The fossil fuel sector is responsible for nearly one-third of methane emissions from human activity today. Record production of oil, gas and coal, combined with limited mitigation efforts, has kept emissions above 120 million tonnes (Mt) annually. Abandoned wells and mines – included in this year’s Global Methane Tracker for the first time – contributed around 8 Mt to these emissions in 2024. Bioenergy production and consumption results in a further 20 Mt of methane, largely from the incomplete combustion of traditional biomass used in cooking and heating in developing economies.

The agriculture and waste sectors are also major sources of methane emissions, but fossil fuel supply offers the greatest potential for immediate reductions in methane emissions. Solutions that lower methane emissions from fossil fuels to near zero already exist, and they could be deployed today at little – or even negative – cost. We estimate that around 5% of global oil and gas production currently meets a near-zero emissions standard (nearly 3 million barrels per day of oil and 130 billion cubic metres of natural gas). Many actors have set targets for lowering methane emissions by 2030, and momentum to drive down methane emissions has grown since the launch of the Global Methane Pledge in 2021 and the Oil and Gas Decarbonization Charter in 2023. Yet so far, few countries or companies have formulated real implementation plans for these commitments, and even fewer have demonstrated verifiable emissions reductions.

Little or no measurement-based data is used to report methane emissions in most parts of the world. This is a major issue because measured emissions tend to be higher than reported emissions. Our estimates are based on the latest and best available data including scientific studies, measurement campaigns and large emissions events detected by satellites. As more measured data has become available, it appears that most national inventories are underreporting emissions: our estimate of total energy-related methane emissions globally is about 80% higher than the total reported by countries to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). This gap is narrowest in Europe, where countries regularly submit inventories and some producers report emissions based on measured data.

While existing data and estimates can serve as a basis for action to cut methane emissions, improved data will lead to more efficient resource allocation and better confidence in emissions-reduction efforts.

Many countries and companies are looking to improve their methane reporting. Canada recently updated its methodology to reflect improved data, which led to an increase of more than 35% in the volume of reported fugitive emissions from oil and gas. In 2024 some oil and gas companies met the highest level of reporting set by the United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP) Oil and Gas Methane Partnership 2.0 (OGMP 2.0). Around 10% of emissions reported to OGMP 2.0 are now based on the most stringent data reporting category, including emissions from ConocoPhillips, GRTGaz, Jonah, Snam and TotalEnergies.

Since the first iteration of the Global Methane Tracker in 2020, the growing availability of measurement studies and satellite data has reduced uncertainty in our estimates across all regions. However, significant data gaps remain, especially in parts of the world where satellites struggle to gather useful data – such as in Venezuela, where cloud cover hinders observations, and in the north of Russian Federation (hereafter: “Russia”), where snow and ice make it challenging to observe methane leaks.

Robust measurement, monitoring, reporting and verification (MMRV) procedures and systems are essential for facilitating and tracking emissions reductions. However, there are tried-and-tested policies that have been proven to reduce methane emissions, and which can be implemented as data quality improves. These include leak detection and repair (LDAR) requirements, mandating no- or low-emissions equipment, and restricting routine flaring and venting. 

Today there are more than 25 satellites in orbit that can provide insights on methane emissions. New methane-focused satellites became operational in 2024, including MethaneSAT and Tanager-1, which have sensitive detection thresholds and provide high resolution data.

Data from MethaneSAT shows that dispersed sources (i.e. those that emit less than 500 kg of methane per hour) are responsible for a significant portion of the methane released in major oil- and gas-producing basins. This adds to recent evidence from the United States that indicates the importance of addressing both super-emitters and smaller sources. New analysis from Carbon Mapper, which looked at more than 2 000 methane plumes around the world, indicates that about one quarter of emissions sources detected at oil and gas facilities were recurrent (i.e. a leak was detected on multiple occasions at the same location).

Data from Sentinel 5P, which has been operating for a number of years, suggests that emissions from super-emitting methane events at oil and gas facilities rose to a record high in 2024, despite a reduction in coverage (i.e. the number of days where observations were possible). 

A growing share of oil and gas production is subject to methane abatement commitments, thanks to new participants in the Global Methane Pledge (e.g. Azerbaijan), the Oil and Gas Decarbonization Charter (e.g. PetroChina), the Oil and Gas Methane Partnership 2.0 (e.g. the Nigerian National Petroleum Company) and other methane initiatives. However, several large emitters have yet to commit to methane cuts and about half of the industry has yet to set near-zero methane targets. Most of the oil and gas industry appears to be following the lead of governments as only around 5% of global production is covered solely by voluntary industry pledges.

While it is important to continue building ambition for methane cuts, the immediate focus should be on implementing existing commitments and collaborating to drive down emissions. Regulators can learn from jurisdictions that have implemented tried-and-tested policies. Companies can share best industry practices. Financiers can encourage methane abatement. Everyone can benefit from better and more transparent data. The International Energy Agency (IEA) has been working with partner organisations to deliver support where it is needed most and to ensure that regulators have the knowledge they need to succeed in reducing emissions.

Nearly 100 countries have engaged on national methane action plans, and additional methane policies were announced in 2024. This included new European Union regulation, which includes measures to address methane from imported oil, gas and coal. Several countries are looking to update their Nationally Determined Contributions – the climate action plans that each country submits under the Paris Agreement – to implement methane commitments.

