Bonus episode from COP29: Getting real about methane emissions

Summary

Energy Gang: Bonus Episode from COP29 — Getting Real About Methane Emissions

Podcast: Energy Gang
Host: Ed Crooks (Wood Mackenzie)
Guests:

• Bjørn Otto Sverdrup (Chair, Executive Committee of the Oil and Gas Climate Initiative - OGCI)
• Enrique Pezera (Regional Lead, Latin America, Global Methane Hub)
  Date: December 10, 2024
  Location: Live at COP29, Baku, Azerbaijan

---

Main Theme:

This special episode, recorded at COP29 in Baku, confronts the persistent challenge of methane emissions—a greenhouse gas responsible for roughly 30% of human-induced global warming. While some diplomatic progress was made (with more countries joining the Global Methane Pledge), global methane emissions continue to rise. Host Ed Crooks speaks with leaders from industry and civil society to examine the barriers to progress and the pathways toward significant methane reduction by 2030.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Methane’s Outsize Role and Elusive Solutions

• Methane is the second most important greenhouse gas after CO₂, responsible for ~30% of recent anthropogenic global warming. (00:25)
• Main emissions sources: oil/gas, coal, agriculture, waste.
• Capturing methane can be economically attractive for the energy sector because it's the main component of natural gas.
• Despite nearly 160 countries joining the Global Methane Pledge (30% reduction by 2030 vs 2020 levels), total emissions are still climbing. (01:45)

---

2. The Oil and Gas Decarbonization Charter: Ambition vs. Reality

Guest: Bjørn Otto Sverdrup, OGCI (04:44–20:51)

Charter Scope and Industry Progress

• The Decarbonization Charter unites 55+ international and national oil & gas companies, representing 43% of global production, in a commitment to slash operational emissions, end flaring, and tackle methane by 2030.
• Companies involved must set targets, report progress transparently, and invest in future energy systems. (06:42–07:42)

“From the beginning we have said you should never join this group if you just want to look good, you should join this group if you want to improve.”—Bjørn Otto Sverdrup (08:53)

Are These Just Pledges, or Is There Real Progress?

• While the core OGCI group (12 majors) reports >50% reduction in methane and flaring over 5–6 years, global emissions are still rising. The focus is shifting to rigorous baseline setting and public reporting. (09:40)
• National oil companies are increasingly engaged; motivations vary from climate concern to economic efficiency (energy loss is costly).
• Technology transfer and peer assistance are encouraging, e.g., drone-based detection systems shared between international and national companies. (11:20)

“Some of these improvements can be made fairly easily. So having this awareness on the top and also the training of professionals on how to reduce methane leaks or reduce flaring is...encouraging.”—Bjørn Otto Sverdrup (11:54)

COP29, Finance, and Carbon Markets

• Finance and robust carbon markets are seen as critical for deployment and scaling of methane mitigation.
• There’s a “brutal recognition” that hitting the 1.5°C target is increasingly unlikely—carbon removals and market mechanisms will have to expand rapidly. (14:45)

“Many technological solutions are still struggling to be picked up by market dynamics...carbon markets may play a very important part in completing the business models for both low-carbon solutions [and] deeper methane cuts.”—Bjørn Otto Sverdrup (14:39)

Energy Industry’s Place in Climate Talks

• Inclusion of oil & gas in UN climate negotiations is a pragmatic necessity, given their operational footprint and emissions.
• Oil & gas companies claim to be significant investors in renewables now, with $100 billion invested in low-carbon solutions. (17:30–18:00)
• Sverdrup calls for accountability: “You should hold us accountable to the things we're saying. And I promise you we will be back again one year from now reporting progress and being as transparent as possible.” (19:23)

Host Candidly Challenges Greenwashing Concerns

“I have to say that the oil and gas industry was not included in climate negotiations...because it seemed like the industry had not demonstrated it was a good faith actor.”—Ed Crooks (16:57)

---

3. The Role of Measurement, Policy, and Finance in Methane Reductions

Guest: Enrique Pezera, Global Methane Hub (21:01–35:56)

Origins and Mission

• The Global Methane Hub, launched after COP26, is a philanthropic entity targeting methane in energy, agriculture, and waste.
• Main levers: Funding MRV (monitoring, reporting, verification); transparent, actionable data; policy support at all levels. (21:46–22:30)

“One of the biggest challenges with methane emissions is what you don't see, you don't care. So you need to see and you need to quantify these emissions and you need technology for that.”—Enrique Pezera (22:09)

Why Are Emissions Still Rising?

