Does Shale Gas have a role in Annex 1
climate change commitments?
Prof Kevin Anderson and Dr John Broderick
Tyndall Manchester
www.tyndall.manchester.ac.uk
[email protected]
Key Point
Natural Gas (inc. shale gas) is not a low carbon fuel
Context

The international energy agency’s (IEA) view on climate change

on track for a 3.5°C rise by 2040 (i.e. 4.2°C relative to preindustrial)

“When I look at this data, the trend is perfectly in line with a
temperature increase of 6 degrees Celsius, which would have
devastating consequences for the planet.”

“we have 5 years to change the energy system –
or have it changed”
Fatih Birol - IEA chief economist
UNFCCC
 “stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in the
atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous
anthropogenic interference with the climate system”
Article 2
What is dangerous?
 ‘To hold the increase in global temperature below 2
degrees Celsius, and take action to meet this objective
consistent with science and on the basis of equity’
» Copenhagen Accord (2009/10), Cancun Agreement (2010/11)
 ‘… must ensure global average temperature increases do
not exceed preindustrial levels by more than 2°C’
» European Commission’s annual communication (2009)
What is mitigation challenge?
 To hold cumulative emissions of CO2 in the atmosphere at
levels that provide a high probability (90%-99%) of staying
below a 2°C rise in global surface temperature
What emissions pathways fits with 2°C?
 In 2012 it is too late for a high probability of staying below 2°C
i.e. already blown the budget for our existing commitments
 So lets take an outside chance (<50:50) chance of ‘avoiding dangerous CC’
 With significant reductions in deforestation & halving food-related emissions
 What is left for emissions from energy?
i.e. the pathway for 50:50 chance of avoiding dangerous climate change
… for energy emissions?
(with 2020 peak & a high probability of exceeding 2°C)
50
GtCO2yr-1
40
30
Increasing probability
of exceeding 2°C
20
10
0
2000
2010
2020
2030
2030
Year
2040
2050
2050
… and for energy emissions?
(with 2020 peak & a high probability of exceeding 2°C)
50
GtCO2yr-1
40
30
10-20% annual reductions
20
Globally:
no emission
10
space for coal, gas, or
shale – even with CCS!
0
2000
2010
2020
2030
2030
Year
2040
2050
2050
… and for Annex 1 nations (~OECD)?
 40%
 70%
 90+%
reduction by
reduction by
reduction by
2015
2020
2030
Why such different conclusions?
Context
 Take science-based view of 2°C (i.e. cumulative emissions not 2050 targets)
 ‘Fair’ division of emissions between Annex 1 & non-Annex 1
 Explicit account of global deforestation and food emissions
NB: decarbonising power sector is not the same as “avoiding dangerous climate change”
Impact
 Timeframe of transition to low/zero carbon energy system significantly reduced
 Gas not compatible with such a science-based timeframe
 Gas with CCS only compatible with very high capture (over 95%)
NB: research priorities should be genuinely low or zero carbon energy technologies
For unconventional gas
Non-Annex 1
Part of rapid carbon intensity reduction if upstream emissions are managed
… but must lock out other fossil fuel infrastructures & enable CCS
Annex 1
Incompatible with even weak version of 2°C commitments
- inc. with CCS
» Rapid reduction in energy demand; and
» increase in very low/zero energy supply necessary