Oil and Gas Methane Partnership Fact Sheet

 The Oil and Gas Methane Partnership 2.0 (OGMP 2.0) published their progress report on Level 5 emissions reporting in early April. The report claims that by 2030, about a third of the global oil and gas supply will be covered by Level 5 reporting. To achieve Level 5 reporting, partners must rectify their emissions estimates based on modeling with a representative sample of site level emissions measurements. The report is making waves as OGMP 2.0 Level 5 reporting is expected to be a major aspect of compliance for the EU’s methane regulations. Given that importance, Oilfield Witness has prepared some information to contextualize the report. 

  • It is unlikely that 30% of the global supply actually achieves Level 5 reporting by 2030. 
    • The report indicates that only 238 assets across the entire globe are currently meeting Level 5 reporting (less than 10% of the global supply). 
    • To achieve their projections some countries must make unprecedented advances in emissions monitoring. For example, Qatar currently has 0% of its production certified at Level 5, but the report projects 94% of its production will be Level 5 by 2030. Similarly, the report projects U.S. Level 5 reporting will increase by 300% by 2030. 
    • OGMP rules require that companies achieve Level 5 reporting within five years of joining. The estimate that 30% of the gas supply will be Level 5 by 2030 assumes that every country implements their entire Level 5 achievement plan. Notably, there is no penalty for not achieving it and companies that don’t are allowed to continue to be part of OGMP. 
    • Companies tend to report slightly higher emissions at Level 5 than at previous levels, so some operators may be disincentivized to achieve it. 
  • While Level 5 requires some direct measurement of emissions, it is an overstatement from major international organizations like the IMEO to call it “measurement-based methane reporting”. 
    • To be clear, Level 5 reporting does not mean that emissions are measured rather than estimated. It means that emissions estimates are checked against measurements of a small sample of sites. That sample’s size and selection is determined by the company. That companies do not already do this as standard practice is unacceptable. It should be considered a bare minimum practice as it is very well established that only using engineering estimates for methane emissions will result in significantly undercounting methane emissions. 
    • Even when measurement does occur, it often relies on aerial surveys which give a snapshot of one moment in time – but do not provide continuous monitoring data. 
    • Companies hired to conduct methane emissions measurement can have large margins of error. Peer reviewed research evaluating one of the major measurement vendors found that more than 60% of measurements were off by at least 20%. 
    • Much of the implementation plan information submitted to the OGMP 2.0 is not public, making verification of sampling methodology difficult. 

Without clear enforceable penalties for not achieving Level 5 reporting, OGMP 2.0 risks joining the ranks of the failed or ineffective pledges, commitments and promises that have slowed climate policy while garnering positive PR for the industry (OGMP 1.0, The Methane Guiding Principles, The Global Methane Pledge, World Bank Zero Routine Flaring Initiative). Simultaneously, achieving Level 5 reporting cannot be treated on its own as evidence of progress. Since the partnership started in 2020, methane emissions have continued to climb. Effective climate stewardship must mean reductions in production of oil and gas, not just improving measurement. For more information about OGMP 2.0 and how it impacts the EU’s methane regulations check out this more detailed analysis.