright Blue wants to see incentives and requirements for gas suppliers to deliver a steadily-increasing proportion of low carbon gases into the energy mix – including biomethane, bioSNG and hydrogen.

It says the proportion of low carbon gas injected into the gas network, and the trajectory for this over time, should be consistent with meeting the UK’s current and likely greenhouse gas emissions reduction target.

Compliance with, and implementation of, this new ‘low carbon gas obligation’ would be overseen by Ofgem.

Continued here.

  1. A C Osborn says:

    These people are either completely mad or absolutely determined to kill as many people in the UK as possible by making Energy as expensive as possible.
    Or Both.

  2. cognog2 says:

    A carbon dioxymoron methinks.

  3. BoyfromTottenham says:

    Oh, I see. First the UK eco-loons demonise the UK’s nuclear power, then coal, now gas. What is left to power the country – unicorn farts and the occasional bit of sunshine? Or like good socialists, other people’s money. Oops, I meant power from other countries’ nuclear, coal and gas fired power stations. Can this get any crazier? Thank god my parents left the UK sixty years ago, when Australia needed workers and paid our fares (sorry, no return tickets) for us. Maybe president Trump will copy Australia and offer free fares from the UK to the US to help him build a wall. Or maybe not. Good luck my pommy friends.

  4. oldbrew says:

    Dogma before sanity, never mind public demand…

    Date: 16/02/19

    The state is dependent on imports even though it sits atop the abundant Marcellus Shale.
    . . .
    Consolidated Edison , an energy utility that provides gas and power to the New York City area, announced last month that beginning in mid-March it would “no longer be accepting applications for natural gas connections from new customers in most of our Westchester County service area.” The reason for the shortage is obvious: The Cuomo administration has repeatedly blocked or delayed new pipeline projects. As a Con Ed spokesman put it, there is a “lot of natural gas around the country, but getting it to New York has been the strain.”

    New York policy makers have also killed the state’s natural-gas-drilling business.

  5. Bitter&twisted says:

    “Bright” Blue?
    You have to be kidding me!

  6. Gamecock says:

    Meeting emissions reduction targets seems a valid reason to kill 95% of the people.

  7. Curious George says:

    This is a preparatory step for a purchase of Russian gas.

  8. Bob Greene says:

    Curious George, the US will be happy to sell LNG. We seem to have plenty of gas.

  9. Bob Greene says:

    I couldn’t figure out how one decarbonizes gas until I read they want to inject hydrogen and use biomethane. Unless they think they have enough electricity to get hydrogen from water, the other processes constituting a vast majority of the hydrogen production is from sources where the byproduct is CO2. What’s gained other than feel good?

    The other source was injection of biomethane into the gas system. It’s being done but has anyone considered just how much biogas would have to be supplied as a substitute and how much energy would be required to separate and compress the methane. Conversion of 11,000 SCFM 54% methane landfill gas to 5,000 SCFM 97% methane using specialized zeolite requires 4-6 MW of electricity. You can supply some of the power from a waste gas stream. Expensive gas and not nearly enough of that to meet the NG demand.

    Of course anyone who wants to decarbonize can just stop using it or move to those places where they don’t have access to high or low carbon power.

  10. tom0mason says:

    ‘”Bright” Blue’ sound like the watermelons faction of the conservative party.
    Check out who they are,
    Note the deficit of engineering/science talent, instead there is the usual excess of politicos, bankers, and journalists.

    Of note is —
    Senior researcher — Wilf Lytton — Wilf produced analysis and briefings for Sandbag on the European Union’s industrial policy, focusing on the impact of carbon pricing. His work on European emissions policy has been featured in publications including Der Spiegel, Euractiv and The Ecologist. Masters degree in geology from University College London.

    Associate Fellows —
    Ben Caldecott — Director of the Sustainable Finance Programme at the University of Oxford’s Smith School of Enterprise. He is also an Academic Visitor at the Bank of England, a Visiting Scholar at Stanford University, and a Senior Advisor at Highmore LLC. Ben specialises in environment, energy, and sustainability issues and works at the intersection between finance, government, civil society, and academe, having held senior roles in each domain.

