During the last decade, fossil gas was cheap, in part because of the tight gas boom in the US.
For this reason, and to reduce GHG emissions (burning gas emits less GHG than burning coal), gas has been promoted in most 🇪🇺 countries, especially for electricity generation.
1/5
For this reason, and to reduce GHG emissions (burning gas emits less GHG than burning coal), gas has been promoted in most 🇪🇺 countries, especially for electricity generation.
1/5
This promotion of fossil gas presents two problems:
- First, the use of fossil gas is not compatible with our climate commitments. While it emits slightly less GHG than #coal (the extent of which depends on the origin of the gas), it is far from being a low-carbon energy;
2/5
- First, the use of fossil gas is not compatible with our climate commitments. While it emits slightly less GHG than #coal (the extent of which depends on the origin of the gas), it is far from being a low-carbon energy;
2/5
- Europe's dependence on fossil gas constitutes a vulnerability in terms of security of supply: 🇪🇺 extractions have been declining for the last twenty years, making us structurally increasingly dependent on Russia and LNG imports.
3/5
3/5
And regarding LNG imports, Europe is in competition with other importers, notably China and emerging countries where demand is growing rapidly.
4/5
4/5
For the #climate as well as for the security of energy supply, European countries should quickly re-evaluate their energy strategies and stop seeing fossil gas as a cheap and abundant source of energy that they can rely on over the long term.
5/5
5/5
Source of the chart: Energy Charts, energy-charts.info/charts/energy/…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
