Methane (CH4) is the second-most harmful greenhouse gas after carbon dioxide (CO2), trapping outgoing heat and warming the atmosphere through a process known as radiative forcing. Though it lingers in the atmosphere for far less time (12 years, compared with centuries for CO2), methane absorbs substantially more energy while it does. Cutting methane emissions therefore promises significant near-term climate benefits. Methane carries other hazards, too: it contributes to the formation of ground-level (tropospheric) ozone, a harmful pollutant, and methane leaks can also pose explosion risks.

Atmospheric methane concentrations today are 2.7 times higher than they were before the Industrial Revolution and methane is responsible for nearly 30% of the rise in global average temperatures since that era. Atmospheric measurements show that methane concentrations, alongside CO2, continue to increase year‑on‑year.

The latest Global Methane Budget (2025) estimates that annual global methane emissions reached around 610 million tonnes (Mt) in 2020, with human activity accounting for almost two-thirds of the total and natural sources making up the rest.

International Energy Agency (IEA) analysis suggests the energy sector emitted nearly 150 Mt of methane in 2025. Coal production was responsible for 39 Mt, while inactive mines accounted for around 4 Mt and end-use equipment about 1 Mt. Oil operations accounted for around 44 Mt and natural gas activities for close to 34 Mt, while abandoned wells added a further 3.5 Mt. End-use equipment contributed an additional 2.5 Mt of methane leakage. Incomplete combustion of bioenergy – mainly from traditional biomass – generated about 18 Mt, with modern bioenergy adding another 2 Mt. The Global Methane Tracker documentation provides information on data uncertainties and the IEA’s methane estimation approaches.

Emissions from fossil fuels arise at multiple points along the supply chain. Some are intentional, either by design – such as tanks that vent directly to the atmosphere – or as part of operations, for example when pipelines are depressurised for maintenance or inspection. Others are released for safety reasons, as in coal mine ventilation systems. Methane can also escape unintentionally through leaking components like valves or seals, or through incomplete combustion of natural gas, including at flaring sites.

Across the oil and gas sector, most methane emissions come from upstream activities, which account for 80% of the total. These include extraction, gathering systems and processing facilities, whether located onshore or offshore. The remaining 20% comes from downstream operations, mainly gas transport, including losses from transmission and distribution pipelines, as well as emissions linked to liquefied natural gas (LNG) shipping, storage and regasification. Additional downstream sources include storage facilities, refineries and oil transport.

Methane emissions linked to coal production vary by mine type and conditions. In underground operations, ventilation air is typically the main source, along with drainage systems. In surface mines, emissions tend to come from drainage operations, exposed coal seams and other disturbed areas. Additional releases occur during coal handling, processing, storage and transport, as methane continues to escape from the coal itself.

Well-established solutions exist to cut methane emissions from fossil fuel operations and deploying them does not require new technological breakthroughs. Some producers already achieve very low methane intensities by restricting routine flaring and venting, enforcing leak detection and repair (LDAR) requirements, and adopting clear technology standards. Norway shows what is possible: long-standing policies – including a ban on non-emergency flaring and a tax of venting and flaring – have driven emissions from its oil and gas operations to the lowest in the world. If all countries matched Norway’s emissions intensity, global methane emissions from oil and gas operations would fall by more than 90%.

Applying currently available methane abatement technologies today would lower total energy sector emissions by almost 70% (100 Mt). More than 60% of these reductions would come from oil and gas, with coal and bioenergy each accounting for around 20%. Based on 2025 energy prices, our analysis indicates that around 30% of potential reductions in fossil fuel emissions could be achieved at no net cost. The share of such opportunities is higher in oil and gas than in coal, as many mitigation measures effectively pay for themselves: the cost of implementation is lower than the market value of the methane that can be recovered and sold.

In oil and gas, most abatement potential lies in upstream activities, with the lowest-cost mitigation options typically found at oil and gas sites with significant leakage and access to gas markets. For coal, recent studies underline the importance of coal mine methane utilisation in shaping overall emissions trends, particularly in China. Despite continued growth in coal production, coal mine methane emissions have grown more slowly since 2016, largely due to a shift toward lower-emitting mines in northern provinces and greater use of captured methane. Satellite observations corroborate this structural change, pointing to similar shifts in the drivers of China’s evolving methane emissions profile.

