Abandoned coalmines and oil and gas wells are now one of the biggest sources of the powerful greenhouse gas methane, new data shows, and little effort is being made to clean them up.
The methane emissions from abandoned fossil fuel infrastructure now exceed those from Iran, and if considered as a country would be the fourth biggest source in the world, behind China, the US and Russia.
Solving the global methane problem is one of the most urgent issues in tackling the climate crisis: methane is about 80 times more powerful in trapping heat in the atmosphere than carbon dioxide, yet emissions have been increasing.
Some methane comes from natural sources such as forests, but most comes as a byproduct of fossil fuel extraction and from agriculture. Reducing those emissions rapidly would help to pause or even reduce temperature rises in the short term, and buy time for the world to shift to a low-carbon economy.
Cleaning up the world’s abandoned facilities would cost about $100bn, according to the International Energy Agency (IEA), which has investigated them for the first time in its annual Global Methane Tracker report, published on Wednesday.
But finding the money to do this will prove difficult, one of the report’s authors, Tomás de Oliveira Bredariol, acknowledged. “Addressing this does not usually provide an economic return,” he said. “It needs work to identify and address the problem.”
Tomás recommended that countries should monitor abandoned facilities, of which there are estimated to be at least 8m in the onshore oil and gas sector alone.
The likelihood of action on this, and on the ongoing issue of methane from existing facilities, from at least two of the world’s biggest emitters seems remote. Russia operates some of the leakiest pipelines and oil and gas production infrastructure, but has largely withdrawn from climate action. The US, which is second behind China in overall methane emissions from the energy sector, was making strides towards cutting methane from its oil and gas operations under Joe Biden. But as part of his recent executive order on the climate, Donald Trump has put methane regulations under review with the potential to scrap them.
The IEA’s report found methane from fossil fuels globally remained “stubbornly high” as countries took too little action, despite the potential for cost savings. Capturing methane from operating oil and gas facilities is often profitable, as it can be sold alongside gas, and is relatively easy to do.
With new satellites that can pinpoint methane emissions, the problem is much easier to identify than even a few years ago. The IEA has found that monitored emissions from satellites are much higher than the official estimates of methane that countries admit to.
after newsletter promotion
But Durwood Zaelke, a long-time campaigner on methane and president of the Institute for Governance and Sustainable Development, warned: “Measuring methane emissions is not enough to mitigate them, as the IEA shows with its report. Having 25 satellites tell us we have a problem is not enough, nor is reminding the fossil fuel emitters that it’s bad business to waste gas. It’s time to move from measuring and promising to mandatory performance.”
He wants a global agreement specifically targeting methane, a measure espoused by some leading advocates of climate action, including Mia Mottley, the prime minister of Barbados and chair of the V20 group of more than 70 of the most climate-vulnerable countries.
Marcelo Mena, chief executive of the Global Methane Hub, an NGO, said there was some cause for optimism, pointing to recent polling that showed public support for action on methane. “We’re seeing meaningful action from some major emitters – China has introduced new standards for coal methane, Canada and Kazakhstan are preparing oil and gas methane regulations, and the UK has joined Brazil in co-chairing the Climate and Clean Air Coalition, which serves as the secretariat of the Global Methane Pledge,” he said. “These developments reflect a growing consensus that methane mitigation is the fastest, most effective way to slow warming in the near term and avoid the worst climate impacts.”