    Michael Johnson — former investment banker. Michael trained with JP Morgan in New York and, after 21 years in investment banking, joined Towers Watson, the actuarial consultants. Subsequently he was responsible for the running of David Cameron’s Economic Competitiveness Policy Group.

    I wonder, a Pro-EU lobby group??

  11. dscott says:

    You have to hand it to the Russians, this is the biggest, most successful disinformation campaign ever conducted upon the West. The gullible useful idiots on the left just eat this stuff up and the corrupt politicians greedily play the game with their cronies.

  12. oldbrew says:

    The UK can already get Russian gas via interconnector from Belgium.
    The 45% from UK is declining as North Sea gas runs down.

  13. Graeme No.3 says:


    Have you considered the possibility that he stains his skin bright blue with woad? It was the practice before the Romans introduced central heating and plumbing but these people seem determined to revert to living in mud huts and similar standards.

  14. stpaulchuck says:

    “independent, liberal conservative”

    I nominate that phrase for oxymoron of the month.

  15. stpaulchuck says:

    Hey Brits, how’s them windmills working out for ya?

  16. John, UK says:

    Well at the time of writing they are producing 24% of UK demand, not that I am a fan of them in the slightest…

  17. oldbrew says:

    John – yes, but where would that 24% be coming from on a windless day with the same demand?

    And what happens if/when the suppliers of that ‘back-up’ decide their plant is too old to maintain any more, but not worth replacing with a new one as the economics of supply are too heavily weighted against them – even assuming they can get planning permission?

  18. ivan says:

    As tom0mason says there isn’t an engineer or anyone with practical experience among them. These are the useful idiots that repeat what the UN Agenda 21 and 30 eco-loons tell them. They are so misguided and ignorant in thinking that CO2 is the devil gas that must be eliminated rather than being the plant food it is.

    dscott, I doubt the Russians had any hand in orchestrating any of this. We have too many useful idiots that it for them rather than doing the sensible thing and promoting fracking for our own supply of natural gas – especially since the US has had a dramatic drop in ‘carbon’ emissions since they started using their fracked gas.

    The UK needs a government that has a backbone and will stand up against this UN push to make slaves of the common people using pseudo science to do so.

  19. Adam Gallon says:

    John, on 24th January, they were providing 0.69GW, which was under 2% of demand. That’s from nearly 20GW of installed capacity. Luckily, we still had nearly 5GW of coal available.

  20. phil salmon says:

    There is a reason why the term “chasing the wind” in the book of Ecclesiastes in the bible is an idiom for futile and vacuous activity.

  21. oldbrew says:

    The Sun reports:
    UK spent £440million of foreign aid on green schemes in well-off countries [last year]

    Another £354 million was spent by the Department for International Development last year in third world nations on mitigating and adapting to climate change.

    The money is part of a five-year £5.8 billion International Climate Finance commitment.

  22. John, Uk says:

    I know the things are bloody useless but the guy – presumably from the twin cities over the pond – asked how they were working out so I gave him the facts at the time of writing. Personally I’m all for coal and gas, I’ve no desire to freeze to death in my old age.

  23. nickreality65 says:

    “Without thermal controls, the temperature of the orbiting Space Station’s Sun-facing side would soar to 250 degrees F (121 C), while thermometers on the dark side would plunge to minus 250 degrees F (-157 C). There might be a comfortable spot somewhere in the middle of the station,
    but searching for it wouldn’t be much fun!”

    Guess what, space is not cold, it’s HOT!!

    Like standing next to a campfire, hot on the fireside, cold on the back side and without the atmosphere’s 0.3 albedo earth gets hotter not colder.

    Because the atmosphere and its associated albedo reflect away 30% of the incoming solar energy (like the reflective panel behind a car’s windshield) the earth is cooler with an atmosphere and not warmer per greenhouse theory.

    Because of the significant (>60%) non-radiative heat transfer processes of the atmospheric molecules the surface of the earth cannot radiate as a black body and there is no “extra” energy for the greenhouse gasses to “trap”/absorb/radiate/“warm” the earth.

    No greenhouse effect, no CO2 warming, no man caused climate change.

    No problem.