We’re all worried about climate change, so isn’t it better to use locally produced gas, rather than transporting it halfway round the world?
FACT. That could only be true if the displaced imports are not used elsewhere. In reality, the tankers would just go somewhere else, with our local fracked gas contributing to increased global emissions. And in fact shale gas may not even be that much better than imported LNG anyway. Manchester University’s report on shale gas and the UK’s carbon transition says “Unfortunately there is relatively little robust data on the carbon footprint of LNG” and finishes with “Consequently, the idea that UK shale gas will reduce global emissions by substituting imported LNG should be treated with caution”[i]. The same report goes on to say that shale gas is preferable to only coal when compared with other options such as solar, wind and nuclear.
There’s a better solution, according to a 2015 report by Verco and Cambridge Econometrics[ii]: making this country’s homes highly energy efficient would reduce gas imports by 26%. Given that, according to Government statistics, in 2021 LNG made up 29% of our gas imports[iii], simply insulating homes would pretty much eliminate the need for any LNG imports. So if the question is “What’s the best way to address climate change?”, fracking is not the answer.
[i] 89490 SGUK Low Carbon Transition.pdf (http://www.ukuh.org/media/sites/researchwebsites/2ukuh/89490%20SGUK%20Low%20Carbon%20Transition.pdf)
[ii] Energy efficiency a ‘win-win’ for Chancellor’s Spending Review (https://www.endfuelpoverty.org.uk/energy-efficiency-a-win-win-for-chancellors-spending-review/)
[iii] Digest of UK Energy Statistics (DUKES): natural gas – GOV.UK (https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/natural-gas-chapter-4-digest-of-united-kingdom-energy-statistics-dukes)