Novel Strategy for Emission Reduction

In a study published in Frontiers in Science, an international team of climate scientists outlined three critical needs for reducing methane emissions and provided a new resource to assist in determining the most economical means of doing so.

To mitigate the climatic issue, methane emissions must be addressed immediately. Methane has contributed to almost half of global warming thus far, and emissions are increasing quickly.

The world has been rightly focused on carbon dioxide, which is the largest driver of climate change to date. Methane seemed like something we could leave for later, but the world has warmed very rapidly over the past couple of decades, while we’ve failed to reduce our CO2 emissions. So, that leaves us more desperate for ways to reduce the rate of warming rapidly, which methane can do.

Drew Shindell, Study Lead Author and Professor, Duke University

Reduce, Coordinate, and Incentivize

Methane is the second most potent greenhouse gas, although only around 2 % of global climate finance is directed toward reducing methane emissions. These emissions are also rapidly increasing because of a mix of emissions from fossil fuel production and increased emissions from wetlands caused by the climate crisis.

We must act now to delay the effects of climate change and keep the global temperature below 2 °C. To this end, we must follow the Global Methane Pledge to cut methane emissions by 30 % from 2020 levels by 2030.

The scientists provide three crucial imperatives for action, supported by satellite remote sensing data assessments, reported methane emissions, and how abatement choices interact with market dynamics.

First, methane emissions must be reduced. Second, coordinated efforts should be made to reduce methane and carbon dioxide emissions—reducing carbon dioxide alone will not stop warming fast enough, while cutting methane just delays global warming. Third, methane abatement must be incentivized and enforced.

This is an economical and life-saving measure. According to estimates, the losses from each ton of methane released in 2020 ranged from US$470 to US$1700. However, this could be a major underestimation since the real cost might be as high as $7,000 per ton and still growing when accounting for the impact on air pollution that harms human health.

Shindell added, “The benefits of methane mitigation nearly always outweigh the net costs. Many methane mitigation options provide net economic gains even without accounting for environmental impacts.”

Emissions are reduced more rapidly since methane does not build up in the atmosphere over time. If all methane emissions were cut tomorrow, more than 90 % of the stored methane—but only about 25 % of the carbon dioxide—would have been removed from the atmosphere in 30 years.

“The most important mitigations are the available mitigation options across all sectors that aren’t too expensive because we really need to do everything to reach climate targets such as 1.5 or 2 C warming. Controlling methane from only one sector wouldn’t be enough. We need a broad portfolio of actions”, Shindell added.

The Right Tools for the Job

A country's existing policies and the industries it relies on will determine the most effective options to combat methane. 

The authors developed an online tool to discover the most efficient abatement strategies in various countries. For large fossil fuel producers, the most effective approaches might be to regulate output, incentivize methane absorption, or charge firms for methane emissions.

For others, the greatest benefits could come from concentrating on emissions from landfills. People can make a difference by adopting new lifestyles and voting with the environment in mind.

Shindell stated, “People can make sure they avoid overconsumption of beef and dairy and compost their organic waste whenever possible. If it is not possible where they live, they can vote for those who’ll create programs for composting in their towns. They can also vote for those who will make polluters pay for methane emissions rather than letting them profit while society picks up the tab for the damages they are inflicting.”

He concluded, “There are uncertainties, of course. We don’t yet have enough data to fully parse out the contributions of individual factors to the recent surge in the observed growth rate, for example. But it is imperative to rapidly reduce methane emissions to reduce the accelerating climate damages so many people around the world are suffering.”

Journal Reference

Shindell, D., et al. (2024) The methane imperative. Frontiers in Science. doi:10.3389/fsci.2024.1349770