Most methane emissions linked to bioenergy stem from the inefficient burning of solid biomass in households for cooking and heating. Traditional fuels such as wood, charcoal, agricultural residues and animal dung release significant amounts of methane when burned in simple stoves or open fires. In 2025, this incomplete combustion accounted for around 18 Mt of global methane emissions, largely in developing economies where clean cooking remains inaccessible or unaffordable.

A smaller share – around 2 Mt – comes from modern bioenergy supply chains, including facilities that produce biogas or biomethane. Anaerobic digestion units, landfill gas capture systems and wastewater treatment plants can all experience fugitive methane losses during feedstock handling, digestion, upgrading or storage. Some feedstocks, such as manure or organic wastes, also emit methane as they decompose before entering the digestion process, while others, such as dedicated energy crops, do not generate such pre-processing emissions.

Across traditional and modern bioenergy systems, improvements in combustion efficiency, equipment design and operational best practices can substantially reduce methane emissions. Deploying best available technologies and strengthening LDAR programmes are especially important for modern facilities. Recent direct measurements of gas cooking stoves in Latin America underscore this: methane emissions were found to be six to 19 times higher than Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) default factors used in national inventories, with continuous leaks and ignition pulses accounting for a significant share of the total.

Expanding access to clean cooking solutions – including liquefied petroleum gas (LPG), electricity, improved biomass stoves and clean biofuels – offers further scope to cut methane emissions while delivering substantial health, gender and economic benefits in communities most affected by traditional biomass use.

Our estimate of methane emissions from abandoned wells draws on historical production records, available measurement campaigns and databases tracking closed or inactive facilities (see the Global Methane Tracker documentation for methodological details). Although data coverage remains incomplete, current estimates suggest there are around 8 million abandoned onshore oil and gas wells globally, along with a substantial number of closed coal mines. In the United States alone, there are thought to be almost 4 million abandoned wells and more than 250 000 abandoned coal mines. Emissions from abandoned coal mines amounted to around 4.5 Mt, with China accounting for 60% of the total. Methane released from abandoned oil and gas wells contributed around 3.5 Mt, 40% of which came from the United States.

Emissions vary widely across abandoned sites. Properly sealed wells and fully flooded mines tend to release little to no methane. By contrast, facilities that were not decommissioned to modern standards can leak for decades or longer. For example, one Romanian well drilled in 1909 was still leaking methane alongside natural seepage more than a century later. Direct measurement studies suggest abandoned sites are often underestimated in inventories, particularly because of high emissions from unplugged wells. Older closures also tend to emit less than more recently abandoned ones, especially in the coal sector.

Marginal wells – oil and gas wells that produce very small volumes – are a potentially significant but poorly quantified source of emissions. While individually they tend to emit small quantities of methane, their emissions are occasionally high relative to production. In many regions, marginal wells are more numerous than high‑producing wells: in the United States, for example, marginal wells (producing less than 15 barrels of oil equivalent per day) represent around 80% of the total active number of wells, but they provide less than 10% of total oil and gas production. Their large number means their collective emissions can be significant. For example, in the United States, marginal wells are estimated to emit between 1-4 Mt of methane, i.e. up to one-third of the IEA’s estimate for total upstream onshore oil and gas emissions in the country. Scientific studies also suggest that a small number of marginal wells are responsible for a disproportionate amount of emissions. In one study, no emissions were detected at around 55-60% of visited oil and gas production sites and the top 10% of emitting sources contributed approximately 90% of the total methane emissions observed, highlighting that action on a few sites could deliver substantial reductions.

The IEA develops and publishes country-level estimates of energy-related methane emissions and mitigation opportunities as part of its Global Methane Tracker. To provide a comprehensive view of anthropogenic methane, the Tracker includes emissions estimates from non-energy sectors such as agriculture and waste, using publicly available data. It also assesses how different policy measures could reduce emissions and compares national and regional commitments and strategies.

Our estimates are updated regularly using the best available evidence, including data on fossil fuel operations, country- and production-specific emissions intensities and scientific studies and measurement campaigns, as well as large emission events detected by satellites. They evolve over time as new measurements emerge and as factors such as infrastructure age, flaring patterns, operator practices and satellite detection capabilities improve, alongside governance frameworks and methane regulations.