• Global emissions are rising, but the pace is lower in the energy sector due to regulatory and technological advances.
• Success stories (Canada, Colorado, California) show deep cuts are possible now, often at net zero or even negative cost, especially in oil & gas. (24:50)

“75% of oil and gas methane emissions can be mitigated and more than 40% of the total can be mitigated at net zero costs.”—Enrique Pezera, referencing IEA report (24:25)

Regional Progress: Latin America

• Colombia: methane mitigation law (oil, gas, coal) is already lowering emissions.
• Mexico and Brazil: regulation is advancing. Argentina: private sector action continues despite government climate skepticism—methane reduction seen as a market necessity for EU exports. (25:41–28:17)
• In energy, the reduction target is 75% by 2030.

Will Emissions Finally Drop Soon?

• Pezera is optimistic: recent regulatory and technology developments could flip the trend as soon as next year. (29:14)
• Stresses again the dual need for energy transition and methane mitigation: “It's not one or the other. The two need to come at the same time.” (29:57)

Critical Role of Financing and Carbon Markets

• Methane makes up nearly 45% of global warming effect but gets only 3% of climate finance.
• Urgent needs:
  • Clear investment taxonomy—so methane mitigation in oil & gas is labeled ‘green’ and is bankable.
  • Strong carbon pricing to reward methane reductions proportionate to its warming impact. (32:17–33:39)
  • More flows to the Global South, where the majority of methane emissions originate.

“If a big financial institution is financing methane mitigation in an oil field in Angola, it is considered a green investment because that money is being channeled towards a very important climate issue. But that infrastructure is not there yet.”—Enrique Pezera (33:39)

What Would Make COP29 a Success?

• Countries must (A) explicitly recognize methane mitigation in NDCs and (B) commit the resources to back it up, especially for the Global South. (34:24–34:56)

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• “[COP is] a mobilization of intent and efforts, and it's inspiring to see how many people are gathering to work on different pieces of the work.” —Bjørn Otto Sverdrup, OGCI (13:17)
• “Things are different and hopefully that also leads to a more nuanced debate where you're looking for shared solutions.” —Bjørn Otto Sverdrup (18:00)
• “There is a lot of resistance in the financial sector to provide financing for the oil and gas industry because...they are then financing more oil and gas production. And it's a big problem, right?” —Enrique Pezera (33:34)
• “80% of methane emissions are in the Global South, which is quite different from when we talk about carbon dioxide...So there needs to be an understanding that the Global South, we have a great opportunity for methane mitigation there, but it needs the capacity, it needs the resources, it needs support.”—Enrique Pezera (34:56)

---

Important Timestamps

• 00:25 — Methane’s significance and global warming share
• 04:44 — Introduction of OGCI, the Decarbonization Charter, and company commitments
• 09:40 — Progress reports vs. continued rise in global emissions
• 14:39 — Carbon markets and financing needs for new technologies
• 21:09 — Global Methane Hub’s origins and focus on transparency/policy
• 24:25 — IEA findings: cost-effectiveness of methane mitigation
• 25:41 — Latin American success stories and regulatory landscape
• 29:14 — Outlook: When will emissions finally decline?
• 32:17 — Solution focus: climate finance, carbon pricing, and taxonomy
• 34:24 — What would make COP29 a methane success?

---

Overall Tone

Pragmatic but urgent. Both guests acknowledge hard realities—slow progress, market barriers, North–South divides, the mismatch of ambitions and resources—while offering concrete examples and guarded optimism that conditions for meaningful methane reduction are improving. Ed Crooks maintains a journalistic, challenging, yet constructive tone throughout.

---

Conclusion

COP29 delivered only incremental steps on climate finance and global carbon markets, leaving many Global South nations frustrated—but the technical and regulatory groundwork for deep methane cuts is starting to show results. The energy sector’s willingness to cooperate, innovate, and accept scrutiny will remain critical as the world heads to COP30 in Brazil, with the global methane emissions curve needing to bend sharply downward if 2030 targets are to be met.

---

For feedback or questions, listeners are encouraged to reach out via social media or the Wood Mackenzie website.

