The military aggression of the Russian Federation, which it launched in Ukraine, put an end to the climate policy that the world knew before.
This statement was made on June 5 in an American magazine Foreign Policy.
Against this background, in Germany, Austria and the Netherlands, the return of coal-fired power plants has begun to develop rapidly.
The catalyst is the fact that Russia claims that it is allegedly difficult to maintain a stable gas flow due to EU sanctions, which hinder proper maintenance and supply of spare parts.
At the same time, for assertion Colorado, a US environmental think tank based in Colorado, says Russian gas is more harmful to the environment than LNG in the United States or Qatar.
This statement repeated the opinion of another think tank, which previously said that depending on the amplitude of methane leaks, US LNG delivered to Europe was probably as harmful as US coal delivered to the same location. These considerations stem from approaches to life cycle assessment and the recent deployment of satellites, which allows us to directly measure methane leaks along the natural gas and LNG supply chain.
It is noted that the effective combination of these contributions blurs the relative benefits of natural gas, LNG or coal when it comes to the carbon footprint. Methane leakage options, such as geology or specific assets, do not allow for simplistic conclusions, such as that "coal is worse than natural gas".
So this indicates that Russian gas and coal are less environmentally friendly than American coal and LNG.
Before EcoPolitics reported that The European Commission has allowed to increase the use of coal 5% and nuclear energy over the next 5-10 years against the background of the abandonment of Russian gas and oil.
It will also be recalled that the European Commission presented on May 18 in Brussels plan for the transition to renewable energy sources and denials of energy resources from the Russian Federation.
