{"title":"美国出口液化天然气(LNG)的温室气体足迹","authors":"Robert W. Howarth","doi":"10.1002/ese3.1934","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports from the United States have risen dramatically since the LNG-export ban was lifted in 2016, and the United States is now the world's largest exporter. This LNG is produced largely from shale gas. Production of shale gas, as well as liquefaction to make LNG and LNG transport by tanker, is energy-intensive, which contributes significantly to the LNG greenhouse gas footprint. The production and transport of shale gas emits a substantial amount of methane as well, and liquefaction and tanker transport of LNG can further increase methane emissions. Consequently, carbon dioxide (CO<sub>2</sub>) from end-use combustion of LNG contributes only 34% of the total LNG greenhouse gas footprint, when CO<sub>2</sub> and methane are compared over 20 years global warming potential (GWP<sub>20</sub>) following emission. Upstream and midstream methane emissions are the largest contributors to the LNG footprint (38% of total LNG emissions, based on GWP<sub>20</sub>). Adding CO<sub>2</sub> emissions from the energy used to produce LNG, total upstream and midstream emissions make up on average 47% of the total greenhouse gas footprint of LNG. Other significant emissions are the liquefaction process (8.8% of the total, on average, using GWP<sub>20</sub>) and tanker transport (5.5% of the total, on average, using GWP<sub>20</sub>). Emissions from tankers vary from 3.9% to 8.1% depending upon the type of tanker. Surprisingly, the most modern tankers propelled by two- and four-stroke engines have higher total greenhouse gas emissions than steam-powered tankers, despite their greater fuel efficiency and lower CO<sub>2</sub> emissions, due to methane slippage in their exhaust. Overall, the greenhouse gas footprint for LNG as a fuel source is 33% greater than that for coal when analyzed using GWP<sub>20</sub> (160 g CO<sub>2</sub>-equivalent/MJ vs. 120 g CO<sub>2</sub>-equivalent/MJ). Even considered on the time frame of 100 years after emission (GWP<sub>100</sub>), which severely understates the climatic damage of methane, the LNG footprint equals or exceeds that of coal.</p>","PeriodicalId":11673,"journal":{"name":"Energy Science & Engineering","volume":"12 11","pages":"4843-4859"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/ese3.1934","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The greenhouse gas footprint of liquefied natural gas (LNG) exported from the United States\",\"authors\":\"Robert W. Howarth\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/ese3.1934\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports from the United States have risen dramatically since the LNG-export ban was lifted in 2016, and the United States is now the world's largest exporter. This LNG is produced largely from shale gas. Production of shale gas, as well as liquefaction to make LNG and LNG transport by tanker, is energy-intensive, which contributes significantly to the LNG greenhouse gas footprint. The production and transport of shale gas emits a substantial amount of methane as well, and liquefaction and tanker transport of LNG can further increase methane emissions. Consequently, carbon dioxide (CO<sub>2</sub>) from end-use combustion of LNG contributes only 34% of the total LNG greenhouse gas footprint, when CO<sub>2</sub> and methane are compared over 20 years global warming potential (GWP<sub>20</sub>) following emission. Upstream and midstream methane emissions are the largest contributors to the LNG footprint (38% of total LNG emissions, based on GWP<sub>20</sub>). Adding CO<sub>2</sub> emissions from the energy used to produce LNG, total upstream and midstream emissions make up on average 47% of the total greenhouse gas footprint of LNG. Other significant emissions are the liquefaction process (8.8% of the total, on average, using GWP<sub>20</sub>) and tanker transport (5.5% of the total, on average, using GWP<sub>20</sub>). Emissions from tankers vary from 3.9% to 8.1% depending upon the type of tanker. Surprisingly, the most modern tankers propelled by two- and four-stroke engines have higher total greenhouse gas emissions than steam-powered tankers, despite their greater fuel efficiency and lower CO<sub>2</sub> emissions, due to methane slippage in their exhaust. Overall, the greenhouse gas footprint for LNG as a fuel source is 33% greater than that for coal when analyzed using GWP<sub>20</sub> (160 g CO<sub>2</sub>-equivalent/MJ vs. 120 g CO<sub>2</sub>-equivalent/MJ). Even considered on the time frame of 100 years after emission (GWP<sub>100</sub>), which severely understates the climatic damage of methane, the LNG footprint equals or exceeds that of coal.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11673,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Energy Science & Engineering\",\"volume\":\"12 11\",\"pages\":\"4843-4859\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/ese3.1934\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Energy Science & Engineering\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ese3.1934\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ENERGY & FUELS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Energy Science & Engineering","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ese3.1934","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENERGY & FUELS","Score":null,"Total":0}
The greenhouse gas footprint of liquefied natural gas (LNG) exported from the United States
Liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports from the United States have risen dramatically since the LNG-export ban was lifted in 2016, and the United States is now the world's largest exporter. This LNG is produced largely from shale gas. Production of shale gas, as well as liquefaction to make LNG and LNG transport by tanker, is energy-intensive, which contributes significantly to the LNG greenhouse gas footprint. The production and transport of shale gas emits a substantial amount of methane as well, and liquefaction and tanker transport of LNG can further increase methane emissions. Consequently, carbon dioxide (CO2) from end-use combustion of LNG contributes only 34% of the total LNG greenhouse gas footprint, when CO2 and methane are compared over 20 years global warming potential (GWP20) following emission. Upstream and midstream methane emissions are the largest contributors to the LNG footprint (38% of total LNG emissions, based on GWP20). Adding CO2 emissions from the energy used to produce LNG, total upstream and midstream emissions make up on average 47% of the total greenhouse gas footprint of LNG. Other significant emissions are the liquefaction process (8.8% of the total, on average, using GWP20) and tanker transport (5.5% of the total, on average, using GWP20). Emissions from tankers vary from 3.9% to 8.1% depending upon the type of tanker. Surprisingly, the most modern tankers propelled by two- and four-stroke engines have higher total greenhouse gas emissions than steam-powered tankers, despite their greater fuel efficiency and lower CO2 emissions, due to methane slippage in their exhaust. Overall, the greenhouse gas footprint for LNG as a fuel source is 33% greater than that for coal when analyzed using GWP20 (160 g CO2-equivalent/MJ vs. 120 g CO2-equivalent/MJ). Even considered on the time frame of 100 years after emission (GWP100), which severely understates the climatic damage of methane, the LNG footprint equals or exceeds that of coal.
期刊介绍:
Energy Science & Engineering is a peer reviewed, open access journal dedicated to fundamental and applied research on energy and supply and use. Published as a co-operative venture of Wiley and SCI (Society of Chemical Industry), the journal offers authors a fast route to publication and the ability to share their research with the widest possible audience of scientists, professionals and other interested people across the globe. Securing an affordable and low carbon energy supply is a critical challenge of the 21st century and the solutions will require collaboration between scientists and engineers worldwide. This new journal aims to facilitate collaboration and spark innovation in energy research and development. Due to the importance of this topic to society and economic development the journal will give priority to quality research papers that are accessible to a broad readership and discuss sustainable, state-of-the art approaches to shaping the future of energy. This multidisciplinary journal will appeal to all researchers and professionals working in any area of energy in academia, industry or government, including scientists, engineers, consultants, policy-makers, government officials, economists and corporate organisations.