Liquefied natural gas in Canada praised as potential 'transition' energy source, yet faces skepticism due to environmental concerns
Canadian liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports to Asia have the potential to significantly reduce global greenhouse gas emissions, according to Alberta Premier Danielle Smith, citing a Fraser Institute study. The study suggests that doubling Canada's natural gas production and exporting the additional LNG to Asia, with coal displacement, could cut emissions by up to 630 million tonnes annually[1].
This potential climate benefit comes from the displacement of coal-fired power generation in the region. However, the environmental impact of LNG exports is a matter of debate. While LNG can aid in phasing out coal, it may delay or displace investments in renewable energy by providing a less carbon-intensive but still fossil fuel-based energy option[1].
The Canadian LNG export sector is focusing on emissions reductions through lower-emission natural gas production and efforts to monitor and manage methane emissions across the supply chain. For instance, Japan and Canada are collaborating to improve emissions transparency and methane regulation in LNG supply chains, highlighting the demand for "low-emission LNG" in Asian markets[4].
However, there are notable drawbacks and complexities to consider. LNG still involves fossil fuel extraction and methane leakage risks, which could offset some emissions benefits[1]. Infrastructure development for LNG, including export terminals and pipelines, has faced political and environmental opposition, implying social and ecological trade-offs in Canada itself[2].
Moreover, shipping LNG to Asia entails energy use and emissions, reducing some potential global emissions reductions benefits. Some experts argue that the magnitude of emissions reductions from LNG exports is debatable[3]. Michael Sambasivam, a senior analyst with Investors for Paris Compliance, doubts that India would see an economic case for replacing domestically produced coal with imported Canadian gas[3].
Furthermore, a massive system of subsidies would be needed for developing countries to replace their coal with imported Canadian gas[3]. Devyani Singh, an investigative researcher at Stand.earth, states that arguments that LNG is a green fuel are undermined by the climate impacts of producing, liquefying, and shipping LNG[4].
Canada is set to export LNG to Asian shores for the first time from the LNG Canada facility in Kitimat, British Columbia. The project is a partnership between Shell and four Asian companies[5]. Sambasivam questions why a Canadian company should get credit for any emissions reductions abroad as a result of the coal-to-gas switch, as both parties would want to claim the emissions savings[2].
Singh also questions whether all methane leakage along the pipeline has been accounted for[2]. Sambasivam asserts that LNG would be competing head-to-head with renewable energy, and the Fraser Institute study suggests that Canada's ability to reduce emissions elsewhere should be considered in its climate policy[2][3]. In China, LNG is likely to be added to the energy mix rather than displacing coal[3].
In conclusion, Canadian LNG exports can contribute to reducing global greenhouse gas emissions by substituting coal power in Asia, especially if methane emissions are tightly controlled and the LNG is produced with low emissions. However, this strategy has limitations related to fossil fuel reliance, potential methane leakage, and the risk of hindering renewable energy uptake. It represents a complex trade-off between immediate emissions displacement and long-term clean energy transitions[1][4].
- The Canadian LNG export sector is aiming to lessen emissions through producing lower-emission natural gas and managing methane emissions across the supply chain.
- Despite the potential for LNG to displace coal and aid in emission reduction, it is still a fossil fuel and faces risks of methane leakage, which could diminish the emissions benefits.
- LNG exports have encountered political and environmental opposition, implying potential social and ecological trade-offs in Canada itself.
- There is a debate whether shipping LNG to Asia for emission reduction is entirely effective due to the energy used during transport, reducing some potential global emissions reductions benefits.
- Both the Fraser Institute study and Michael Sambasivam argue that Canada's ability to reduce emissions in other regions should be considered in its climate policy and Asia's reliance on coal may continue even with LNG imports.
- Devyani Singh claims that the climate impacts of producing, liquefying, and shipping LNG undermine the arguments of LNG being a green fuel, and it may still hinder renewable energy uptake.
