Search Climate Insights Directory

The document analyzes a planned US$245 billion expansion of gas infrastructure in Africa, highlighting a significant imbalance where investment in LNG export terminals and pipelines far outweighs investment in domestic power generation. It warns that these projects, often driven by Europe's short-term energy crisis following Russia's invasion of Ukraine, risk becoming stranded assets while failing to address low electricity access in countries like Nigeria, Mozambique, and Tanzania.

The report highlights a significant imbalance in African gas infrastructure, where investments are heavily skewed toward LNG export terminals rather than domestic electricity generation. With an estimated $245 billion in total gas infrastructure investments underway or planned, the document warns of 'stranded assets' as the world transitions to clean energy and European demand fluctuates. It details the current and projected capacities of LNG terminals, pipelines, and gas-fired power plants, noting that while countries like Nigeria, Mozambique, and Tanzania pursue massive export projects, they continue to face severe domestic electricity shortages.

The document analyzes the current and planned gas infrastructure in Africa, highlighting a significant imbalance where the majority of investment is directed toward LNG exports to Europe rather than domestic electrification. It details the costs and capacities of LNG terminals, pipelines, and gas-fired power plants, noting that while billions are proposed for development, much of this remains in the proposal stage and faces financial risks due to the transient nature of European energy demand.

The report highlights a planned US $245 billion expansion of gas infrastructure in Africa, primarily driven by European demand following the Russian invasion of Ukraine. It argues that this focus on exports, particularly LNG and pipelines, undermines domestic energy needs and the transition to renewable energy. Significant funding gaps exist for proposed projects, and the report warns that these investments may become stranded assets as the global energy transition progresses.

The document examines how countries in the Global South can achieve energy access and economic growth by leveraging clean energy instead of relying on liquefied natural gas (LNG). Using South Africa and Vietnam as case studies, it suggests that renewable energy is increasingly competitive and that gas power plants supplied by imported LNG will play a smaller role in affordable grid expansion than previously assumed.

The report finds that LNG developments in Mozambique and Tanzania face significant transition risks, with asset values potentially dropping by 61% and 69% respectively in a 'Well Below Two Degrees Centigrade' (WB2C) scenario. In a 'Net Zero by 2050' (NZE) scenario, most projects would become uneconomic or 'value destructive' for investors. The authors argue that pursuing domestic gas-led industrialisation could further erode the viability of export projects and may require substantial government subsidies, potentially costing Tanzania approximately $5 billion over 30 years. Consequently, governments face material downside risks to public finances, as they intend to use gas revenues for public expenditure.

The report examines the impact of global decarbonisation on Africa's natural gas sector, distinguishing between existing and emerging producers. It argues that faster global transitions to net-zero emissions will reduce LNG demand and prices, creating 'external' climate transition risks that threaten the viability of future projects. The analysis suggests that domestic demand is an insufficient hedge against these risks due to regulated low prices and the increasing competitiveness of renewable energy. Emerging producers are identified as particularly vulnerable due to weaker sovereign credit ratings and the timing of their infrastructure investments.

The document argues that the EBRD should sign the Glasgow Statement by COP 27 and implement a robust fossil fuel exclusion policy during its upcoming energy strategy review. It estimates that the EBRD could shift EUR 741 million annually from fossil fuel finance toward a clean and just energy transition. The brief emphasizes that transitioning to clean energy and energy efficiency is the only sustainable solution to the energy crisis and insecurity caused by Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

Bangladesh faces a potential $11 billion expenditure on spot market LNG imports from 2022 to 2024 due to diminishing domestic gas reserves and a heavy reliance on gas-fired power generation. The analysis indicates that implementing the ambitious solar targets of the Mujib Climate Prosperity Plan could reduce these imports by 25% and save approximately $2.7 billion. Despite this, the country continues to prioritize new gas and coal capacity over renewable energy, which currently accounts for only 1% of total power generation.

The document argues that the procurement of 3,000 MW of gas power is irrational, unlawful, and environmentally harmful. It claims the process was 'tailor-made' for an existing Eskom project, lacked adequate public consultation, and ignores the availability of cheaper, cleaner renewable energy alternatives. The authors assert that gas is not a 'bridging fuel' due to high methane leakage and that such infrastructure risks becoming a stranded asset, thereby threatening South Africa's climate commitments and constitutional rights to a healthy environment.

