COLUMN
on the benefits associated with reducing emissions and the external drivers come into play when others think we are not doing enough and should be forced to do more.
Over many years we have seen a growing appetite globally to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from industrial operations. In the Americas, this has been a little less consistent, with variability at the political leadership level taking different views on what can be achieved and what is required to make that happen.
We are currently locked into a 12-year cycle where policy decisions have fluctuated wildly; however, during that period, we have still seen total emissions volumes fall due to the many consistent actions taken over that same period by responsible operating companies.
Action
What can you learn individually, and what could you possibly take back to your employer or operating company to implement and make a difference? We collectively( I hope) all understand that nothing will change until we change.
What actions could you take in the marketplace on a wider level to support the global drive to zero emissions? We now know what emissions we are looking for( Scopes 1, 2 and 3) and how these emissions are being generated. This allows us to really focus on what we can do to get the best possible reductions. The biggest driver in reducing emissions is time.
Where we have correctly managed emissions over time, we can expect to see maximum possible emissions reduction. Of course, the quality and cost of emissions mitigation and repairs also have an impact on total emissions reduction outcomes and so it is important that these get equal attention in emissions management too. When we take all necessary actions within the correct timescales, we can expect to achieve sustainable business operations.
Regulations
In the world of regulation, it is important to understand where the bar is being set. Much like in athletics, the bar starts at a low level to ensure maximum participation, but then the height increases over the course of the competition. This is the trajectory we have been on, with a growing number of compliance requirements coming into play around all global markets, but in particular in the USA and Europe.
The growing number and complexity of regulations around the monitoring, measurement, reporting and verification of emissions, along with proposed associated taxation of these has caused operating companies to review their operating practices and invest in de-carbonization initiatives as well as commit to their self-imposed emissions reduction targets. Most major operating companies in the oil & gas markets have made policy statements or pledges on how much they will cut their emissions over fixed time periods and published these for public consumption. Rolling back on these at this stage would be challenging to say the least.
De-regulation is driven by the perceived burden of monitoring and compliance, which resulted in an announcement on March 12th this year that 31 regulations were being“ rolled back” by the EPA and that sweeping EPA staffing cuts would follow.
Of course, some of those potential de-regulation rollbacks will be open to legal challenges. The probability that this de-regulation will have an impact on operator behaviours is not so clear. Given their very public statements of policy and intent, it is unlikely that they will all change their course in the short term. There is also a growing level of understanding that there are many positive spin-off benefits associated with managing emissions more tightly.
The“ burden” rhetoric has generated some negativity in the marketplace with complaints about what surveys are required, when, and how often. This has created a global ripple effect, with the head of policy department at the IOGP announcing at the Methane Mitigation Conference in Europe that the EU Methane Regulation places a disproportionate burden on oil and gas producers, asking them to detect minimal leaks that have negligible impact on the environment and that within IOGP Europe, they are advocating for a simpler, smarter and more effective approach.
A new, clearer understanding of the business benefits associated with proactive emissions management will most likely drive continuity of commitment from the IOGP community moving forwards. The positive opportunities and resulting outcomes from Emissions Elimination activities are re-focusing attention to the significant emissions such as flaring and venting that can be mitigated and eliminated
Snow in Houston, Texas, January 2025
32 FUGITIVE EMISSIONS JOURNAL • JUNE 2025