Cutting down on methane and flaring can help improve energy security and ease the supply-demand balance by bringing additional natural gas to market. Around 200 billion cubic metres (bcm) of methane was emitted by the fossil fuel sector globally in 2024. Not all of this could have been captured and used as an energy source, but we estimate that methane abatement could have made nearly 100 bcm of natural gas available. A further 150 bcm of natural gas is flared globally each year, the majority of which consists of routine, non-emergency flaring. Addressing flaring and methane emissions in tandem would facilitate the deployment of solutions to ensure greater volumes of gas reach markets.

A vanguard of countries and companies are already demonstrating that methane emissions can be minimised, but not enough are following their lead: emissions intensities vary more than 100-fold between the best and worst performers.

In April 2025, the IEA and the government of the United Kingdom convened an international Summit on the Future of Energy Security to review the trends shaping global energy security and reflect on the tools needed to address energy security risks. Methane abatement makes a clear contribution to the energy security agenda. 

Deploying targeted methane mitigation solutions in the fossil fuel sector would prevent a roughly 0.1 °C rise in global temperatures by 2050 (assuming fossil fuel demand follows the Stated Policies Scenario). This would have a tremendous impact – comparable to eliminating all CO₂ emissions from the world’s heavy industry in one stroke. Without targeted action on methane, the risks of severe climate damage increase considerably.

In the oil and gas sector, abatement solutions include upgrading equipment that emits by design, such as replacing wet compressor seals with dry seals, and using vapour recovery units to recover low-pressure methane flows. For coal, emissions could be reduced through coal mine methane utilisation, or by using flaring or oxidation technologies.

Around 35 Mt of total methane emissions from oil, gas and coal could be avoided at no net cost, based on average energy prices in 2024 (a slight decrease from our 2023 estimate, mostly due to lower gas prices and the addition of abandoned facilities to our estimates). This is because the required outlays for abatement measures are less than the market value of the additional methane gas captured and sold or used.

In 2024, we published the IEA’s Methane Abatement Model, which allows users to estimate oil and gas methane abatement potential and the associated cost of abatement by country, segment and reduction technology.

Some methane abatement measures have high upfront capital costs and in many cases there is no route for bringing captured gas to markets, requiring investment in new infrastructure or means of gas transport. Many abatement options can still pay for themselves within a year. In the oil and gas sector, around 30% of the industry’s emissions today could be avoided with measures offering rates of return of more than 25% – well above the usual returns sought by oil and gas companies when considering new capital investment.

There are a number of reasons why companies may fail to invest in methane abatement despite these attractive rates of return. For example, companies could be unaware of the scale of the problem or the available solutions. There may be higher-profile opportunities competing for investment resources, or leadership may perceive methane abatement as more costly than it is. There may be split incentives, whereby equipment owners do not directly benefit from reducing methane leaks, the contractual terms prevent methane savings from affecting revenue, or the owner of the gas does not see its full value. Securing capital for required upfront investments can be difficult, especially in developing economies. Companies may struggle to deploy sufficient staff or secure the necessary services to tackle the problem. Or they may not have identified an effective pathway or business case for bringing captured gas to productive use. 

Abandoned facilities constitute a significant source of methane emissions. Based on the limited data that is currently available, we estimate that there are around 8 million abandoned onshore oil and gas wells globally, as well as a large number of abandoned coal mines. Most properly plugged wells emit negligible amounts of methane. But wells that were not appropriately decommissioned, or that have vents, can continue emitting methane for many years.

Globally, we estimate that abandoned coal mines emitted nearly 5 Mt of methane in 2024 and abandoned oil and gas wells released just over 3 Mt. Combined, these sources would be the world’s fourth-largest emitter of fossil fuel methane.

Most emissions result from mines and wells that have recently been abandoned – which makes timely action critical for effective mitigation. Options include plugging and monitoring wells that are no longer operational, sealing abandoned coal mines, and directing methane flows to energy use or oxidation technologies.

There are currently more than 2 billion people without access to clean cooking, mostly in developing economies in Africa and Asia Pacific. This contributes to nearly 3 million premature deaths annually, with women and children most at risk. Universal access to modern, clean cooking facilities would deliver substantial gains in equality, health and economic well-being. It would also cut down on a major source of methane emissions.

There are also opportunities to reduce methane emissions from modern bioenergy production. These include upgrading biogas and biomethane facilities with low-emission technologies, deploying solutions like LDAR and thermal oxidisers at these sites, and improving waste management to curb uncontrolled emissions.

When considering its full lifecycle – including methane and CO₂ emissions from supply and CO₂ emissions from its combustion – the greenhouse gas emissions intensity of natural gas use is generally much lower than that of coal. On average, natural gas results in about 35% fewer emissions than coal, and more than 95% of the natural gas consumed in 2024 had fewer lifecycle emissions than coal. When comparing emissions intensities of electricity generation, gas has a greater emissions advantage due to the higher efficiency of gas-fired power plants versus coal-fired plants.

Natural gas results in lower emissions than coal except when methane emissions from extraction, processing and transport are very high and when the warming impact of methane is considered over a shorter timeframe (e.g. using a 20-year global warming potential [GWP] rather than a 100-year GWP, as used here). The IEA is conducting an in-depth analysis of the full greenhouse gas emissions intensity of liquefied natural gas (LNG) and the options available for reducing these emissions, which will be released in June 2025.

Nonetheless, comparing natural gas only to coal sets the bar too low. The environmental case for gas relies not on surpassing the emissions performance of the most carbon-intensive fuel, but on minimising its own emissions intensity.