Transcript

[A]

Looking to understand the economics, technologies, policies and communities shaping our energy future, check out a new podcast series, Energize the Future of Energy from Gzero Media's Blue Circle Studio, co hosted by JJ Ramberg and Greg Ebel, CEO of Enbridge. They explore the energy transition by digging into the biggest challenges of AI, food, waste, community impact and policy with experts like Pulitzer winner Daniel Yergin, Microsoft's Ulrichoman and and Impact Technology's Ryan Beggin. From Divert. Listen on Apple, Spotify or wherever you get your podcasts or visit gzeromedia.com energygang to learn more. Hello and welcome to the Energy Gang, a discussion show from Wood Mackenzie about the fast changing world of energy. I'm ID Crooks and this is a special episode of bonus coverage from COP 29 in Baku, Azerbaijan. And what we're focusing on in this episode is the issue of methane. It is the second most important greenhouse gas after carbon dioxide, and it's estimated that it accounts for about 30% of the human induced global warming that we've seen since pre industrial times.

[B]

One of the biggest challenges with methane emissions is what you don't see, you don't care. So you need to see and you need to quantify these emissions and you need technology for that.

[A]

That was Enrique Pezera, who's the regional lead for Latin America for the Global Methane Hub. That's an organization backed by philanthropic money that works on practical projects to cut methan methane emissions. Methane is of course the principal component of natural gas and so emissions come from that natural gas industry, from the coal and the oil industries, and also from agriculture and from waste. And because it's the main component of natural gas, it can seem like one of the easier sources of emissions to cut because if you capture the gas, then you have a useful product that you can sell. And so COP 29, which was in many ways a pretty disappointing conference, you can hear my discussion of that with Melissa Lott and Amy Harder. On the previous show, progress on methane was claimed as one of the bright spots in in 2024 we had four more countries joining the Global Methane Pledge, bringing the total to 159. Those are countries that aim to cut their methane emissions by 30% below 2020 levels by 2030. And almost 100 of those countries have drawn up action plans to say how they're actually going to do that. So might sound quite promising. Except global methane emissions have not actually been heading towards that 30% reduction. In fact they've been going up. So to talk about what's happening with methane and how emissions can be reduced. I spoke first to someone from one of the largest emitting industries, oil and gas. Bjorn Otto Sverdrup is the chair of the Executive Committee for the Oil and Gas Climate Initiative, which is a group backed by 12 big international oil and gas companies that works on ideas for reducing emissions. And he's also the head of the secretariat for a large group that signed up for something called the Oil and Gas Decarbonisation Charter. That's a group of about 55 big oil and gas companies from around the world, including many national oil companies from emerging econom that have agreed to work together on cutting emissions. And I asked him first about that decarbonisation charter. It was launched in COP28 in Dubai a year ago. What material progress has it made? So I'm joined now by Bjornoto Sverdrup, who is the chairman of the Executive Committee of the Oil and Gas Climate Initiative, which is the organization representing 12, I think, of the world's leading oil and gas companies that are working together to reduce emissions. Bjorn, welcome to the show.

[C]

Thank you so much for inviting me here.

[A]

One of the signature announcements coming out of COP28 last year in Dubai was the launch of the Oil and Gas Decarbonization Charter. This is an initiative meant to be bringing together quite a large group of companies, more than 50 oil and gas companies from around the world. It's interesting, I think, that we're in Azerbaijan this year, a big oil and gas producer. We were in United Arab Emirates last year, big oil and gas producer. We're going to be in Brazil for COP30 next year, again, a big oil and gas producer. And people have said the significance of this is that it shows that oil and gas producers, oil and gas producing countries and oil and gas producing companies need to be part of the global effort to address climate change, because if they're left outside the tent, then they're not going to make any progress. And, and it seems like this Decarbonisation Charter is right at the heart of that. I suppose then the question a lot of people will have is what does that really amount to? What are actually people committing to when they sign up to the charter? What real progress, what material impact from the charter are you able to show people?

[C]

Climate is very closely related to energy. Most of the emissions are coming from the energy system. So I think we should welcome actually that even at COP and the conventional parties of governments, when they're discussing climate and eager to see progress, they are inviting the energy industry and the energy providers to be part of the conversation. So be that in Dubai and be that in Brazil in coming years. I think it's a healthy and it's a very important pragmatic move. What we did last year was to bring on board more than 55 oil and gas producing companies from truly Global Initiative to see how could they move faster to reduce their own emissions. And it's a very significant kind of group of companies, activities in more than 104 countries, representing 43% of the world's oil and gas production, 6700 fields. And I think the fact that these companies are saying we are eager to reduce our own emissions, particularly on methane and flaring, even as closely as 2030, is an important move. And since the charter was launched at the COP last year, we have always had our eyes on how much progress do we need to make in order to be showing up in Baku with having something to show.

