The battle against climate change is far from over, and one of the key weapons in our arsenal is methane policy. Methane, a potent greenhouse gas, has been a blind spot in global climate efforts, but its impact is undeniable. With the clock ticking, the question remains: will methane policy make or break our efforts to combat the climate crisis?
The International Energy Agency's recent report paints a grim picture. Methane emissions are not declining globally, and there's a worrying implementation gap in current policies. The UN has repeatedly emphasized the critical role of methane in addressing the climate crisis, and for good reason. One tonne of methane causes 80 times more warming than one tonne of carbon dioxide over 20 years. This makes reducing methane emissions an emergency brake for tackling climate change.
Our analysis at Oxford University's Climate Policy Monitor supports this finding. We identified over 100 methane policies across 32 jurisdictions, but only a third of them are mandatory. India and Indonesia, for instance, account for over 12% of global methane emissions, yet they have no identifiable methane policies. This lack of action in key emitting regions is a major concern.
The situation is not all doom and gloom, however. There are signs of progress and leadership. Japan, for example, has successfully reduced methane emissions by 40% between 1990 and 2022 through robust policymaking. Their Act on Promotion of Global Warming Countermeasures mandates public disclosure of facility-level emissions and third-party verification, setting a high standard for others to follow.
But the focus on energy-sector methane has led to a blind spot in agricultural emissions. Agriculture is the largest human source of methane emissions, accounting for around 40% of total emissions. Yet, fewer than half of the identified methane policies target agriculture specifically. This imbalance suggests that governments are prioritizing energy-sector methane while neglecting agricultural emissions.
The agri-food sector is also lagging in ambition. Only three of the largest dairy and coffee companies have set targets to reduce methane emissions by 2030, according to the Changing Markets Foundation. This is despite the fact that dietary changes, particularly cutting beef and dairy consumption, could be transformative in putting an emergency brake on climate change. Such shifts would also have co-benefits for the environment and public health.
The US, unfortunately, is a case of backsliding. The Environmental Protection Agency delayed methane regulations for oil and gas facilities in 2025, and the EU has been lobbied to delay penalties for oil and gas importers on methane. However, there is hope in the form of developing and emerging economies, which are prioritizing climate action through rule-making based on their unique contexts.
In conclusion, methane policy is a critical component in the fight against climate change. While there are implementation gaps and blind spots, there are also signs of progress and leadership. The challenge is to build on these successes, address the gaps, and ensure that methane policy is a key driver in our efforts to stabilize the climate. The world must get to grips with methane emissions, and the time to act is now.
