The Global Methane Pledge: Progress, Measurement Challenges, and Oil & Gas Accountability

Why Methane Matters Disproportionately

Methane (CH₄) is responsible for approximately 30 per cent of observed global warming since the pre-industrial era, despite representing a far smaller share of total greenhouse gas emissions than carbon dioxide. Its outsized impact stems from its potency: over a 20-year horizon, methane traps roughly 80 times more heat per molecule than CO₂. The corollary is that reducing methane emissions delivers faster climate benefits than equivalent CO₂ reductions — making it the single most impactful near-term lever available.

The oil and gas sector is the largest industrial source of anthropogenic methane, contributing an estimated 80 million tonnes annually according to the International Energy Agency (IEA). Venting, flaring inefficiency, and fugitive emissions from processing, transmission, and distribution infrastructure are the primary sources. For LNG-exporting nations such as Qatar, the methane intensity of the full value chain — from wellhead to regasification terminal — is increasingly scrutinised by importing jurisdictions, particularly the European Union.

The Global Methane Pledge: Where Do We Stand?

Launched at COP26 in Glasgow (November 2021), the Global Methane Pledge commits signatories to a collective goal of reducing methane emissions by at least 30 per cent below 2020 levels by 2030. As of early 2025, more than 155 countries have signed — including every GCC state except one.

Progress has been uneven. The IEA's 2024 Global Methane Tracker estimated that global oil and gas methane emissions fell by approximately 10 per cent from 2020 to 2024, driven primarily by:

• Regulatory action in the United States (EPA methane rule, finalized December 2023)
• Norway's near-elimination of routine flaring
• Technology deployment for leak detection and repair (LDAR) across North American shale basins
• Improved measurement revealing lower baseline emissions in some jurisdictions

However, satellite observations also revealed previously undetected super-emitter events in Turkmenistan, Algeria, and parts of the Permian Basin, partially offsetting recorded reductions. The gap between pledged reductions and actual trajectory remains significant: at current rates, the sector will achieve a 15–18 per cent reduction by 2030, well short of the 30 per cent target.

OGMP 2.0: The Industry Reporting Standard

The Oil & Gas Methane Partnership 2.0 (OGMP 2.0), administered by UNEP, is the most rigorous industry-led reporting framework for methane emissions. It requires signatories to progress through five reporting levels, from asset-level activity factors (Level 1) to source-level, measurement-informed estimates reconciled with site-level measurements (Level 5 — "Gold Standard").

By end-2024, 130 companies representing over 40 per cent of global oil and gas production had joined OGMP 2.0. In the GCC, QatarEnergy, ADNOC, and Saudi Aramco have all committed to the framework, though the level of reporting maturity varies:

The progression from Level 3 to Level 5 is where the real technical challenge lies. It requires moving from engineering estimates based on equipment counts and emission factors to actual measurement data from continuous monitoring, periodic surveys, and aerial or satellite observation.

Satellite Monitoring: MethaneSAT and the Transparency Revolution

The launch of MethaneSAT in March 2024, backed by the Environmental Defense Fund, marked a step change in methane monitoring capability. Unlike previous satellites that detected only large point sources (super-emitters), MethaneSAT can quantify area-wide methane emissions at approximately 100-metre resolution across entire oil and gas basins — including those in the GCC.

Other satellite systems contributing to the monitoring ecosystem include:

• TROPOMI (Sentinel-5P): European Space Agency instrument providing daily global methane concentration maps at 7 km resolution since 2017.
• GHGSat: Commercial constellation offering 25-metre resolution point-source detection, with several GCC facilities already surveyed.
• Carbon Mapper: Coalition launching additional satellites in 2025 targeting industrial super-emitters globally.
• EMIT (ISS): NASA instrument that identified over 750 super-emitter events in its first 18 months, including several in the Middle East.

For GCC operators, satellite monitoring creates both risk and opportunity. The risk is reputational: a super-emitter event detected by satellite and published openly (as GHGSat and Carbon Mapper do) creates immediate public and regulatory scrutiny. The opportunity is operational: satellite data can identify leaks that ground-based monitoring misses, enabling faster repair and genuine emissions reductions.

Satellite monitoring does not replace ground-level measurement — it provides an independent cross-check that makes under-reporting increasingly untenable.

Methane Intensity Metrics for LNG

As the world's largest LNG exporter, Qatar's methane intensity across the LNG value chain is a strategically important metric. Methane intensity is typically expressed as methane emissions divided by gas marketed, measured in tonnes CH₄ per thousand tonnes of hydrocarbon produced or as a percentage.

The EU's methane regulation (Regulation 2024/1787), which entered force in August 2024, establishes methane intensity thresholds for imported fossil fuels. From 2027, importers must report the methane intensity of their supply chains; from 2030, maximum intensity standards may apply, with non-compliant cargoes potentially subject to penalties or exclusion.