[A]

Okay, I'll come on to what you think you've got to show in a moment. But just to clarify on the sort of the distinction between the Oil and Gas Decarbonization Charter and the Oil and Gas Climate Initiative, which is the group that you're employed by. The initiative, that's the smaller group, 12 companies, that's basically Western international oil companies, large European and U.S. companies, but the charter is a much broader group that includes in particular a lot of the big national oil companies from oil and gas producing countries around the world. Right?

[C]

Yeah, you're right. So 10 years ago, running up to the Paris Agreement, actually 12 of the largest oil and gas companies in the world came together, basically signaling that we are ready for an ambitious Paris Agreement and wanted to be a catalyst for change in this industry. So as you said, it includes all the European majors. Importantly, I think you say also the US companies, Exxon, Oxy and Chevron, but also Petrobras, Aramco and CNPC of China. So combined this group over the last 10 years actually managed to reduce their emissions Significantly more than 50% on methane and flaring, and tried to be a catalyst for change not only on reducing emissions, but also unlocking new types of solutions. And what we've been eager to do is to say, look, can we mobilize even bigger part of the industry too take part in this journey? We know that nearly 60% of the world's oil and gas resources are held by national oil companies, many of them located in the emerging markets of Global South. Many of them have not spoken much on climate related issues, but still they have emissions and they're increasingly important part of the world's energy market. So we tried to develop something and under the leadership of the previous COP presidency, Dr. Sultana Jaber, we were able to literally broaden the tent when we met in Dubai to bring many more companies on board. And I think what they sign up to is a meaningful set, very meaningful and quite bold set of emissions. They sign up to try to reduce or get to net zero for all their own operated emissions, eliminate flaring and methane by 2030, report progress according to international framework, set targets, collaborate and share, and also to invest in the future energy system. It's a very meaningful set of ambitions. And now of course, are they making progress? That's the most important question.

[A]

Do you have that?

[C]

So from the beginning we have said you should never join this group. If you just want to look good, you should join this group if you want to improve. That's been clear from the beginning. We know that there is a risk to say, hey, this is greenwashing. So we have said always from the beginning, if you're joining, be serious and try to do actions.

[A]

And in terms of results though, in terms of actually reducing methane emissions, reducing flaring, it doesn't yet seem to have been a lot of progress. Right? I mean, if you look at estimates for global methane emissions, they're probably going to be higher this year than they were last year. I mean, maybe it's unreasonable to expect kind of an immediate impact, but very soon you are going to have to demonstrate some real progress, aren't you? Where do you think we're going to see that?

[C]

You're right, that world total methane emissions are going up. That's very negative. It needs to be turned around. But equally, we're encouraged by the fact that the group of 12, the OGS High members, have been able to reduce their emissions within five, six years, more than 50%. To me it shows the potential. So what we've been doing now is to at least let's try to figure out a bit of a baseline. And I believe that in next year we'll be focusing on making sure that nearly all the companies have set targets and also are improving the way they are sharing numbers.

[A]

I mean, it would seem to me that if you're running a national oil company in many of these developing countries, emerging economies, you're thinking about energy poverty, you're thinking about development needs, you're thinking about needing to raise revenue and provide employment and generate investment into your economy, which desperately needs it. I would have thought a lot of people would think Addressing climate change is pretty low down their list of priorities. So when you're talking to people and you're trying to kind of make the case to say, look, this is an effort that you should join, this is something you should be doing, you should be setting these targets, what do you say to them?

