The latest report from the International Energy Agency is far from the first to point out the need to cut methane emissions. As a result of ever-more grim climate reports, two years ago at the COP26 climate, more than 100 nations signed a pledge to cut their 2020-level methane emissions 30% by 2030. But so far, those emissions are still rising and not just a little. The World Meteorological Organization’s Greenhouse Gas Bulletin noted in its 2022 report 11 months ago that increases in methane levels in 2020 and 2021 were the largest since systematic record keeping began in 1983. “Methane concentrations are not just rising, they’re rising faster than ever,” said Rob Jackson, a professor of Earth systems science at Stanford University.
“More than 75% of methane emissions from oil and gas operations and half of emissions from coal today can be abated with existing technology, often at low cost,” the IEA said in the report, asserting that the cuts could mean, among other things, avoiding 1 million premature deaths between now and 2050.
Scientists say that methane, which over the short run has a global warming potential that is 84-86 times more powerful than carbon dioxide, has contributed about a third of the rise in the planet’s average temperatures since the Industrial Revolution, making it the second largest contributor to global warming. Total methane emissions could rise as much as 13% between 2020 and 2030. Keeping the temperature rise to 1.5° Celsius (2.7° Fahrenheit) means meeting those COP26 pledges with immediate cuts, the IEA researchers say.
One essential component of this is making “[d]ecisive, far-reaching efforts to cut methane emissions from fossil fuel production” without delay, the report states. Reducing fossil fuel demand would cut methane emissions, they acknowledge, but this won’t be deep enough fast enough to meet that aspirational 1.5°C climate goal. Extra effort is needed, such as ending the practice of venting and flaring as well as fixing leaks at wellheads and pipelines. Doing so could mean avoiding as much as 0.1°C (0.18°F) in global temperature rise by 2050. That would do more to cut emissions than immediately parking and permanently turning off all world’s cars and trucks, the researchers say.
A press release attached to the report states:
As methane emissions lead to ground-level ozone pollution, immediate action would also deliver public health, food security and economic benefits. Based on modelling of the UNEP/CCAC Global Methane Assessment published in 2021 – which, for the first time, assessed and integrated the climate and air pollution costs and benefits from methane mitigation – methane action would prevent nearly 1 million premature deaths due to ozone exposure, 90 million tonnes of crop losses due to ozone and climate changes, and about 85 billion hours of lost labour due to extreme heat by 2050. This would generate roughly USD 260 billion in direct economic benefits through 2050. The Global Methane Assessment formed the scientific underpinning of the Global Methane Pledge (GMP) by illustrating that there are readily available measures to achieve its goals.
“Cutting methane doesn’t let us off the hook to make good on the just energy transition. But cutting methane is a low hanging fruit while we work on the overall decarbonization of our economies in tandem with supporting our societies to build greater resilience. Investments in maintenance and operational changes that prevent methane from leaking into the atmosphere are a fraction of profits made from fossil fuels. This is in stark contrast to the cost of inaction, from crop productivity losses, to impacts on human health and the economy,” said Inger Andersen, Executive Director of UNEP.
“We know what to do, we have the means to do it,” she added. “There is a support-system in place to help countries develop roadmaps, policies, and regulations, and to provide countries and companies with credible data to drive emissions reductions. We must do it now.”
At Earthworks, which focuses on the destructive impacts of fossil fuels, Policy Director Lauren Pagel said in a statement: “This report discredits any attempt to use methane reduction efforts as an excuse to further permit fossil fuel expansion. It also gives President Biden sufficient justification to declare a climate emergency and steer the U.S. toward a sustainable, just energy future.”
Brett Wilkins at Common Dreams notes:
Declaring a climate emergency unlocks certain executive powers that the Biden administration could use the battle the crisis without congressional action.
While Biden said in August that he has "practically" declared a climate emergency, campaigners note that his administration has approved more new permits for fossil fuel drilling on public lands during his first two years in office than former President Donald Trump did in 2017 and 2018.
Of course, a bunch of congressional Republicans want nothing to do with emission cuts. Many go as far as California Rep. Doug LaMalfa and his ilk—who still argue against the basic physics and chemistry of the greenhouse effect. Others just go along to get along with their benighted colleagues when it comes to any energy policy that doesn’t include support for hydrocarbons. In March, for instance, Texas Rep. August Pfluger introduced a bill to kill the first-ever federal methane fee, included in the Inflation Reduction Act. The fee would eventually assess $1,500 per ton of methane emissions from oil and gas producers, pipeline operators, and others.
Save a million lives? Keep 90 million tons of carbon emissions out of the atmosphere? Republicans have other priorities.