This has direct implications for QatarEnergy and its North Field Expansion (NFE and NFS) projects. Demonstrating low methane intensity requires:

• Comprehensive Leak Detection and Repair (LDAR) programmes across all upstream and midstream facilities
• Near-elimination of routine venting and flaring
• Continuous monitoring at liquefaction trains and loading terminals
• Third-party verification of reported methane emissions data
• Lifecycle analysis covering extraction, processing, liquefaction, shipping, and regasification

LDAR Programmes: Technical Requirements

Leak Detection and Repair is the foundational operational practice for methane management. Modern LDAR programmes in the oil and gas sector deploy multiple detection technologies:

Optical Gas Imaging (OGI)

Infrared cameras (e.g., FLIR GF320) that visualise methane plumes in real time. Quarterly OGI surveys are the minimum standard under most regulatory frameworks, with monthly surveys becoming common at high-priority facilities.

Continuous Monitoring Systems

Fixed sensor networks (point sensors, open-path lasers) that provide 24/7 facility-level monitoring. Technologies such as ABB's laser-based analysers and Quanta3's sensor arrays are deployed at LNG facilities in Qatar and the UAE.

Aerial Surveys

Drone-mounted and aircraft-mounted spectrometers that can survey entire facility complexes in hours. Particularly effective for large-area upstream operations such as those in Saudi Arabia's Ghawar field.

Satellite Integration

As discussed above, satellite data now provides a top-down cross-check. Leading operators are integrating satellite, aerial, and ground-level data into unified emissions management platforms.

How GAB-Accredited Verification Supports Methane Reporting

Self-reported methane emissions data, however sophisticated the measurement technology, requires independent verification to achieve credibility with regulators, investors, and trading partners. This is where accredited verification becomes essential.

A verification body accredited under ISO 14065 by a national accreditation body that is a signatory to the International Accreditation Forum (IAF) Multilateral Recognition Arrangement (MLA) provides the highest level of assurance. In the GCC context, the Gulf Accreditation Center (GAC) and individual national bodies (such as Qatar's national accreditation system) provide this accreditation.

The verification process for methane reporting typically covers:

• Assessment of measurement methodology against ISO 14064-1 and sector-specific guidance (API Compendium, OGMP 2.0 technical guidance)
• Review of LDAR programme design, execution frequency, and repair completion rates
• Evaluation of emission factor selection and activity data quality
• Cross-referencing reported data with available satellite and aerial survey results
• Assessment of uncertainty quantification and materiality thresholds
• Verification statement issuance with opinion on material correctness

For GCC operators facing EU methane regulation compliance requirements, engaging a GAB-accredited verification body ensures that the verification itself meets the quality standards expected by European regulators and importers.

Qatar's Methane Commitments and Progress

Qatar has made several methane-specific commitments:

• Global Methane Pledge signatory (COP26, 2021)
• Zero routine flaring by 2030 (World Bank Zero Routine Flaring initiative)
• QatarEnergy methane intensity target: Reduce methane intensity to below 0.2 per cent by 2025 across upstream operations
• OGMP 2.0 commitment: Achieve Gold Standard reporting by 2026
• North Field Expansion: New LNG trains designed with enhanced vapour recovery, zero-bleed pneumatic devices, and integrated LDAR from commissioning

Progress is tangible. QatarEnergy reported a 28 per cent reduction in upstream methane intensity between 2019 and 2023. The new NFE trains, incorporating lessons from existing Qatargas and RasGas facilities, are designed to achieve methane intensities significantly below the global LNG average of approximately 0.35 per cent.

What Operators Should Do Now

Regardless of current regulatory requirements, GCC oil and gas operators should take the following steps to prepare for an increasingly transparent methane accountability landscape:

• Conduct a baseline methane emissions inventory using ISO 14064-1 methodology with sector-specific emission factors from the API Compendium or IPCC 2019 Refinement
• Implement or upgrade LDAR programmes to include OGI, continuous monitoring, and aerial surveys as appropriate to facility type and scale
• Engage OGMP 2.0 if not already a member; develop a roadmap to Gold Standard reporting
• Commission third-party verification of methane emissions data by a GAB-accredited verification body
• Prepare for EU methane regulation compliance by documenting supply chain methane intensity and establishing data-sharing agreements with downstream partners
• Invest in workforce training on methane measurement technologies, LDAR execution, and emissions quantification methodologies

Conclusion

The Global Methane Pledge has catalysed political commitment, but translating pledges into verified emissions reductions requires robust measurement, transparent reporting, and independent verification. For GCC oil and gas operators — particularly LNG exporters facing incoming EU regulatory requirements — the business case for comprehensive methane management is clear: market access, regulatory compliance, and competitive positioning all depend on demonstrated methane performance, verified to international standards.

The tools exist: satellite monitoring, continuous sensors, advanced LDAR, and accredited verification frameworks. The question is no longer whether to act, but how quickly operators can close the gap between current capabilities and the transparency that markets and regulators now demand.