As the global climate crisis intensifies while the production of gas soars, it is clearer than ever that gas must be phased out together with coal and oil. In contrast to industry claims that gas can be a bridge fuel in the clean energy transition, our analysis consistently shows that gas is NOT clean, cheap, or necessary.
Below are a collection of resources on gas that include reports, blogs, and action opportunities.
WHY WE WORK ON GAS
Since 2000, global gas production has grown over 50%. The expansion of fracking in the United States has played a leading role in this growth, with U.S. production growing over 60%. The U.S. fracked gas boom has left a trail of destruction in its wake, with pipelines, compressor stations, storage terminals, LNG export terminals, and sand mining pits adding to the thousands of wells that scar the landscape, and threaten communities and climate.
With global gas production estimated to grow a further 20 to 40 percent within the next two decades, the fossil fuel industry pedals a myth that somehow this massive expansion of fossil gas and associated infrastructure is helping to solve the climate crisis. We work to debunk this “bridge fuel” myth with our analysis, reporting, and advocacy.
This report makes the case that gas is not a ‘bridge fuel’ to a safe climate. As the global climate crisis intensifies and gas production and consumption soars, it is clearer than ever that gas is not a climate solution.
At precisely the time in which the world must begin rapidly decarbonizing to avoid runaway climate disaster, the United States is moving further and faster than any other country to expand oil and gas extraction.
Ireland is on course to miss both its short-term climate commitments within EU legislation. Expanded gas extraction will only make it more difficult to achieve these goals, and must be avoided in order to achieve a safe climate future.
This report focuses on fossil gas development in the G20 and debunking the myth of fossil gas as a clean transition fuel.
This report examines how a new wave of gas pipeline construction threatens to shunt serious risks and costs on to utility ratepayers.
This report scientifically grounds the growing movement to keep carbon in the ground by revealing the need to stop all new fossil fuel infrastructure and industry expansion.
This report shows that current projections for U.S. natural gas production – fueled by a boom in the Appalachian Basin – will lock in enough carbon to bust through agreed climate goals.
The ACP is facing a triple threat of challenges that combine to present serious obstacles for the project to reach completion. It would be prudent for investors to question whether pursuing the project further is a wise use of capital.
Diminishing consumer demand coupled with more affordable renewables are casting doubt on the overall feasibility and potential profitability of the Atlantic Coast Pipeline.
The proposed Jordan Cove LNG export terminal and Pacific Connector pipeline would be a substantial source of climate pollution for decades to come.
We find that the Rover Pipeline would lead to annual emissions of nearly 145 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent.
This analysis examines the banks that are in line to finance the Mountain Valley Pipeline, a 301-mile, $3.5 billion fracked-gas project.
This analysis finds that the PennEast Pipeline would result in the emissions equivalent the 14 coal plants, or 10 million passenger vehicles.
This analysis finds that the Atlantic Coast Pipeline would cause the emissions equivalent of 20 coal plants, or 14 million passenger vehicles.
This analysis finds that the Mountain Valley Pipeline would cause the emissions equivalent of 26 coal plants, or 19 million passenger vehicles.
LATEST GAS POSTS
"Every year there’s a new temperature record, it’s getting worse and worse and you feel like a broken record saying it. This should be the number one urgent conversation happening right now because it’s not just going to be Alaska, it’s going to be other communities all over the US"
A document from the early nineties reveals that Mobil was worried about climate change and secondly it was already funding groups with the intention of obfuscating the debate.
Over the past decade, nearly 90% of the U.S. Export-Import Bank's total finance for energy projects has flowed to projects in oil, gas, and coal. As momentum grows for climate solutions in the U.S. and abroad, there is an urgent need for a ban on fossil fuel financing at ExIm.
A new analysis released today highlights how European Investment Bank (EIB) financing of fossil fuel projects – in particular gas pipelines and LNG terminals – is not compatible with EU climate commitments or the aims of the Paris Agreement.