³Ô¹ÏÍø

Download this background briefing as a PDF: Methane and global climate goals

Key points 

• Methane emission reductions are essential and integral to meeting the climate goals of the Paris Agreement.  
• The UK needs to accelerate domestic methane reductions to be in line with a 30% reduction by 2030 (compared to 2020), which is the global target set out in the Global Methane Pledge. 
• The UK can also support delivery of the Global Methane Pledge by using its role as a financial hub to stimulate innovation in methane-reducing technologies. 
• Great care needs to be taken when selecting metrics, such as GWP100 or GWP*, to assess the warming impact from methane. If they are used incorrectly, it may result in misleading messages or could even undermine policy outcomes. 

What reductions in methane emissions are necessary to meet the Paris Agreement? 

Substantial reductions in methane emissions will be necessary to meet the Paris Agreement goal of holding global warming well below 2°C while pursuing efforts to limit it to 1.5°C relative to pre-industrial levels.  

The IPCC estimate of the remaining carbon budget for limiting warming to 1.5°C (the total net amount of carbon dioxide that can still be emitted while keeping global warming below the 1.5°C threshold) assumes that . Limiting warming to a weaker 1.7°C of global warming assumes that methane is reduced by about 45% over the same period. 

If methane emissions are not reduced, this could in theory be compensated by even more stringent reductions in carbon dioxide, but there are questions about how feasible this might be in practice. If there were no reduction at all in methane emissions by 2050, this would shrink the remaining carbon budget to such an extent that in effect the 1.5°C ambition of the Paris Agreement would be . 

Which sectors contribute to methane emissions and what reductions are necessary from each? 

According to the IEA’s , in 2023, 40% of human-caused methane emissions were from agriculture, 34% from fossil fuels and 20% from waste. There are more opportunities for low-cost, high-impact measures to reduce methane from the fossil fuel sector than for agricultural emissions, which are more complex and challenging to address. Therefore, the IPCC’s calculations for the remaining carbon budget assume greater reductions in fossil-fuel methane emissions: to limit warming to 1.5°C, it is assumed that methane from oil, gas and coal energy will as extraction is decreased and made more efficient. For agricultural emissions the reduction is , as reductions here are harder. 

What action should the UK take to meet the Global Methane Pledge? 

The Global Methane Pledge, which the UK helped to launch at COP26 in Glasgow, calls for a global 30% reduction in methane emissions by 2030 from the 2020 level of emissions. 

In terms of its own emissions, despite having achieved in methane emissions in recent decades (largely from the ), the UK is not yet on track to meet a 30% reduction between 2020 and 2030. The Climate Change Committee has reported that . This will likely require managing and controlling agricultural emissions, which now make up half of the UK’s methane emissions. 

Methane emissions from landfills have decreased significantly since the millennium, but levels have remained static over recent years, despite existing regulations. The UK government aims to nearly eliminate biodegradable waste going to landfill by 2028. The plan is to divert this waste to anaerobic digesters for biogas and biomethane production, as well as to composting facilities. However, this approach raises another important issue: the need to address . This suggests a need for enhanced monitoring, reporting, and verification mechanisms to better understand and manage emissions from this sector.  

A suggested that the (NAEI) may be underestimating emissions from some sectors, such as fossil fuels and biomass combustion, and there may be a need to reassess the sources contributing to methane emissions to ensure that their emissions are accurately represented and addressed in policy development. 

Beyond its own emissions, the UK can also play a wider role in delivering the global goal by helping other countries to cut their emissions. In particular, as a world-leading financial hub, there is the potential to catalyse innovation through incentivising investment in methane-reducing technologies and limiting the finance available for methane-generating activities. 

How are methane’s potency and lifetime accounted for in global targets? 

The impacts of methane on the climate differ from those of carbon dioxide. On the one hand, it is much shorter lived, remaining in the atmosphere for around 12 years (compared with hundreds of years for carbon dioxide). On the other, it is much more potent, absorbing much more energy than carbon dioxide and therefore leading to greater levels of warming while it is in the atmosphere. 

Metrics are available that can help to make it easier to compare the impacts of different greenhouse gases, despite their different characteristics. For example, GWP100 considers both the lifetime and potency of greenhouse gases and describes how much warming (technically, the amount of ‘radiative forcing’) they would cause over 100 years, relative to the same amount of carbon dioxide. This metric is helpful for thinking about our long-term climate goals and is the standard metric used for reporting to the and in the carbon budgets developed by the UK’s . It is less useful in other contexts, such as reflecting the near-term impacts of greenhouse gas emissions. Other metrics – such as GWP20 and GWP* - have been designed for these situations. 

Great care needs to be taken when applying metrics to policy analysis as if they are used incorrectly, they can lead to . 

Authors and contacts 

This background briefing was written by:

• , Research Associate, Chemical Engineering Department
• , Director of Research at the Grantham Institute and Professor of Climate Science and Policy at the Centre for Environmental Policy
• , Research Fellow, Centre for Environmental Policy 
• Jenny Bird, Campaign Manager, Grantham Institute 

Media enquiries: grantham.media@imperial.ac.uk
Policy enquiries: j.²ú¾±°ù»å°ª¾±³¾±è±ð°ù¾±²¹±ô.²¹³¦.³Ü°ì &²Ô²ú²õ±è;

Further reading 

• Bakkaloglu, S., Cooper, J. and Hawkes, A., 2022a. . One Earth, 5(6), pp.724-736. 
• Bakkaloglu, S., Cooper, J. and Hawkes, A., 2022b. . Journal of Cleaner Production, 376, p.134229. 
• Climate Change Committee, 2024
• Department for Energy Security and Net Zero,
• IEA, 2024
• Riahi, K., et al., IPCC, 2022: Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK and New York, NY, USA. and
• Rogelj, J., Lamboll, R.D., 2024. . Communications Earth & Environment 5, 35. 
• Rogelj, J., et al., 2018. in: Flato, G., Fuglestvedt, J., Mrabet, R., Schaeffer, R. (Eds.), Global Warming of 1.5 °C: An IPCC Special Report on the Impacts of Global Warming of 1.5 °C above Pre-Industrial Levels and Related Global Greenhouse Gas Emission Pathways, in the Context of Strengthening the Global Response to the Threat of Climate Change, Sustainable Development, and Efforts to Eradicate Poverty. IPCC/WMO, Geneva, Switzerland, pp. 93–174.
• Schleussner, C.F., Nauels, A., Schaeffer, M., Hare, W. and Rogelj, J., 2019. . Environmental Research Letters, 14(12), p.124055.   
• Woolley Maisch, C.A., et al., 2023. . Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 128(21), p.e2023JD039098.  

Published October 2024.