[C]

Actually, we do not need to do that much convincing. We added four companies this year and lost none. I'm sensing that they are staying the course. They're coming being concerned about climate related issues or energy losses for different reasons, some for climate impact. Others are saying, look, methane leaks, flaring, it's a loss of energy, we cannot afford that anymore in a scarcity of energy. So different reasons for that and also market signals saying, let's move to this. Two weeks ago we in Abu Dhabi, we gathered most of the signatories, more than 30 CEOs met, reconfirmed their commitment and also discussed about progress made and what should be priorities going forward. Some of the companies said they reported that they have been able to get support to do drone surveillance over specific oil and gas fields to detect methane leaks and have been able to fix that. And then this was a national oil company or two actually NOCs, and this support was offered for free by the proprietary technology of one of the international oil and gas companies. And then during that meeting, other companies and the same company offered this support to all of the other companies to say, I can give you this helping hand. So I think it's also this clear idea we can improve. Some of these improvements can be made fairly easily. So having this awareness on the top and also the training of professionals on how to reduce methane leaks or reduce flaring is to me it's encouraging. I'm convinced we will see results of this.

[A]

And so how does that relate to what's happening here at the COP in Baku? There are government officials negotiating away in rooms a few yards from where we're talking now, trying to thrash out some kind of agreement, in particular an agreement on climate finance. How does that relate to what your members, what the oil and gas industry globally is doing in terms of reducing emissions?

[C]

The COP will always be important. Of course it's Gammons discussing, but it's also become something broader and bigger. I mean it's a mobilization of intent and efforts and it's inspiring to see how many people are gathering to work on different pieces of the work. For the energy industry in particular, I think this year is very important on carbon markets. But also what we believe is a big gap is on how could you mobilize more capital in particular to emissions reductions or deployment of new energy in the emerging markets. At the COP is always a reminder of the scale of the challenge, but also the global nature of the climate. So I think to promote some kind of strengthen further international initiatives to reduce emissions is very important and also to provide more energy to more people.

[A]

You mentioned carbon markets. That was one of the topics that was on the agenda at COP28 last year. There were hopes that there would be some kind of global agreement on how international carbon markets function. That didn't happen at Cop 28. Here at Cop 29 there seems to have been some progress, but certainly not still a final deal. What is the importance of that? Why is it significant? And why is there value in getting some kind of real global deal on how carbon markets work?

[C]

There's a lot of technological solutions that would be needed that is still struggling to be picked up by market dynamics. They are too dependent on subsidies or consumer not willing to pay for that. So carbon markets may play a very important part in completing the kind of the business models for both low carbon solutions, carbon capture, synthetic fuels, all those solutions that we know we need. And also I think, and this is a brutal recognition or a fact coming out is there's more and more talk about we will struggle to meet 1.5 degrees. We will be what they call overshoot. So carbon removals will be more important. And then we need to find way to ensure that there are business models that will work to ensure that technology is made possible.

[A]

So what does a good outcome look like for cop 29 then?

[C]

Two things and one wish. So the short term I think we talked about the carbon markets will be very important. So if they're able to make progress on that because been in the making for a while and then the credibility of this international dialogue will probably rely on the richer part of the world's ability to really come up with financing for some of the emerging markets or the Global South's needs. So capital and that market peace will be important. Speaking on behalf of my industry, I think to ensure that the energy industry is part of the conversation is to me very important. I think it was strange that the oil and gas industry was not part of the conversation. It was only since Sharm El Sheikh in Egypt and then in Dubai and Abaku again was part of it. And I think you need to have a pragmatic and inclusive approach to find solutions. And I think sometimes the discussion is too binary because the world is still running a lot on oil and gas over time. That share will go down. But there are plenty of emissions to be reduced and we need to find ways of reducing emissions across the board in a responsible way.

[A]

I mean, personally I don't find it strange, I have to say that the oil and gas industry was not included in climate negotiations for a very long time because it seemed like the industry had not demonstrated it was a good faith actor. Right. And there were people would challenge climate science and try and delay action and so on. A lot of people would still have a vision of the world where to get to net zero to really address climate change properly. The oil and gas industry has to go away altogether. I mean, you can understand why people have those concerns, right?

[C]

But maybe things are changing, right? First, I think maybe more and more people come to see that the oil and gas companies are serious about reducing their own emissions and delivering tangible results of that and being more transparent. Equally, I think they see some of the biggest investors into renewables now are actually oil and gas companies. So we keep track of that in OGCI and this year we ended 1 billion short of $100 billion spent invested into low carbon solutions among the 12 over the last since last years. So these are very big numbers. And if you look at the portfolio of many of the oil and gas companies, the biggest projects that they're doing right now is a renewables project. So be that in hydrogen, in carbon capture storage, offshore wind, massive solar projects for instance. And also I think maybe see that the oil and gas industry staying the course and are showing up differently. Earlier this week we alert the CEO Exxon suggesting that the US should stay within the Paris Accord. Similarly, I think you saw the CEO of TotalEnergy suggesting that there shouldn't be a rollback of methane regulations. Companies are suggesting carbon pricing as a meaningful update. Some would say, hey, are you asking for more taxation, etc. So, so things are different and hopefully that also leads to a more nuanced debate where you're looking for shared solutions.

