Climate policy should reduce greenhouse gas emissions – Slow Boring

Analysis of the Northeast Supply Enhancement Pipeline Project and Sustainable Development Goals

Project Overview and Stated Opposition

An assessment of the proposed Northeast Supply Enhancement (NESE) project, a natural gas pipeline intended to serve the New York region, reveals a significant conflict in strategies for achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). A coalition of New York House Democrats has formally opposed the project, citing concerns related to SDG 13: Climate Action. However, the official letter of opposition does not provide a quantitative analysis of the pipeline’s projected impact on greenhouse gas emissions, creating a challenge for evidence-based policymaking.

Socio-Economic Implications in the Context of SDGs

The NESE pipeline project presents potential benefits aligned with several key SDGs. A comprehensive evaluation must consider these factors alongside climate concerns.

• SDG 7: Affordable and Clean Energy: By increasing the supply of domestic natural gas, the pipeline is projected to lower energy costs for consumers and industries, enhancing energy security and affordability.
• SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth: The construction and operation of the pipeline are expected to create jobs and stimulate regional economic activity.
• SDG 9: Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure: The project represents a significant investment in energy infrastructure, which is critical for regional economic stability and development.
• SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities: Access to affordable and reliable energy is a cornerstone of sustainable urban development, directly impacting the cost of living and the operational capacity of public services in New York City.

A Counter-Analysis of the Project’s Impact on SDG 13 (Climate Action)

Contrary to the stated opposition, a detailed analysis suggests the NESE pipeline could result in a net reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, thereby contributing to the objectives of SDG 13. The mechanisms for this potential reduction are as follows:

1. Displacement of Higher-Emission Fuels: The primary climate benefit arises from fuel switching.
   • Natural gas furnaces produce approximately 40% fewer emissions than the heating oil furnaces common in the region.
   • Increased gas availability can reduce reliance on high-emission oil and coal-fired “peaker plants” used during periods of high electricity demand.
2. Support for Electrification: The project can facilitate the transition to a lower-carbon economy.
   • By providing a cheaper fuel source for power generation, the pipeline can lower electricity prices.
   • Reduced electricity costs make the adoption of electric vehicles and electric heat pumps more economically viable for consumers, accelerating the decarbonization of the transportation and building sectors.
3. Reduction of LNG Imports: The pipeline would provide domestically produced natural gas, displacing imports of Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG), which involves an energy-intensive global supply chain.

Relevant Precedent: The Indian Point Nuclear Plant Closure

The recent closure of the Indian Point nuclear power plant serves as a critical case study. The shutdown of this major source of zero-emission energy, advocated for by environmental groups, resulted in a documented increase in New York’s greenhouse gas emissions as fossil fuels were used to replace the lost generating capacity. This outcome highlights the risk of policy decisions that are not grounded in a comprehensive analysis of their net impact on climate goals, undermining progress on SDG 13.

Regional Challenges for Renewable Energy Transition

While the transition to renewable energy is a central component of achieving SDG 7 and SDG 13, the northeastern United States faces specific geographical and economic challenges.

• Resource Availability: The region possesses lower solar irradiance and less consistent onshore wind resources compared to other parts of the country.
• Project Viability: Offshore wind projects have faced significant cost inflation and logistical hurdles, while large-scale onshore projects often encounter local opposition to land use changes.
• Lack of Direct Trade-Off: The approval of a gas pipeline does not preclude investment in renewables. Instead, it can serve as a transitional infrastructure that ensures energy affordability and reliability while the renewable energy sector matures.

Conclusion: A Call for Evidence-Based Policy

The debate over the NESE pipeline underscores a critical need for a more nuanced and data-driven approach to climate policy. An effective strategy for achieving the Sustainable Development Goals requires an integrated assessment that balances environmental targets with economic and social needs. Policies that block transitional infrastructure without a quantitative analysis of the net emissions impact risk inadvertently increasing emissions and raising energy costs, thereby hindering progress on SDG 7, SDG 11, and SDG 13 simultaneously. Future infrastructure decisions must be based on a pragmatic evaluation of their direct and indirect impacts on the complete SDG framework.

