With their massive profits on the line, the gas industry has been spreading dodgy claims about ‘green’ or ‘renewable gas’. Here's why their claims don’t stack up.
The gas that gets pumped into homes across Victoria is mostly made up of methane — it’s expensive, it’s a powerful greenhouse gas (with over 80 times the warming power of carbon dioxide), and it’s harmful to our health when burnt indoors.
In Victoria it’s an especially large problem. Because we burn far more methane gas than any other state it is responsible for 17% of our climate pollution, and it’s only getting more expensive as supplies in the Bass Strait run out.
As awareness of these issues grows, households and small business (which represent a whopping 50% of our gas consumption) are starting to switch to new and efficient electric appliances.
But with their profits on the line, the gas industry is trying to convince Victorians to stick with their old gas appliances with misleading advertising about ‘green’ or ‘renewable’ alternatives like biomethane or hydrogen.
Often these misleading ads promote experiments where they have blended tiny amounts of these alternatives into the gas network, creating a false impression that they can scale it up and make the gas network less polluting. Sadly, this lacks any real credibility.
The gas industry has been repeatedly caught spreading misleading sustainability claims.
So let’s look at the details these gas corporations don’t want you to know …
Hydrogen is a gas that can be produced by splitting water molecules. This process is called electrolysis and can be powered by renewable energy. In many applications, such as fuel cells, using hydrogen only produces water and oxygen as byproducts.
Great! But unfortunately, the idea of using hydrogen to replace methane in the gas network is not just unlikely, it’s a complete fantasy.
Here’s why …
Hydrogen is only clean when used in applications like fuel cells. When it is burnt, hydrogen produces even more toxic nitrogen oxides (NOx) than methane. [1] These pollutants damage the lungs and increase the risk and severity of respiratory infections and asthma.
Hydrogen is far too expensive for household use, and even under the most generous assumptions it will only become cost-competitive after 2045. Meanwhile electric alternatives are cheaper and less polluting to run right now. [2]
A valuable resource like hydrogen should be used where there are no other alternatives – such as shipping and steel production. Using it for things like home heating — where there are cheaper and more efficient alternatives — makes no sense.
Traditional gas appliances would not be safe to use with hydrogen, so gas companies would need to coordinate the replacement or alteration of every single appliance in an area before increasing the amount of hydrogen above 5% ... Householders and businesses would foot the bill for this, and any missed appliances could cause an explosion.
Hydrogen is a smaller molecule than methane so it’s more prone to escaping via leaks, A UK lab tested the use of hydrogen blended gas in best-selling cooktops and water heaters and all suffered major leaks when hydrogen was added to the mix. [3]
Hydrogen can leak more easily than methane and increase the risk of explosions. It also reacts with steel and causes ‘embrittlement’.[4] So to blend any more than about 5% hydrogen the entire gas network would need a massive upgrade. Households and businesses would have to pay for this through their bills and, perversely, the owners of the gas network would make larger profits – which is why they love the idea so much.
You can learn more about why hydrogen is not a viable alternative for the gas network in these fantastic articles by Forbes and RenewEconomy.
Unlike our existing gas supply which is sucked out of the ocean floor and fracked from underneath farmland, bio-methane is produced by placing organic materials (like agricultural waste) in large ‘digester’ facilities where it is broken down by bacteria.
Considered on its own, bio-methane production is a renewable process. But the idea that we could use this at a large scale in the existing gas network suffers from three fatal flaws:
Most credible estimates say biomethane could only replace a small fraction (less than 10%) of our existing gas needs. [5]
Bio-methane is relatively expensive to produce. In Europe, where there is a much larger biomethane industry, the cost is around two to three times higher than Victoria’s current wholesale gas price. [6]
Just like conventional methane, burning biomethane in your home would release harmful pollutants like nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and carbon monoxide (CO) that can exacerbate respiratory illnesses and contribute to childhood asthma.
Learn more about the health risks of burning methane in your home >>
So while biomethane will be useful solution for some industries where it is difficult to electrify, the idea we can use it to supply our existing household gas network is simply not credible.
Using alternative gases to replace methane in the gas network is simply not feasible.
But this doesn’t stop the gas industry. Instead, they shamelessly promote their experiments with ‘blending’ tiny amounts of these alternative gases to create the impression that it can be scaled up in the future. But their real motivation is preserving their profits and delaying the inevitable switch away from methane gas.
The real solution to cutting pollution, protecting our health and lowering bills is to switch to clean, efficient electric appliances.
The big challenge for electrification is the upfront cost of the appliances – which not everyone can afford. That’s why we’re pushing for solutions that will make it easy and affordable for everyone to start the switch. Learn more and get involved here >>