Iran Energy News Oil, Gas, Petrochemical and Energy Field Specialized Channel
Related Articles
Some European Union countries are trying to weaken the bloc’s planned law to cut methane emissions in the oil and gas sector, documents show, weeks after the EU pledged at the COP27 climate conference to do more to tackle the potent greenhouse gas.
Methane is the second biggest cause of climate change after carbon dioxide and has a far higher warming effect, meaning rapid cuts in methane emissions are crucial if the world is to avoid severe climate change.
The European Commission last year proposed legislation to require oil and gas companies in Europe find and fix leaky infrastructure allowing methane to escape. Checks would be required every three months, starting six months after the regulation takes effect.
But EU countries, who are negotiating the law, want to delay the first survey to 12 months, and then set different timelines – in some cases less frequent – for checking different types of infrastructure, according to their latest draft compromise.
For example, compressor stations and liquefied natural gas terminals would be surveyed every six months, valve stations every 12 months and transmission pipelines every two years.
Countries also want to exempt deep wells from a requirement to check inactive oil and gas wells for methane leaks, and to change a weekly requirement for inspecting gas flare stacks to a monthly one, the draft showed.
Hungary and Romania requested weaker rules
The draft reflects negotiations among the 27 EU member countries, and did not indicate which states backed the changes.
EU documents detailing the negotiating positions of various countries, however, showed Hungary and Romania had requested weaker rules.
In one document, Hungary said the EU plan to immediately end routine gas flaring would represent a “cost and timing issue for the industry”, and should be delayed to 2030.
Hungary’s representation to the EU declined to comment on the negotiations.
A Romanian source told Reuters the country was working to draft measures “in line with our climate ambitions, technically feasible, while ensuring that the implementation calendar is realistic”.
One senior EU diplomat said the changes should not dilute the law’s ambition, and sought to address some countries’ concerns about the cost and feasibility of the rules.