Analysis of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

1. SDG 7: Affordable and Clean Energy
   • The article focuses on the provision of energy (natural gas) to the northeastern United States. It discusses the cost of energy for consumers (“reduce energy costs,” “electricity prices are 50 percent higher than the national average”), the mix of energy sources (natural gas, coal, oil, nuclear, renewables), and the efficiency of energy use.
2. SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth
   • The economic benefits of the proposed pipeline are mentioned. The article states that the project “will create jobs and stimulate other economic activity,” directly linking infrastructure development to economic growth.
3. SDG 9: Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure
   • The central subject of the article is the “Northeast Supply Enhancement project,” a proposed pipeline. This is a clear example of energy infrastructure development. The discussion revolves around the sustainability and necessity of this infrastructure in the context of a modern energy system.
4. SDG 13: Climate Action
   • This is the primary lens through which the pipeline project is debated. The article is centered on the “climate concerns” raised by opponents, the project’s potential impact on greenhouse gas emissions, and the effectiveness of climate policy. It critiques the lack of analysis on whether the pipeline would increase or decrease overall emissions.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

1. Target 7.1: By 2030, ensure universal access to affordable, reliable and modern energy services.
   • The article highlights the issue of energy affordability in the Northeast, noting that the region imports expensive liquified natural gas and that New York’s electricity prices are significantly above the national average. The pipeline is presented as a way to “provide the Northeast with access to cheaper piped gas,” thereby reducing energy costs for consumers.
2. Target 7.2: By 2030, increase substantially the share of renewable energy in the global energy mix.
   • The article extensively discusses renewable energy as an alternative to fossil fuels. Opponents of the pipeline argue for “increased renewable generation.” However, the author questions the feasibility of this in the Northeast, citing that it is “not that windy” and the “least sunny part of the country,” making renewable energy less economical without subsidies.
3. Target 9.1: Develop quality, reliable, sustainable and resilient infrastructure… to support economic development and human well-being.
   • The proposed gas pipeline is a piece of energy infrastructure intended to enhance the reliability and affordability of the energy supply in New York. The core debate in the article is whether this infrastructure can be considered “sustainable” given the climate concerns, or if it is a necessary component for economic well-being.
4. Target 13.2: Integrate climate change measures into national policies, strategies and planning.
   • The article is a critique of how climate change measures are being integrated into policy-making. It argues that the opposition to the pipeline, based on “climate concerns,” lacks a rigorous analysis of the actual emissions impact. The author advocates for policy decisions based on whether a project will make “emissions higher or lower,” rather than on assumptions.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

1. Greenhouse Gas Emissions Levels
   • This is the central indicator discussed. The article questions the pipeline’s impact on emissions, noting that replacing coal with gas has historically reduced U.S. emissions. It also states that “gas-burning furnaces emit 40 percent less greenhouse gases than oil-burning furnaces,” providing a specific metric for comparing fuel sources.
2. Price of Energy
   • The article implies this indicator by discussing the goal to “reduce energy costs” and citing that “New York’s electricity prices are 50 percent higher than the national average.” The relative price of piped natural gas versus imported liquified natural gas is a key economic indicator in the debate.
3. Share of Energy Sources in the Energy Mix
   • The article implicitly uses this indicator by discussing the decline of coal, the rise of natural gas, and the push for renewables. The closure of the Indian Point nuclear plant and its replacement by fossil fuels is a specific example of a shift in the energy mix that led to higher emissions.
4. Energy Efficiency
   • This indicator is mentioned when the article notes that “a large gas-fired power plant is more efficient than a home gas furnace” and that pipeline opponents cite “improved efficiency” as a reason why gas consumption might decline.
5. Job Creation and Economic Activity
   • The article explicitly mentions that the project is expected to “create jobs and stimulate other economic activity,” which are direct indicators of economic impact.

SDGs, Targets and Indicators Summary

Source: slowboring.com