Browse all documents

Summary

AI-generated

This summary is written by a language model reading the source document. It is not the publisher's words and is not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment

This policy brief by Energy Innovation evaluates the greenhouse gas (GHG) intensity of natural gas versus coal power plants, concluding that while natural gas can reduce emissions compared to coal over a 100-year period, it is not a sufficient solution for climate change and can be counterproductive if methane leaks are high or if it displaces renewable energy.

Key insights

AI-generated

These insights are written by a language model reading the source document. They are not the publisher's words and are not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment
  • Natural gas-fired power plants can only provide a modest reduction in climate change impacts under optimal conditions. If they are poorly developed with significant methane leaks or used to replace renewable energy or energy efficiency, they may instead contribute to the problem. While careful leak control offers some GHG emission reductions over 100 years, these are insufficient for natural gas to have an expanded role in GHG management.
  • Methane is a primary driver of the climate impact of natural gas, acting as a powerful GHG. On a mass basis, it causes 28 times more global warming than carbon dioxide over 100 years (34 times with feedback loops), 84 times more over 20 years (86 times with feedbacks), and is 120 times more potent when first released.
  • The GHG intensity of natural gas depends heavily on methane leakage rates, which are estimated to be between two and four percent in the United States. In the first year of emissions, if leakage is at the high end (four percent), both new and average gas plants are more GHG intensive than new or average coal plants, making the construction of new baseload gas plants unadvisable.
  • Over longer timeframes, natural gas shows a GHG advantage over coal: after 20 years, one MWh from new gas is 16% to 40% less GHG intensive than average coal; after 100 years, the improvement is 44% to 52% above coal. However, the document notes that required emission reductions for a stable climate must be more ambitious than these figures.
  • The author recommends using existing natural gas capacity to shut down aging coal plants in the United States, but advises against investing in more large gas plants. Flexible, advanced gas turbines are identified as a potential tool for integrating variable renewables like wind and solar, though they are only one of several options. The federal government and states are urged to regulate methane leakage toward zero.

Cite the original document

APA
Energy Innovation (n.d.). Natural gas: not clean enough. https://energyinnovation.org/wp-content/uploads/Coal-vs-Gas-issue-brief.pdf
Chicago
Energy Innovation. Natural gas: not clean enough. n.d. https://energyinnovation.org/wp-content/uploads/Coal-vs-Gas-issue-brief.pdf.
Wikipedia
{{cite report |author=Energy Innovation |title=Natural gas: not clean enough |url=https://energyinnovation.org/wp-content/uploads/Coal-vs-Gas-issue-brief.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}
BibTeX
@techreport{energyinnovationndnatural, author = {{Energy Innovation}}, title = {{Natural gas: not clean enough}}, institution = {Energy Innovation}, url = {https://energyinnovation.org/wp-content/uploads/Coal-vs-Gas-issue-brief.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }

Full text

Collected · Record updated