Literature DB >> 21846117

Uncertainty in life cycle greenhouse gas emissions from United States natural gas end-uses and its effects on policy.

Aranya Venkatesh1, Paulina Jaramillo, W Michael Griffin, H Scott Matthews.   

Abstract

Increasing concerns about greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in the United States have spurred interest in alternate low carbon fuel sources, such as natural gas. Life cycle assessment (LCA) methods can be used to estimate potential emissions reductions through the use of such fuels. Some recent policies have used the results of LCAs to encourage the use of low carbon fuels to meet future energy demands in the U.S., without, however, acknowledging and addressing the uncertainty and variability prevalent in LCA. Natural gas is a particularly interesting fuel since it can be used to meet various energy demands, for example, as a transportation fuel or in power generation. Estimating the magnitudes and likelihoods of achieving emissions reductions from competing end-uses of natural gas using LCA offers one way to examine optimal strategies of natural gas resource allocation, given that its availability is likely to be limited in the future. In this study, the uncertainty in life cycle GHG emissions of natural gas (domestic and imported) consumed in the U.S. was estimated using probabilistic modeling methods. Monte Carlo simulations are performed to obtain sample distributions representing life cycle GHG emissions from the use of 1 MJ of domestic natural gas and imported LNG. Life cycle GHG emissions per energy unit of average natural gas consumed in the U.S were found to range between -8 and 9% of the mean value of 66 g CO(2)e/MJ. The probabilities of achieving emissions reductions by using natural gas for transportation and power generation, as a substitute for incumbent fuels such as gasoline, diesel, and coal were estimated. The use of natural gas for power generation instead of coal was found to have the highest and most likely emissions reductions (almost a 100% probability of achieving reductions of 60 g CO(2)e/MJ of natural gas used), while there is a 10-35% probability of the emissions from natural gas being higher than the incumbent if it were used as a transportation fuel. This likelihood of an increase in GHG emissions is indicative of the potential failure of a climate policy targeting reductions in GHG emissions.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21846117     DOI: 10.1021/es200930h

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Environ Sci Technol        ISSN: 0013-936X            Impact factor:   9.028


  9 in total

1.  Greater focus needed on methane leakage from natural gas infrastructure.

Authors:  Ramón A Alvarez; Stephen W Pacala; James J Winebrake; William L Chameides; Steven P Hamburg
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2012-04-09       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  Role of natural gas in meeting an electric sector emissions reduction strategy and effects on greenhouse gas emissions.

Authors:  Carol Lenox; P Ozge Kaplan
Journal:  Energy Econ       Date:  2016

3.  Estimates of carbon dioxide emissions based on incomplete condition information: a case study of liquefied natural gas in China.

Authors:  Lingyue Li; Jing Yang; Yan Cao; Jinhu Wu
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2019-02-04       Impact factor: 4.223

4.  Harmonization of initial estimates of shale gas life cycle greenhouse gas emissions for electric power generation.

Authors:  Garvin A Heath; Patrick O'Donoughue; Douglas J Arent; Morgan Bazilian
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2014-07-21       Impact factor: 11.205

5.  Toward a better understanding and quantification of methane emissions from shale gas development.

Authors:  Dana R Caulton; Paul B Shepson; Renee L Santoro; Jed P Sparks; Robert W Howarth; Anthony R Ingraffea; Maria O L Cambaliza; Colm Sweeney; Anna Karion; Kenneth J Davis; Brian H Stirm; Stephen A Montzka; Ben R Miller
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2014-04-14       Impact factor: 11.205

6.  Limited impact on decadal-scale climate change from increased use of natural gas.

Authors:  Haewon McJeon; Jae Edmonds; Nico Bauer; Leon Clarke; Brian Fisher; Brian P Flannery; Jérôme Hilaire; Volker Krey; Giacomo Marangoni; Raymond Mi; Keywan Riahi; Holger Rogner; Massimo Tavoni
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2014-10-15       Impact factor: 49.962

7.  Life cycle water consumption and wastewater generation impacts of a Marcellus shale gas well.

Authors:  Mohan Jiang; Chris T Hendrickson; Jeanne M VanBriesen
Journal:  Environ Sci Technol       Date:  2014-01-10       Impact factor: 9.028

8.  Cumulative environmental and employment impacts of the shale gas boom.

Authors:  Erin N Mayfield; Jared L Cohon; Nicholas Z Muller; Inês M L Azevedo; Allen L Robinson
Journal:  Nat Sustain       Date:  2019

9.  Design and Use of a Full Flow Sampling System (FFS) for the Quantification of Methane Emissions.

Authors:  Derek R Johnson; April N Covington; Nigel N Clark
Journal:  J Vis Exp       Date:  2016-06-12       Impact factor: 1.355

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.