[A]

Yeah, absolutely. And I do think that is a really striking thing is just how different the conversation is in the industry now compared to what it was certainly 20 years ago or even 10 years ago.

[C]

When the charter was signed, even though it was signed at COP and made seen as a pledge by many. We do not want that to be a fireworks or a pledge and then it's happy one day and nobody remembers it afterwards, Right? So we would like it to stay. And we also would like to say this industry should be recognized as an execution oriented industry and you should hold us accountable to the things we're saying. And I promise you we will be back again one year from now reporting progress and being as transparent as possible to show that is this charter making a difference or not? And just invite everybody to say, engage with us and if you find ways to criticize us, please do that, but also look for other opportunities that you could be supportive of this. Please do so.

[A]

Yeah, that's a great point. And certainly we're going to be looking to do that on the energy gang holding you to account and following your progress on meeting the goals of the charter over the years to come. And definitely if there are any people listening to this that would like to contribute that and have ideas, ways to address these challenges, we'd love to hear them.

[C]

So we have a webpage so you can watch that. It's the Oil and Gas Decommission Charter. But yeah, watch out.

[A]

We will be doing that. For now, though, we do have to leave it there. Bjornotis Verdor, thanks so much. Indeed. Great talking to you.

[C]

Thanks.

[A]

I then also spoke to Enrique Pezera, who's the regional lead for Latin America for the Global Methane Hub. I asked him first about the origins of that organization.

[B]

So, the Global Methane Hub, it's a philanthropic institution. It was created after the Global Methane pledge at the COP26 in Glasgow, where then more than 100 countries committed to lower the global methane emissions by 30% in 2030 from 2020 levels. After this pledge, philanthropy saw an opportunity to create an organization that would specify that would target its actions in methane mitigations in the three main emitting sectors, agriculture, energy and waste. That's when the Global Methane Hub was created with that philanthropic focus.

[D]

And when you talk about targeted actions, what do you actually do?

[B]

We have many different levers, but I would say the main levers is first of all, we support research and application of MRV in the three sectors. I will focus more in the energy.

[D]

Sector and mrv, as we always say.

[A]

This is a business that's full of.

[D]

Acronyms, that's monitoring, reporting, monitoring, reporting and verification.

[B]

Because one of the biggest challenges with methane emissions is what you don't see, you don't care. So you need to see and you need to quantify these emissions and you need technology for that. It's through this data that you hold companies and governments accountable for their emissions. If you don't have that, then you're not going to tackle the challenge. This is a big focus of our work, is to provide clear, transparent data for all stakeholders involved for civil society for regulators, for the private sector, for anyone who needs these information to base their actions. Another lever that we have is policy. Right, we need policies. I know there are a lot of commitments from the private sector, but they need to be back up by policies to level the playing field and make sure that we reach these ambitious targets. So we work with policymakers, from local governments to national governments to international negotiations to create the right set of policies that will move ambition to make sure that these policies are implementable.

[D]

As you say, methane is a very important part of the global warming problem. It is also a problem that's apparently getting worse, right? I mean, if you look at the numbers we had in 2021, this global pledge on methane, since when emissions have just been going up and up and up, they're up in 22, in 23, they're very likely going to be up again this year. Doesn't really look like these international efforts are having much impact so far. So I suppose I've got two questions really. Why is it that international efforts so far haven't had much of an impact? And when we look forward, what can be done to actually bend that curve and start emissions heading in the right direction?

