Not all certification approaches can deliver on the goals of the EU Methane Import Standard
On 15 December, EU ministers will gather for an important Energy Council meeting where they will examine how the EU’s new methane import standard should be implemented. Of particular importance will be a discussion on what types of tracing systems should be accepted to comply with the EU Methane Regulation’s (EUMR) requirement to show the origins of fossil fuels. This is a critical decision, as the effectiveness of the EU import standard depends on whether imported fuels can be credibly tracked to producers, giving producers real incentives to reduce emissions.
The issue? Existing certification systems vary widely in structure and rigor and – critically – each take a different approach to how compliance certificates are created, tracked, and attributed to physical volumes. Some systems allow too much flexibility, undermining the ability of the import standard to incentivise emissions reductions.
New analysis from the University of Texas Energy Emissions Modeling and Data Lab (EEMDL) provides timely evidence to help EU decision makers weigh these choices. Working with data from major oil and gas producing basins in the United States, the researchers modeled how different certification approaches would impact real world methane emissions.
EEMDL found that if the EU were to allow a certification system that relies on a national level book-and-claim model, the import standard would have zero impact on emissions in the United States. Under such a model, environmental attributes created in any oil and gas producing basin within the United States can be reattributed to any volume exported from the U.S. to EU markets. For example, because relatively low-intensity production in the north-east Appalachian basin far exceeds the EU’s demand, this flexibility would allow EU importers to use these “clean” certificates and attach them to the higher intensity gas from other basins that actually goes to Europe. Thus, under a national level book-and-claim certification system one of the EU’s largest suppliers would see no additional incentive to reduce emissions – the very goal of the Methane Import Standard.
The researchers also modeled systems that apply more geographic specificity. A basin-level book-and-claim model was shown to significantly reduce emissions from the US, by 85,000 MT a year. Notably, a trace-and-claim system, which links the attributes of a given batch of fuel to a credible commercial delivery path, may deliver significantly more reductions than basin-level book-and-claim, up to 250,000 MT. Both approaches create a real incentive for the EU’s gas suppliers to invest in emissions reductions by requiring a connection between production and the attributes claimed by importers.
EEDML’s results confirm a key point: The design of the certification system matters, and some systems simply do not produce meaningful emissions reductions. The import standard was designed to shift global supply chains toward lower methane intensity. That goal cannot be achieved if certification systems allow attributes to float freely across basins and production sources. It requires systems that reflect where gas is produced, how it moves across supply chains, and how emissions are managed at the source.
The good news is that the EU is on the right track. After a meeting on 26 November, the competent authorities of Member States signaled that they are in favor of developing criteria for compliance for certification methods, which the European Commission will address by recommending model clauses. And as ministers meet on 15 December, they will be considering the role of certification methods – which include both trace-and-claim and book-and-claim approaches – in complying with the import standard. This makes it essential that policy makers clearly understand that not all certification methods are created equal – and EEMDL’s analysis highlights that a rigorous approach is needed to maintain environmental integrity.
Certification systems based on basin-level book-and-claim or trace-and-claim would ensure credible provenance, reinforce accountability, and align the value of certified gas with real emissions performance.
The EU has taken an important step by extending methane standards to imported fossil fuels. The decision now facing Member States is whether this policy delivers its intended impact. As DG ENER and the Competent Authorities finalize the guardrails for ‘certification methods,’ those choices will determine whether certification becomes a loophole or a credible driver of methane emissions reductions.