There has been a large increase in the availability and reporting of methane emissions data in recent years, but estimates are still subject to a high degree of uncertainty and are often inconsistent across data sources. For areas where measured data is available, there can be large level of uncertainty given intrinsic limitations in measurement techniques (see Recent insights from methane emissions studies). Significant data gaps also remain, especially in parts of the world where satellites struggle to gather useful data, including, for example, in Venezuela, where cloud cover hinders observations, and in many parts of Russia, where snow and ice make it challenging to observe methane leaks. For these regions, uncertainty is even higher: our approach to generate estimates is to derive specific country and production type emission intensities using proxies from areas with measured data, which are then applied to production and consumption data on a country-by-country basis (see Global Methane Tracker documentation 2026 for further details). 

The IEA works closely with the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)’s International Methane Emissions Observatory (IMEO) and other partners to ensure our assessments incorporate the latest measurement-based and peer-reviewed research. Alongside the Global Methane Budget, recent (2025) studies continue to show a clear gap between bottom-up inventories and top-down atmospheric observations, underscoring the need for measurement-informed national reporting. They also highlight the role of intermittency and super‑emitters, pointing to a need for monitoring approaches that go beyond infrequent surveys. Meanwhile, advances in satellite constellations, high‑resolution remote sensing and machine‑learning are improving coverage, detection and quantification.

In China, Zhang et al. (2025) developed a mine‑specific emission‑factor database using national coal mine registry data and estimated coal‑sector methane emissions at 21.4 Mt in 2025, while satellite‑based analysis by East et al. (2025) put the national total at around 14 Mt (the IEA’s latest estimate is 22 Mt and the value reported to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change [UNFCCC] is with 21 Mt). This highlights the persistent uncertainty in reconciling measurement‑based and inventory‑based approaches.

New measurement campaigns are also expanding geographical coverage. Fiehn et al. (2025) carried out the first airborne survey of Angola’s offshore oil and gas operations, estimating emissions at roughly 150 kt from their 2022 campaign, and identifying differences between top-down and bottom-up estimates which can be further explored. He et al. (2025) documented an 8% annual increase in super‑emitter activity on Turkmenistan’s west coast from 2020-2023, a trend that is not captured in current inventories. IEA analysis similarly points to rising emissions from super‑emitter events across Turkmenistan, with satellite data showing average annual growth exceeding 15% over the same period.

The IEA’s Global Methane Tracker includes methane released during the end use of coal, oil products and natural gas, drawing on emissions factors from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). However, some measurement campaigns suggest that actual emissions in industrial facilities, urban areas and households may exceed these factors, making end-use sources an ongoing source of uncertainty. Estimates will continue to be revised as more robust evidence becomes available.

Bioenergy-related methane emissions are another category with high uncertainty. For solid bioenergy, the Tracker uses emission factors from IPCC 2006 and applies these to our detailed analysis of the levels and types of traditional biomass used for cooking and heating. We also generate our own estimates of methane from biogas systems, covering emissions from biodigesters, upgrading facilities and digestate storage.

Methane emissions from abandoned coal mines and oil and gas wells are estimated by applying country- and production-type emissions intensities to the available data on abandoned wells and mine capacity. The assessment assumes that older facilities emit less methane than more recently closed ones. Measurement data for these sources remain sparse, and key facility information, including closure dates and site conditions, is lacking in many countries. This results in substantial uncertainty. Lei et al. (2025) estimate that 0.4 Mt of methane was emitted from 4.5 million abandoned oil and gas wells in 2022, well below the IEA’s estimate of around 3 Mt.

Methane from hydropower facilities can also be significant, with some studies putting emissions at around 14 Mt annually. Sources include degassing at turbines and diffusive or ebullitive release from reservoirs. Due to limited global data on these processes, hydropower‑related emissions are not yet included in the Global Methane Tracker, though they may be important in some contexts.

The IEA’s Methane Abatement Model provides a tool for estimating methane reduction potential in oil and gas, along with associated abatement costs by country, segment and technology. Together with the Methane Tracker Data Explorer, it offers a consistent set of country-level estimates assembled from the best available evidence. Further methodological details are provided in the Global Methane Tracker documentation. We welcome additional measurement data along with scientifically robust information that can help refine these estimates over time.

Relevant reports, scientific studies or information can be shared with IEA analysts by email at methanetracker@iea.org.