[B]

Well, you're right that emissions, anthropogenic emissions are still going up and that is a big problem. But we're talking about global changes, right? So these things, they do take some time. We don't have that much time to, to waste. But a lot of things have been done in these last three years to create the right conditions for planetary scale change especially, but not only in the energy sector. So even though emissions are still rising, although at a lower pace in the energy sector, we already have success cases, champions like countries like Canada or US states like Colorado and California that are showing that we right now already have the conditions, the technology, the data, at low cost to make these changes. Not just like pilot, and they're not necessarily small oil and gas producers. But anyways to take that to the global scale and to bring these emissions down, the IEA recently published a report showing that 75% of oil and gas methane emissions can be mitigated and more than 40% of the total can be mitigated at net zero costs. This is improving as we speak because technologies are getting cheaper, data is more available, satellite data is more available. And so these costs are going down. And if you put on top of that a very low carbon price of $20, this number goes up significantly. So yes, emissions are still going up, but the conditions for action are improving considerably. And our expectation is that take into account what has already evolved and what is coming online. Just in the last few months, we'll have the conditions to reach the pledge of lowering methane emissions by 30% and.

[D]

How much progress is being made in the region that you have responsibility for Latin America, what's going on there?

[B]

Yeah. So in Latin America, we actually have many success stories. I wish there were more to tell you about, but we do have some important ones, like in the case of Colombia. Colombia is a country that has already approved an oil and gas mitigation law that also includes coal mining, which is important in Colombia. Their emissions are going down already as a result. And there are other countries like Brazil. Petrobras is a member of both ogci, OGMP Oil and Gas Methane Partnership. And so we do have success cases. A number of countries in the region, important oil and gas producers like Mexico, already has legislation. It needs improvement and we're working to get there. Brazil is about to publish a new oil and gas law. It's actually a regulation by the national Oil and Gas Agency. And so you are seeing progress both in the policy side, but also the private sector is engaging and is already showing more results. I was recently in Argentina, a workshop in El can which has the Vaca Muerta oil and gas fracking fields. And there is a lot of action there as well from the private sector, from mainly international oil companies that have these commitments to lower that oil and gas methane emissions. So there is action, but we need much more ambitions and we need more policies to make sure that the entire sector is moving in the right direction.

[A]

Yeah, and that's an interesting example when you talk about the Vaca Muerta field in Argentina, because Argentina's government obviously seems quite skeptical about climate action and has actually withdrawn its representatives from these COP 29 talks. But you're saying even despite of that, there's still a lot of interest in addressing the methane issue? There's. Yeah.

[B]

What's interesting about Argentina is that even though what you said is it's right and it's unfortunate, we see that many parts of the Argentinian society and government understand methane mitigations as a market opportunity. So they understand that important importing markets like the European Union have already legislation in place that will impose costs for high emitting methane oil and gas that are imported to level the playing field within the regulations that they impose on European producers. So they are seeing it more or less a market opportunity which is perfectly aligned with this current government ideology and they are willing to take actions on that. So that their products have market access.

[A]

And as you were saying, when you put all that together, that gives you some confidence that you can get to that 2030 target. So that is a 2030 goal, is a 30% reduction in all methane emissions from those three sectors, agriculture, waste and energy, or is it that just from energy?

[B]

All of them, yeah. All anthropogenic emissions. And I should say that specifically in the energy sector, it's the one sector where we can lower most emissions at lower cost. So in the energy, the target is 75% emissions reductions. That's the same target that for instance, OGCI has. That's the same target that other initiatives have because the opportunity for reduction is much greater in the energy sector than in agriculture and waste.

[A]

So that's very interesting. Obviously, if you're going to get to that 30% reduction in just five years from now, the decline in total emissions has to start soon. Do you think we might see emissions lower in 25 than they were in 24? Is it going to happen as quickly as next year?

[B]

I do think so. Of course, I don't have a crystal ball. Right. But I do see a lot of commitment and the commitments now are complemented by regulation, which is what I think that will deliver. Right. Not alone. You need to make sure that these regulations are implementable. And with these new technologies like satellite monitoring that I mentioned previously, you have the tools to enforce this new regulation. And 75% methane emissions reductions might sound like a lot, but it's not. And we've got great examples like Canada that I just showed that show that this is perfectly possible. And the oil and gas industry in Canada is doing fine. They're not like they're still increasing productions with all the issues that that brings to the climate. Of course we need to talk about energy transition. It's very important to emphasize that the IPCC 1.5C scenarios all state the need for us to have both energy transition with methane mitigation at the same time. It's not one or the other. The two need to come at the same time. But it is completely achievable and we have good examples of how that can be achieved.

[A]

So what about what's happening here in Baku? How can the outcomes from COP 29 help you make progress on that goal?

