What's at stake
The oil and gas sector emits roughly 80 million tonnes of methane each year. About 75% of that could be reduced using technologies and practices available today, and much of it at low cost: a substantial share of available reductions comes in under $50 per tonne of CO₂e. The solutions exist, the economics work, and the climate case is immediate, yet action still isn't happening at anything close to the scale required.
One important reason is that companies that purchase or rely on natural gas in their supply chain have had few credible ways to account for the emissions reductions tied to the actions they can support, from sourcing lower-emission-intensity gas and using supplier-specific emissions data to investing in fixes for leaks in upstream infrastructure. Without a consistent, trusted way to measure, report, and defend the impact of these interventions, companies have struggled to justify and deploy capital toward them.
Clear, assurable guidance changes that math. It gives companies a shared way to report the impact of their natural gas interventions transparently, thereby helping unlock investment at scale and turn corporate willingness into verified, near-term progress on one of the fastest levers available for reducing warming.
What's being done
Two organizations are running public consultations on guidance designed to close this gap:
RMI has developed an Emissions Accounting Framework for natural gas interventions, now open for public consultation.
Relae and Green Strategies have developed Criteria for Impact-Based Action in Lower-Emissions Natural Gas, along with Impact Accounting for the Natural Gas Supply Chain: Guidance for Buyers, also open for public consultation.
These are complementary pieces of a larger, modular approach. Rather than a single standard, the goal is a connected suite of guidance documents that together give companies clear direction — for high-quality investment and for transparent disclosure — across the natural gas value chain.
Beyond encourages companies, technical experts, and anyone working on these issues to weigh in before each framework is finalized. The quality of the final guidance depends on broad, informed feedback during this window.
