Navigating the gas network transition toward a net-zero future

As the European Union moves toward its 2050 climate neutrality targets, gas network operators face a fundamental shift. While the transition away from fossil gas presents significant challenges, it highlights the role that network infrastructure will play in supporting green gas as both a transitional and a longer-term decarbonisation solution, and also opens a critical window for proactive strategic repurposing.

Key takeaways

1. Demand will fall fastest where networks are least protected. Distribution volumes are expected to decline faster than national forecasts suggest, because low-pressure networks lack the industrial and power-generation demand that sustains transmission. Decommissioning will move up the network tree, leaving redundant higher-pressure capacity behind.
2. Molecule-based repurposing has a limited scope. Biomethane islands and hydrogen conversion are credible in specific settings, but most low- and medium-pressure distribution kilometres will not find a gas-based reuse route. Operators will need a complementary strategy built around non-molecular options.
3. The window closes around 2030 to 2045. Once distribution volumes fall below half of today’s levels, decommissioning reaches programme scale, and the largest repurposing options require decade-long lead times. Planning must start now to avoid stranded-asset write-downs.

An accelerated decline in distribution

The volume of gas flowing through EU networks is projected to decline significantly by 2050 to meet targets – even if real-world trajectories for gaseous fuel use appear flatter. The impact of this is not uniform across the infrastructure; distribution networks are expected to see decommissioning first. Unlike transmission systems, which will be sustained by power generation, hard-to-abate industries, and hydrogen production, lower-pressure distribution networks lack these demand anchors. So, distribution operators may see demand erode faster than top-line national forecasts suggest. Decommissioning is expected to move "up the network tree," starting at low pressure, leading to redundant higher-pressure capacity and potential "islands" of demand. Reactive decommissioning rules out high-value options that require advance coordination and a clear understanding of where and when assets will become available.

Molecule-based repurposing with limited scope

Repurposing pipelines for other gases is one of the most obvious paths, but its credibility remains limited to specific circumstances:

Biomethane islands: biomethane is a mature, deployable technology and a drop-in replacement for fossil gas. It is particularly relevant both as a long-term option for hard-to-abate uses of methane, including high-temperature processes and chemical plants, and as a pathway for treatment of organic waste and capture and valorisation of biogenic methane and CO2 that might otherwise contribute to emissions. Future islanded networks could remain in place to transport this biomethane from production sites to consumption locations.

Hydrogen (H2) conversion: this is a credible option for some parts of the network, especially in industrial areas where hydrogen may form an important part of the solution for hard-to-abate gaseous fuel use. However, it faces challenges including embrittlement of steel components, significant route-specific costs for upgrades, and political contestation regarding residential H2 heating.

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) transport: repurposing for CO2 transport raises structural and safety questions, as existing CO2 pipelines operate at higher pressures than most gas networks. Technical issues such as wet corrosion and material compatibility must be managed. There is also a structural market-building issue: CCS networks are currently limited to point-to-point logistics, linking major emitters with storage sites.

In most scenarios, the majority of low- and medium-pressure distribution kilometres will not find a molecule-based repurposing route, which calls for a complementary strategy.

Alternative repurposing options and timelines

A wide range of less-obvious repurposing options exist where timing, geography, and partnerships align. These options vary in their technical and commercial feasibility:

• Fibre-optic ducting: threading cables through decommissioned pipelines (high technical / high commercial feasibility).
• Power cable routing: using pipelines as ducts for MV/HV cables to support electrification (medium technical / high commercial feasibility).
• Water mains capacity: slip-lining water mains inside gas pipes to save 40-60% of civil costs (high technical / medium commercial feasibility).
• Battery energy storage (BESS): using above-ground sites for containerised storage (high technical / medium commercial feasibility).
• Renewable energy deployment: deploying solar PV on above-ground sites (high technical / medium commercial feasibility).
• District heating: reconfiguring routes for district heating implementation (medium technical / medium commercial feasibility).

What is the timeline for action?

As volumes fall, the window to maximise these options will progressively narrow.

• From now to 2030: this is the period for early action, building data foundations, scenario modelling, and establishing partnerships.
• 2030 to 2045: as distribution volumes fall below 50% of today’s levels[AB1.1], decommissioning will reach a programme scale. Because the largest repurposing opportunities require decade-long lead times, planning must begin well in advance to avoid stranded-asset write-downs.

Blunomy has been supporting gas network operators in Australia, France, and the UK in transforming these strategic challenges into actionable programmes through a three-step approach:

• Advanced forecasting and decommissioning mapping: we helped develop a geographically granular view of the network’s future across different scenarios. This includes building the necessary data foundations, such as asset condition and land rights, to identify exactly when and where assets will become available.
• Systematic techno-economic options assessment: applying a structured methodology contextualised for the specific asset mix and regulatory environment, we identified feasible repurposing routes and calculated their risk-adjusted value by layering avoided decommissioning costs against potential benefits.
• Strategy design and regulatory enablement: we have supported the formalisation of the strategy and the design of near-term pilots. This includes mapping legal rights (easements and permissions) and developing regulatory engagement strategies to ensure cost recovery.

Author

- Andy Butt, Manager

Discover related content:

• Mapping the biomethane potential around gas networks and quantifying the associated co-benefits
• Hydrogen's Future Availability: What Industrial Players Need to Know by 2050
• Systemic Value Assessment: Quantifying environmental and social impact for strategic decision-making