[B]

I think COP 29, it's key for us to understand where our capacity, where ambition meets capacity of implementation. Because now the main focus is finance. Right. So what are the resources that we all have to make sure that the national determined contributions are ambitious and are Implementable. So it's based on what comes out of this cop that we will know the conditions for the NDCs that will come in the next cop. So that is very important for methane mitigations. The Global Methane Hub is working with a number of government, important governments in the world, world to make sure that they have methane mitigation plans for the three sectors that I mentioned, for energy, for agriculture, and for waste. But you do need the resources for that. And when we talk about finance, we don't necessarily mean more public resources for that. As I mentioned previously, we have a lot of market opportunities for methane mitigations because there is a clear return for investors. But you need to have the right market conditions and the right market regulations. So, for instance, when you price carbon adequately, you do have a big premium for methane mitigation because the global warming potential of methane is so huge. So obviously, if you have a functioning carbon market, you create incentives for that. And then not only. But that's true for the energy sector. And of course, the challenges in waste and in agriculture are different. But also we need to work in creating financial conditions and catalyzing the private sector, private resources in order to make these NDCs achievable.

[A]

Right. That's really interesting. And you've sort of just answered the question I was about to ask, but I'm going to ask it anyway, just to drill down into the issue a bit further and make it absolutely clear. So you were talking earlier about that gap then between, as you say, methane representing up to 45% of all global warming, but only 3% of climate finance. And my question was, how can you bridge that gap and how can you get more money into reducing methane emissions? You are saying that carbon markets, carbon pricing. Is that the sort of the number one mechanism you think could be most effective, or are there other things as well?

[B]

Yeah, there are definitely other things. So first of all, we need to have a clear taxonomy for the financial system sector to know clearly what's considered green investment in regards to methane mitigation. So we're working with important countries like Brazil and others, but also working with the international community to have a clear taxonomy for what really we're talking about. When we talk about methane emissions mitigation, for instance, there is a lot of resistance in the financial sector to provide financing for the oil and gas industry because they are then financing more oil and gas production. And it's a big problem. Right.

[A]

That's a real hierarchy. So not wanting to finance the oil and gas industry means you can't actually finance emissions reduction.

[B]

Exactly. So that is a big problem. And we need the right taxonomy, the right certifications in place to make sure that if a big financial institution is financing methane mitigation in an oil field in Angola, it is considered a green investment because that money is being channeled towards a very important climate issue. But that infrastructure is not there yet. So we, as the global mapping hub, work through our grantees, through our partners, to create that infrastructure so that these resources will be available and will be available at a premium, at a lower cost than otherwise.

[A]

So what does success at this COP look like to you then?

[B]

I think what's clear that we need to achieve is countries recognizing first the importance of methane mitigation for their climate plans for their NDCs. This needs to be clear. And as I said, we need resources for that. So countries need to not only have ambition and set methane targets on our NDCs, but they need to point where the resources are for that mitigation. There needs to be support from the Global north to the Global South. This is one of the main issues that are being discussed in this cop. I think that a great sign is that international support from the Global north to methane mitigation in Global south, especially because 80% of methane emissions are in the Global south, which is quite different from when we talk about carbon dioxide. Most of emissions, at least historical emissions, are in the Global North. It's not the same with methane. So there needs to be an understanding that the Global south, we have a great opportunity for methane mitigation there, but it needs the capacity, it needs the resources, it needs support. And I think that I will judge this COP as successful. It's one. If it's one, there is acknowledgement of the importance of methane mitigations. And if there are methane targets on the NDC. Some countries have already announced their NDCs. We are hoping for more ambition and for specific targets for methane mitigation.

[A]

Enrique Pezera, thank you very much indeed. Great talking to you.

[B]

Great talking to you. It was a pleasure. Thank you.

[A]

As we now know, the outcome of COP 29 in terms of financing for cuts in emissions of all kinds, including methane, was very much less than many developing and emerging economies had hoped for. But the international effort on climate continues and there will be hopes for more progress in the run up to COP30 in Brazil a year from now. So that's all from me. Thanks again to Bjornotos Verdrup and to Enrique Pezera. And above all, many thanks to all of you for listening. As you know, we really value your feedback, so please do keep it coming. Leave us a review or contact us on social media. We're on X and on Bluesky Guy and I'm also on LinkedIn and we'll be back soon with our roundup of the highs and lows of energy in 2024. Until then, goodbye.