The Centre for Environmental Rights, on behalf of Fair Finance Southern Africa (FFSA), has requested information from Investec Group concerning a US$ 140 million loan provided by a syndicate of four banks to Karpowership. The letter highlights that Karpowership SA's proposed floating gas-to-power projects in Coega, Richards Bay, and Saldanha face significant opposition due to environmental impacts and the risk of prolonging fossil fuel reliance. FFSA argues that the projects would emit substantial methane, potentially totaling 80 to 142 million tonnes CO2e over 20 years, and may become stranded assets. The request asks Investec to clarify if the loan finances South African operations and how this aligns with its membership in the Net Zero Banking Alliance and its own net-zero carbon emission claims.

The Centre for Environmental Rights, on behalf of Fair Finance Southern Africa (FFSA), is questioning the Mauritius Commercial Bank (MCB) about a US$ 140 million loan provided to Karpowership. The letter highlights environmental and legal concerns regarding Karpowership SA's projects in Coega, Richards Bay, and Saldanha, including the refusal of environmental authorisations by the DFFE and the potential for high methane emissions. FFSA seeks to clarify if MCB's financing ultimately supports these South African operations and how the bank assesses the associated material and climate risks.

The document describes a methodology for assessing the economic viability of gas-fired power plants in MISO and SPP during 2019. By comparing day-ahead market revenues against fuel and variable operating expenses, the authors calculated hourly cash flows for 436 facilities. The process involved converting EPA gross generation data to net generation, mapping plants to the nearest market pricing nodes, and utilizing S&P Global data for fuel costs and variable operations and maintenance (O&M) expenses.

The report finds that gas-fired power plants in MISO and SPP frequently operate at a loss, costing ratepayers an estimated $117 million in 2019. This uneconomic generation is most prevalent in steam turbines and gas turbines, often driven by practices like self-scheduling and self-commitment. The authors argue that these inefficiencies, combined with rising fuel costs and the growth of renewables, make gas-fired power an increasingly risky and expensive investment compared to clean energy portfolios.

Nearly 60 civil society organisations have urged the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) to reform the consultation process for its Energy Sector Strategy (ESS) update. The organisations are calling for extended deadlines, multi-lingual accessibility, anonymous submission options, and the public disclosure of background papers and timelines. They specifically request interactive sessions on sub-sectors like hydropower, gas, and 'innovative' technologies, as well as clear guidance on investments in non-regional member states. Additionally, the group demands the integration of a 'Zero Tolerance' provision on reprisals against community members in project-affected areas.

RMI advocates for a comprehensive transformation of the global economy across ten key fronts to meet the 1.5C climate target. These priorities include increasing political ambition, decarbonizing buildings and transportation, phasing out coal and gas, scaling green hydrogen, and enhancing emissions transparency. The organization emphasizes the need for a three- to six-fold increase in zero-carbon capital investments and the integration of mitigation and adaptation efforts, particularly in the Global South, to ensure an equitable transition.

The report finds that global gas-fired power capacity in development (615 GW) now exceeds that of coal (457 GW), representing an estimated US$509 billion in capital expenditure. This expansion is described as ubiquitous across all continents, directly conflicting with the IEA's 1.5°C net-zero pathway. The authors argue that these investments face significant stranded asset risks as clean energy portfolios (CEPs) increasingly outcompete gas on cost, particularly in the US and Australia.

The report argues that South Africa does not need new gas-fired power generation until at least 2035, if ever, due to the falling costs of renewables and battery storage. It warns that current government momentum toward gas-to-power, including the RMI4P program and proposed LNG terminals, risks creating stranded assets and increasing electricity costs for consumers. The authors recommend a moratorium on gas-to-power development, focusing instead on rapid renewable deployment and energy efficiency.

The report assesses the viability of proposed gas power plants in the US against 'clean energy portfolios'—combinations of solar, wind, storage, demand flexibility, and energy efficiency—noting that over 88 gigawatts of gas capacity were proposed in 2021 despite economic and policy shifts favoring clean alternatives.

The document argues that new investment in US gas-fired power plants is becoming uneconomic due to the rise of Clean Energy Portfolios (CEPs)—combinations of wind, solar, energy efficiency, demand response, and battery storage. As of late 2021, 88 GW of gas capacity was proposed, but over 50% of proposed new gas plants have been cancelled prior to construction in the last two years. The analysis finds that CEPs are a cheaper option in more than 80% of sites where gas plants are proposed for service by 2030, and at least 70 GW of proposed gas could be economically avoided, potentially saving $22 billion and 873 MMT of CO2. The report highlights significant stranded cost risks, noting that in a central analysis case, 40% of proposed combined cycle gas plants would cost more to operate than a new CEP costs to build within 10 years.