Home » Opinion » Foreign Views
Shale gas is greener and makes economic sense
Print Edition
Editor’s note:
This article raises a cost-benefit issue: Should we abandon the development of wind power simply because it’s costly? Should we develop shale gas simply because it’s less costly? You are welcome to share your views.
IN late June, the British Geological Survey announced the world’s largest shale-gas field. The Bowland Shale, which lies beneath Lancashire and Yorkshire, contains 50 percent more gas than the combined reserves of two of the largest fields in the United States, the Barnett Shale and the Marcellus Shale.
The United Kingdom has been reluctant to join the hydraulic-fracturing (or fracking) revolution. Yet tapping the Bowland Shale could reignite the UK economy and deliver huge cuts in CO2 emissions.
At the same time, the UK Parliament has approved stringent new measures to reduce carbon emissions by 2020, with the biggest CO2 cuts by far to come from an increase of more than 800 percent in offshore wind power over the next seven years.
But offshore wind power is so expensive that it will receive at least three times the traded cost of regular electricity in subsidies — more than even solar power, which was never at an advantage in the UK. For minimal CO2 reduction, the UK economy will pay dearly.
This is just one example of current climate policy’s utter remove from reality — and not just in the UK. We are focusing on insignificant — but very costly — green policies that make us feel good, while ignoring or discouraging policies that would dramatically reduce emissions and make economic sense.
Consider the three standard arguments for a green economy: climate change, energy security, and jobs. Fracking does better on all three.
Assuming complete success for the UK’s scheme, offshore wind power could produce more than 10 percent of the country’s electricity in 2020 and reduce its CO2 emissions by up to 22Mt, or 5 percent, per year. But the cost would also be phenomenal. The UK would pay at least US$8 billion annually in subsidies to support this inherently inefficient technology.
Compare this to the opportunity of the Bowland Shale. If, by 2020, the UK could exploit its reserves there at just one-third the intensity of the exploitation of the Barnett and Marcellus Shales today, the outcome would be phenomenal.
Natural gas is much more environmentally friendly than coal, which continues to be the mainstay of electricity production around the world and in the UK.
If the UK sold its shale gas both domestically and abroad to replace coal, it could reduce local air pollution significantly and reduce global carbon emissions by 170Mt, or more than a third of UK carbon emissions. At the same time, instead of costing US$8 billion per year, shale-gas production would add about US$10 billion per year to the UK economy.
Likewise, it is often argued that the green economy will increase energy security, as green resources will leave countries less dependent on fossil-fuel imports.
But even much higher supplies of wind power would improve security only marginally, because the UK would still have to import just as much oil (wind replaces mostly coal, rarely oil) and much of its gas, leaving it dependent on Russia.
And yet the UK could improve its energy security, because it has enough gas reserves to cover roughly the entirety of its gas consumption for a half-century or more.
Finally, green-economy advocates promise a surfeit of green jobs. But economic research shows that while subsidies can buy extra jobs, they have to be financed with increased taxes, costing jobs elsewhere.
Shale gas in the US has created an estimated 600,000 jobs that are generating about US$100 billion in added GDP and almost US$20 billion in public revenue.
Bjorn Lomborg directs the Copenhagen Consensus Center. Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2013.www.project-syndicate.org. Shanghai Daily condensed the article.
- About Us
- |
- Terms of Use
- |
-
RSS - |
- Privacy Policy
- |
- Contact Us
- |
- Shanghai Call Center: 962288
- |
- Tip-off hotline: 52920043
- 沪ICP证：沪ICP备05050403号-1
- |
- 互联网新闻信息服务许可证：31120180004
- |
- 网络视听许可证：0909346
- |
- 广播电视节目制作许可证：沪字第354号
- |
- 增值电信业务经营许可证：沪B2-20120012
Copyright © 1999- Shanghai Daily. All rights reserved.Preferably viewed with Internet Explorer 8 or newer browsers.
