LNG Worse for Climate Than Coal, Cornell Study Finds

Oct. 4, 2024

New research reveals that LNG exports from the U.S. have a greater greenhouse gas footprint than coal, challenging claims of LNG being a “bridge fuel.”

A new study from Cornell University has delivered a stark warning about the climate impact of liquefied natural gas (LNG). Contrary to claims by the fossil fuel industry that LNG is a cleaner “bridge fuel” to a renewable future, the study reveals that the greenhouse gas emissions from LNG are even worse than coal. This discovery has sparked fresh calls for the Biden administration to reconsider its policies on LNG exports and take stronger action on climate change.

The study, conducted by Cornell scientist Robert Howarth, provides a detailed analysis of the greenhouse gas footprint of LNG produced and exported from the United States. The results are alarming: the climate impact of LNG, when measured over a 20-year global warming potential, is 33% higher than coal. Even over a 100-year time frame, which tends to downplay the immediate effects of certain emissions like methane, LNG’s footprint equals or exceeds that of coal.

LNG’s massive climate footprint

Howarth’s research highlights the significant environmental cost of LNG. Methane, the primary component of natural gas, is more than 80 times more potent than carbon dioxide in the atmosphere over a 20-year period. This makes methane leaks, which are prevalent throughout the process of LNG extraction, liquefaction, transportation, and storage, a critical factor in LNG’s outsized greenhouse gas footprint.

“The emissions of methane and carbon dioxide released during LNG’s extraction, processing, transportation, and storage account for approximately half of its total greenhouse gas footprint,” Howarth explained in the study. This means that even as LNG is promoted as a cleaner energy source, the reality is that methane leaks from extraction and transport make it one of the most damaging fossil fuels.

To convert natural gas into LNG, the gas must be supercooled to -260 degrees Fahrenheit, a process that requires massive amounts of energy. After this, the LNG is transported on ships, many of which burn LNG as fuel, releasing more methane into the atmosphere. According to Howarth, “Almost all the methane emissions occur upstream when you’re extracting the shale gas and liquefying it. This is all magnified just to get the liquefied natural gas to market.”

Despite advances in shipping technology, even modern tankers with more fuel-efficient engines leak methane. This leakage further increases LNG’s environmental toll. “Regardless of better fuel efficiency and lower carbon dioxide emissions, methane still escapes in the tanker’s exhaust,” Howarth notes.

The myth of LNG as a “bridge fuel”

The findings of this study strike at the heart of the narrative that LNG can serve as a “bridge fuel” to renewable energy. For years, LNG has been marketed as a cleaner alternative to coal and oil, providing a way to transition toward a low-carbon economy. But the data shows otherwise.

Howarth’s study is a clear rebuttal to this argument. His analysis shows that LNG not only fails to offer a significant climate advantage over coal, but it also poses its own unique risks. As the study points out, “Liquefied natural gas will always have a bigger climate footprint than the natural gas, no matter what the assumptions of being a bridge fuel are. It still ends up substantially worse than coal.”

These findings have significant implications for U.S. energy policy, especially given that the U.S. became the world’s largest LNG exporter after lifting its LNG-export ban in 2016. The vast majority of LNG produced in the U.S. comes from shale gas, which is extracted through hydraulic fracturing (fracking), a process known for its environmental harms, including methane leaks.

Calls for policy reform and industry accountability

In the wake of the study, climate advocates have renewed calls for the Biden administration to take decisive action. Jamie Henn, the executive director of Fossil Free Media, stated, “This should be the final nail in the coffin for the false narrative that LNG is somehow a climate solution. Approving more LNG exports is clearly incompatible with the public interest.”

Henn’s call is part of a broader movement urging the Biden administration to make its temporary pause on LNG export approvals permanent. With the climate crisis escalating, advocates argue that continued investment in LNG infrastructure is economically and environmentally unsustainable.

Jason Rylander, legal director for the Center for Biological Diversity’s Climate Law Institute, echoed these concerns. “LNG is not a bridge fuel to clean energy. It’s a highway to climate hell,” Rylander said, emphasizing that the expansion of LNG infrastructure would lock the U.S. into decades of high-emission energy.

Howarth’s findings are particularly timely as the Biden administration faces pressure to accelerate the transition to clean energy. In light of the study, environmental groups are pushing the administration to prioritize renewable energy investments over LNG and other fossil fuels.

Global implications and the way forward

The implications of the Cornell study go beyond U.S. borders. As the world’s largest LNG exporter, U.S. policies on LNG have a global impact. With methane being a significant contributor to short-term global warming, LNG exports could undermine global efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and meet climate goals.

Alex Walker, climate finance program manager at Environmental Defense, pointed out that “LNG is not a bridge fuel.” He and other climate advocates stress that the future of energy must rely on truly clean alternatives, such as wind, solar, and energy efficiency measures, rather than fossil fuel-based solutions that exacerbate climate change.

“Liquefied natural gas will always have a bigger climate footprint than natural gas or coal,” Howarth concludes. “We must urgently move away from LNG and focus on renewable energy solutions to truly address the climate crisis.”

[Top photo: Image Credit: AA+W/stock.adobe.com]