Assessing the Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impact of New Fossil Fuel Infrastructure

The document identifies three primary quantitative perspectives—literalist, fatalist, and economist—used to measure the emissions impact of fossil fuel infrastructure. It also proposes a political economist perspective to account for systemic lock-in effects. The authors conclude that while estimates vary widely, it is highly unlikely that new infrastructure has zero impact on global emissions.

• The 'literalist' perspective calculates emissions based on the total carbon contained in the fuel handled by a project, assuming it will be combusted and use up the global carbon budget. An Ecofys study using this approach estimated that 14 major fossil fuel infrastructure expansions would be associated with over 6 gigatonnes CO2e, roughly 10% of projected 2020 global emissions.
• The 'fatalist' perspective assumes that new infrastructure does not change global consumption because it simply displaces other fuel sources or transportation methods. For example, an EnSys analysis of the Keystone XL pipeline concluded there would be no change in global GHG emissions because oil demand is not sensitive to the availability of specific pipelines.
• The 'economist' perspective argues that increasing supply lowers prices, which in turn increases consumption. This approach varies by model: simple elasticity models for U.S. coal exports to China estimated 0.7 tonnes of net increased coal usage per tonne exported; partial equilibrium models for Indonesian coal exports estimated a reduction of 0.05 to 0.13 t CO2 per t CO2 not exported; and general equilibrium models for subsidy removal in Western Europe and Japan estimated a global reduction of at least 0.8 t CO2 per t CO2 avoided.
• The authors suggest a 'political economist' perspective is necessary to capture non-quantifiable systemic risks, such as the 'lock-in' of fossil fuel technologies or the 'lock-out' of lower-GHG alternatives, which occur when infrastructure creates social or political norms and economies of scale.
• The briefing concludes that it is highly improbable for the GHG emissions impact of new fossil fuel infrastructure to be zero, as market responses and systemic changes typically lead to some fraction of added supply resulting in increased demand.

APA

Erickson, P., & Lazarus, M. (2013). Assessing the Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impact of New Fossil Fuel Infrastructure. Stockholm Environment Institute. https://www.sei.org/mediamanager/documents/Publications/SEI-DB-2013-Assessing-GHGs-fossil-fuel-infrastructure.pdf

Chicago

Erickson, Peter, and Michael Lazarus. Assessing the Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impact of New Fossil Fuel Infrastructure. Stockholm Environment Institute, 2013. https://www.sei.org/mediamanager/documents/Publications/SEI-DB-2013-Assessing-GHGs-fossil-fuel-infrastructure.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Erickson |first1=Peter |last2=Lazarus |first2=Michael |title=Assessing the Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impact of New Fossil Fuel Infrastructure |publisher=Stockholm Environment Institute |date=2013 |url=https://www.sei.org/mediamanager/documents/Publications/SEI-DB-2013-Assessing-GHGs-fossil-fuel-infrastructure.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{erickson2013assessing, author = {Erickson, Peter and Lazarus, Michael}, title = {{Assessing the Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impact of New Fossil Fuel Infrastructure}}, institution = {Stockholm Environment Institute}, year = {2013}, url = {https://www.sei.org/mediamanager/documents/Publications/SEI-DB-2013-Assessing-GHGs-fossil-fuel-infrastructure.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }