Gas Heat And Stoves Are Warming The Climate


Last week, seven European countries pledged to lớn stop important support for fossil-fuel projects abroad. They join the United States & other European countries in stopping funding for energy infrastructure projects in poor countries that depover on coal, gas và oil. This blanket ban will entrench poverty in regions such as sub-Saharan Africa, but vì little to reduce the world’s carbon emissions.

Bạn đang xem: Gas heat and stoves are warming the climate

Africa accounts for around 17% of the world’s people but less than 4% of annual global carbon emissions. It is not fair for rich countries lớn fight climate change at the cost of low-income countries’ development và climate resilience. Instead, rich countries should help African governments to lớn pursue a broad portfolio of energy sources for rapid, sustainable development.

The fossil-fuel infrastructure that already exists in Africa is carbon-intensive and serves its wealthiest countries. South Africa and several North African countries together hold two-thirds of the continent’s electricity-generation capađô thị. The other 48 countries have a capacity of only 81 gigawatts between them, out of a total of 244 gigawatts across Africa và 9,740 gigawatts for the world. The average Ethiopian consumes only 130 kilowatt-hours of electriđô thị per year, about the amount the average person in the United States consumes in 4 days.

This imbalance is both a cause và a consequence of Africa’s laông xã of modern infrastructure. For hundreds of millions of people across Africa, energy is scarce, food is expensive và often imported, and full-time employment is hard to lớn find. Much of what is necessary for development — roads, schools, housing, reliable power — cannot be realized quickly with green power alone.

Can the world kichồng its fossil-fuel addiction fast enough?

Natural gas is a fossil fuel, but it could vì chưng much lớn lift communities out of poverty efficiently. It is roughly twice as carbon-efficient an energy source as coal, & is abundant in many African countries outside North Africa, including Nigeria, Mozambique, Angola & the Democratic Republic of the Congo. The Energy for Growth Hub, an international retìm kiếm network, estimates that if the 48 countries tripled their electricity consumption overnight through use of natural gas, the resulting carbon emissions would be less than 1% of the global total (see

Xem thêm: Tổng Thu Nhập 30 Triệu 1 Tháng, Mua Nhà Giá Bao Nhiêu Để Không Sa "Lầy" Nợ Nần?

Natural gas also offers the best way lớn modernize food production and transport. Despite impressive sầu efforts in solar irrigation systems across Africa, natural gas is still better for large-scale agriculture; it is reliable, inexpensive và burns more cleanly than other fossil fuels. It can be stored until needed. It is one of the best feedstocks for producing synthetic fertilizer; it can power cars, buses, trucks & ships, plus cold-storage systems. That means less food will spoil, và farmers can supply more food with less l&.

A blanket ban on fossil fuels will do little to lớn propel growth of renewable energies across Africa: that growth is already under way. The electrithành phố for Ethiopia, Kenya, Malawi, Mali, Mozambique & Ugandomain authority — which together represent one-fifth of Africa’s population — comes mainly from renewable resources lượt thích hydroelectric power. Moreover, fossil-fuel development can be used as renewable sources are built up, laying the groundwork for more ambitious projects. A 20đôi mươi PhD thesis (see found that ‘dispatchable’ gas-fuelled generators that are movable would be essential for South Africa to transition to renewable electriđô thị, because wind và solar sources would be too variable as they were scaled up. And there is risk in scaling up too fast — the intermittent supply from a large wind farm in Kenya has made the electrical grid costly to operate.

The United States can help the IMF to lớn rethink how it lends

Critics will counter that those with interests in fossil fuels will attempt lớn squeeze out renewable sources, and that governments might be captured by fossil-fuel lobbies. I underst& these concerns, but, speaking as an advocate for sustainability, I believe fossil fuels are still necessary. International finance institutions must prioritize funding for renewable-energy projects whenever possible, and rich countries must invest in retìm kiếm và development that will bring down the costs of renewable energy. They must also not discount the plight of poverty. (Almost 600 million Africans lachồng reliable access lớn electricity.) As natural disasters & other climate risks become more common, people’s need for roads, hospitals, resilient power grids, warning systems, robust food supplies & other infrastructure that requires reliable energy will be even greater.

Rather than banning fossil fuels in development projects, the European Union, United States and World Bank should adopt funding criteria that consider economic growth alongside climate impact. For example, the exploitation of a substantial resource of 4.2 trillion cubic metres of natural gas along the Tanzania–Mozambique border would expvà access to lớn electrithành phố and generate much-needed revenue in two low-income, low-emitting countries. I can imagine a tiered system in which countries with lower per-capita incomes, low emissions or high use of green energy are deemed more eligible for development projects that depover on fossil fuels. Any infrastructure that is built should be modern & well maintained, to reduce waste caused by leaks and the need khổng lồ flare methane gas.

Most of the legacy emissions causing global warming came from rich countries, which still rely on fossil fuels. It would be the height of climate injustice to lớn impose restrictions on the nations most in need of modern infrastructure và least responsible for the world’s climate challenges.