The importance of natural gas in Polish energy is growing. According to data from the Energy Forum, in 2024 he was responsible for 11.6 percent. produced electricity, at 9.9 percent a year earlier. Gaz-System Forecasts cited by the Instrat Foundation (gas operator of the transmission system) speak of an increase in the annual demand for transmission from 18 billion m3 in 2024 to 25-27 billion m3 at the end of the decade.
The government is inclined to a similar direction. The so -called The ambitious scenario of the national plan in the field of energy and climate (KPEiK), whose final version is to be adopted until June this year, shows an increase in power installed in natural gas and hydrogen from 4.1 GW in 2023 to 12 GW in 2030; At the same time, the production of electricity from these sources in the same period is expected to increase from 16.5 TWh to 31 TWh.
Read also: Lost decarbonization of the economy? KPEIK will only be in June
5.25 GW gas in PGE plans. A lot of?
So what is happening on the market? Gas power plants are building Orlen in Polandwhose president, Ireneusz Fąfara, during the European Economic Congress stated that the blue fuel would provide our country with energy security in the perspective of 2050 (i.e. in accordance with the provisions of the Paris Agreement, the target moment of full climate neutrality).
New investments are also planning Enea (e.g. at the Kozienice power plant), Tauron (in Będzin or Jaworzno) or finally PGEwhich in 2024 commissioned the first gas power plant in Poland (not a heat and power plant) PGE Gryfino Dolna Odra with a power of 1340 MW. Gas energy is one of the group's priorities, building the largest gas and steam block in Rybnik in the country and by 2030 planning a total achievement of 5.25 GW of power in this source.
PGE's activities took a closer look at Reclaim Finance and Beyond Fossil Fuels from NGOs, the creator of the Power Transition Tracker tool – an instrument for assessing decarbonization of selected ten European energy companies. The plans of the Polish champion were analyzed next to the German RWE strategy, Spanish Iberdrola, Italian Enel and the Czech EPH.
The conclusions look pessimistic with most of the criteria taken into account – among them the emission reduction plan, departing from gas as also emission fuel, resignation from coal or main investment expenses – PGE is the worst of all companies undergoing examination.
The group's strategy does not indicate the appropriate moment of departure either from gas or coal (not counting the resale of these assets), in the assessment of activists it is non -transparent and does not contain sufficient climate ambitions. The authors of the Power Transition Tracker want the company's emphasis on financial institutions, demanding from it withdrawal from the development of gas projects and presenting a bright strategy to reach zero -emission.
In anticipation of green hydrogen and biomethane
We asked PGE about Gas Development Plans in the long run and the possibility of replacing natural gas in the future with biomethane or hydrogen produced with renewable energy energy – the so -called green gases.
In the response, the group's press office states that investments in gas, “guarantee the presence of controlable power in the power system“, and financial security ensures their power market revenues.
– “Gas sources are also characterized by the fact that their adaptation to the combustion of 'green fuels' is easier and cheaper than in the case of other technologies. In connection with the above, if the appropriate supply of 'green fuels' appears on the market,, The PGE Group will adapt its gas sources to combusing less emission fuels” – the company continues.
At the same time, it diagnoses the obvious fact that biomethane and green hydrogen is currently not enough on the market. – “Currently, PGE conducts many conversations with business partners who declare the willingness to produce 'green fuels' to potentially secure the fuel volume for our assets, but these talks are at a very early stage,” adds the press office.
The powers and production is different
The system role of gas that serves as Available and flexible supplementation of weather sources – It can therefore generate energy when there is a lack of both wind and sun, also helping less efficient warehouses – it is probably the most common argument for using it in the electricity. Hence the popular concept “transitional fuel“After leaving coal, and before the abandonment of fossil fuels.
In the assumption, along with the development of wind farms and solar farms, gas sources would work less and less, but they should be maintained “just in case”. This specificity is explained by Michał Smoleń, head of the Energia & Klimat program at the Instrat Foundation.
– You need to distinguish the powers of gas power plants from the scale of gas combustion, i.e. their actual operation. Older transformation scenarios did not anticipate such a rapid increase in renewable sources we are dealing with, so gas was to replace coal as a year -round source working in the base and then we would actually burn it a lot. Today we know that it will be needed to a lesser extent, however, due to the periods of so -called RES drought when it does not blow and shine, as well as predictions about the pace of development of other technologies, in the coming years we will not be able to give up it completely. It is also a matter of building social trust in transformation, which requires maintaining stable supplies and electricity prices – says.
According to the expert, gas power plants can work with a high use factor in the coming years. – Companies may assume that by the mid -1930s gas will be conducive to delays in the development of renewable energy. The photovoltaic is currently experiencing problems, because the market has saturated, it is not known how quickly we will arrive in new lands of wind farms, and the scale of the planned second phase of windmills at sea is also uncertain – he continues, establishing, among others to the high costs of the offshore industry.
