Why durable methane standards matter - Industry voices on competitiveness, credibility and stability in a volatile global market

Despite political headwinds in the U.S. and ongoing efforts to weaken federal regulations — including oil and gas methane standards that have drawn support from many in the industry — many companies continue to invest in emissions mitigation and uphold these rules because it makes good business sense.

Across recent surveys and outlooks, business leaders have delivered a consistent message: policy and market uncertainty is weighing on investment decisions and day-to-day operations.

As global markets increasingly demand credible, low-emissions energy, this tension underscores why durable, predictable methane standards are critical for competitiveness, stability, and sustained progress.

Stable rules are necessary for long-term planning

Many companies operate on timelines that extend far beyond political cycles, making predictable rules essential. In its 2025 10-K filing, ConocoPhillips noted: “These policy swings create additional uncertainty for companies who need to plan for operations that will endure through administrations.”

Echoing these concerns, the American Petroleum Institute (API), stated:

“The oil and natural gas industry often plans and invests on multidecade timelines to meet energy demand and maintain operational resilience. We remain committed to reducing emissions while delivering affordable, reliable energy, and we will continue working on durable policies that provide the certainty required for long-term investment.”

Major operators have not only voiced support for methane standards, but are actively engaged in shaping practical frameworks across regulatory and voluntary initiatives.

bp, for instance, emphasized the importance of well-designed methane standards, noting:

“A well-designed rule will help drive material methane emission reductions this decade and beyond… input from a broad range of stakeholders makes for more durable and effective policies.”

Occidental (Oxy) has similarly emphasized the importance of collaboration and workable policy design, noting that progress on methane has been driven by “multiple oil and gas companies, technology developers and NGOs working together… to design, pilot, deploy and share innovations,” and has supported regulation to establish a baseline across the industry.

This emphasis on workable policy design is consistent with findings from the National Petroleum Council, which highlight that sound policies are “rooted in evidence and thorough analysis” and characterized by “transparency in their formulation and implementation.”

This is why, throughout the rulemaking process, companies like Exxon have rallied around federal methane standards “We believe federal regulations are the most effective way to reduce methane emissions at scale, and that sound energy policies can accelerate efforts to achieve societal net-zero emissions.”

Importantly, this momentum is reinforced by broader industry collaboration. Initiatives like the Oil and Gas Climate Initiative (OGCI) have demonstrated that methane reductions are both achievable and already underway at scale. OGCI members have reduced upstream methane emissions by more than 60% in recent years and emphasize that “virtually all methane emissions from the industry can and should be avoided.” OGCI also highlights that achieving near-zero methane emissions is one of the most immediate and cost-effective opportunities to reduce emissions while supporting energy security and affordability.

This focus on methane is also grounded in core operational economics. As EQT has noted: “We make money with methane in a pipe… If we’re emitting methane, it’s not in a pipe and we’re not making money.”

Regulatory whiplash creates operational challenges

The policy pendulum leaves companies scrambling to adapt. As Halliburton noted in its filing, despite recent shifts, future administrations could impose more protective policies, creating ongoing uncertainty for operators.

Such regulatory whiplash underscores why implementing and enforcing methane standards like OOOOb/c is valuable — it reduces uncertainty for operators as well as investors and creates a level playing field by rewarding companies that act early in methane mitigation rather than delaying in anticipation of policy reversals.

Experience from states such as Colorado and New Mexico shows that these benefits are achievable. Science-based methane rules can spur innovation, cut emissions, and help gas reach customers efficiently. In Colorado, satellite and aircraft data indicate that oil and gas sector emissions fell by nearly 70% between 2010 and 2017 following the state’s first methane regulations, with emissions intensity — the methane lost per unit of production — also declining.

In the New Mexico portion of the Permian’s Delaware subbasin, operators emit less than half the methane per unit of production compared with operations in the Texas portion, even as total output has more than doubled since 2020. These efficiency gains translated into an estimated $125 million in additional gas value between 2024 and 2025, including $27 million in royalties.

Both New Mexico and Colorado have robust rules for leak detection and repair that apply to all wells regardless of production level.

These examples demonstrate that well-designed, enforceable rules can drive measurable emissions reductions while improving operational efficiency and capturing otherwise lost gas.

Global markets expect credible methane performance

Even if domestic rules fluctuate, international requirements increasingly shape U.S. operator behavior. As BKV Corporation noted:

“International regulations have a tremendous amount of influence on U.S. operators’ decision-making regarding reporting frameworks. If we want to export our gas, we need to ensure it can reach any destination, and so EU frameworks and OGMP 2.0 drive consistency so that we can facilitate those commercial endeavors.”

At the same time, advances in methane detection — including satellites, aerial surveys, and continuous monitoring — are increasing transparency and raising expectations for credible, measurement-based reporting across global markets.

Robust domestic standards help ensure U.S. gas remains competitive in performance-driven markets — supporting market access while meeting rising expectations for credible methane performance.

Conclusion

Across the industry, companies are sending a clear message: stable, predictable methane standards are essential. They reduce compliance uncertainty, support credible reporting, protect market access, and enable operators to plan for decades.

These outcomes depend on alignment across industry practices, measurement technologies, and regulatory frameworks — ensuring that progress is coordinated and maintained over time. By providing credible, flexible, and enforceable standards — reinforced by robust data systems — protective federal rules and state programs allow U.S. companies to demonstrate real methane reductions, maintain global competitiveness, and capture economic value while delivering measurable environmental benefits.