Read also: Repolonization will also cover the sea? A project of industry development strategies in the offshore industry was created
A few percent of the time a year
Large energy companies are investing today in CCGT gas and steam blocks, more expensive in construction, but characterized by high efficiency; Better to work in the system base than as a complementary peak source.
– Ultimately, we will also need blocks launched for several percent of the time a year. In the future, it will be possible to supply them in partly with biomethane, but this will not replace the development of pure wind or sunny power; We will never produce it enough to replace the consumption of fossil fuels on the current scale. However, hydrogen from electrolysis is and will remain very expensiveand it does not seem to play an important role as an alternative to gas in the electricity, even in the horizon of 15 years – says Smoleń.
The conclusion is simple; The more renewable energy in the system, the less gas we will need. At the same time, in the opinion of the Instrat Foundation, presented in the study “Three decades of challenges. The script of the Polish energy transformation until 2050”, official assumptions from the KPEiK project on the decline in the importance of transitional fuel after 2030, may be too optimistic.
The climate account is also not quite clear. Although gas burning causes about twice as lower by CO2 emissions than burning coal in terms of energy, when the raw material is extracted and transported, methane emissions, which is a much stronger greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide. “(…) The reduction of emission valuation only to those covered by the EU ETS system does not present all environmental and climate damage,” the experts of the institute write.
– In recent years, we have better and better understand the problem of methane emissions. When we take into account their occurrence at all stages of the natural gas supply chain, His more ecological image complicates a bit complicated compared to coal. However, the extraction of coal from some Polish mines is also associated with methane emissions – says Michał Smoleń.
At the same time, it signals the thread of risks related to addiction to raw material imports; Europe has noticed the problem after Russia's assault to Ukraine, but on the horizon there are further threats. – of course, you should also remember about the risks associated with the import of fossil fuels; The demand of our coal power plants can be satisfied in the country, although at relatively high costs, while approx. 80 percent gas comes from import – he adds institt representative.
“Swap of one emission fuel for another”
Let's return to the Power Transition Tracker gas summaries. Of the ten analyzed European companies, seven are planning or already implementing the construction of at least 37 new power plants, and the podium of the largest investors is occupied by PGE, RWE and EPH. I am talking about 25 GW of power; According to activists, companies intend to drown funds in them that could strengthen investments in renewable energy and energy efficiency.
The plans of five entities, including PGE, violate the main purpose of the Paris Agreement (stopping the global temperature rise to 2050 at the level 1.5 degrees Celsius compared to the pre -industrial era), which requires full decarbonization of European power electricity by 2035. Diana Maciąg from the Association of Associations Polska Green Network, an expert participating in the work on the Power Transition Tracker, calls the replacement of coal with gas “paper -pride decarbonization”.
– This is just a conversion of one fossil fuel for anotherwhich after taking into account the emission of methane turns out to be no less harmful than coal. To pay off, gas power plants built today will have to work for at least 20 years, and in the base – says.
At the same time, he criticizes the applicable gas policy. Gas power plants lost on the market of power with cheaper energy storage, so the government intentionally changes regulations, introducing special extra time for them. A flood of new gas power plants appeared on the part of the companies, which would not have a chance to arise otherwise – he adds.
Pure flexibility with a solution?
The expert emphasizes that according to scientific knowledge, 2035 is an absolute “deadline” to give up gas in the electricityin turn in other sectors, i.e. heating and industry, this should take place a maximum of five years later. But what about ensuring the stability of the system in which energy cannot be missing?
– There are a number of solutions that can be called collectively pure flexibility -says Macięga and cites Think-Thank Ember recommendations, which as part of “Clean Flexibility” recommends, among others The use of peak-pumped power plants, battery warehouses, heat storage, demand control, introduction of intelligent networks or a greater exchange of energy between countries and regions.
– You can agree to the construction of only small, very flexible gas cylindricals that would be used only as “spare” peaksand natural gas would replace them with biomethane. There is nothing to count on a larger replacement of gas in them; This is a complete fantasy – he adds.
Returning to the atmospheric consequences of burning natural gas, our interlocutor indicates that energy companies report methane emissions to a very limited extent.
– For example, key emissions from supply chains are not taken into account. Brought from the US as LNG, shale gas causes emissions by 33 percent larger than coal. Meanwhile, it is 1/5 of the gas consumed in Poland, and if all planned contracts of Orlen do, it could be even half. Let's not forget; Methane is such a strong greenhouse gas that for the climate it is CO2 on steroids – argues Macięga. The discussion about gas must balance all reasons – and none of them, from climatic, through geostrategic to system and technological, cannot be underestimated.
