By Raymond Hendriawan
The recent ASEAN Methane Energy High-Level Policy Dialogue, hosted by the ASEAN Centre for Energy with support from international partners, convened regional energy leaders and experts in Jakarta to discuss stronger action on methane emissions from the coal, oil, and gas sectors. While methane accounts for just 4.6% of ASEAN’s total greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, its warming potential—86 times that of CO₂ over a 20-year period—and rapid growth have made it a focal point for climate action. The event underscored the urgency of establishing robust measurement systems and the growing synergy between policy innovation, industry engagement, and cost-effective mitigation technologies.
ASEAN’s methane challenge in context
Figure 1 ASEAN total final energy consumption by fuel across scenarios
According to the 8th ASEAN Energy Outlook (AEO8), energy demand in the region is set to rise sharply, driven by industrial expansion, urbanization, and growing transportation needs. Without intervention, GHG emissions from the energy and industry sectors could triple by 2050, with transport-related emissions expected to increase 2.6 times. While carbon dioxide remains the primary concern, methane from coal mining and oil and gas operations poses a faster-acting climate risk.
In 2022, methane contributed just 4.6% of ASEAN’s total emissions, but this figure obscures significant underreporting and data limitations. Dody Setiawan from Ember warned that official estimates often rely on outdated default emission factors for open-pit coal mining, failing to account for the higher emissions from underground mining. “Methane from coal may be significantly undercounted,” he said, warning that real emissions could be over four times higher than current national reports suggest.
Natural gas is projected to grow 2.6 times by 2050 under a business-as-usual trajectory and remains central to energy transition plans. However, without targeted mitigation, fugitive methane emissions from gas infrastructure will also rise. AEO8 modelling shows fossil fuels will continue to dominate the region’s energy mix in all scenarios unless significant policy reforms are enacted.
Gaps in measurement and accountability
A major concern highlighted throughout the dialogue was the lack of accurate, facility-level methane data across the region. Many countries rely on generalized IPCC emission factors—often for open-cut mining—despite a growing shift to underground operations, which emit more methane.
“There is no regulatory obligation yet to report methane emissions at the facility level in Indonesia,” said Dody. “The numbers used in national inventories underestimate the problem by design, because they reflect only the easiest parts to measure.”
Hendra Sinadia, Chair of the ASEAN Federal Mining Association, acknowledged this data gap, noting that “the conversation around coal mine methane (CMM) and decarbonization only happens among the big firms,” as smaller domestic players lack the resources or incentives to act.
Figure 2 The underground coal mine owned by PT Sumber Daya Energi (SDE) in Sungai Durian, Kotabaru, South Kalimantan. (Source: Antara News/HO-PT SDE)
Speakers repeatedly called for the development of robust MRV (Measurement, Reporting, and Verification) systems, including satellite-based monitoring, site-level reporting, and third-party verification to support informed policymaking. Without credible data, methane reduction efforts will remain aspirational.
Industry’s role and dilemma
While regulatory frameworks are key, panelists emphasized that industry holds near-term potential for methane reductions—especially when aligned with economic benefits. Fugitive methane emissions from coal, oil, and gas operations can often be mitigated with existing technologies.
Figure 3 Suripno, Vice President of Sustainability Strategy at Pertamina
Suripno, Vice President of Sustainability Strategy at Indonesia’s state-owned oil and gas company PT Pertamina, stressed a pragmatic approach: “In Pertamina, the development of GHG reduction is a market-driven approach. Our methane strategy leans towards options that provide economic benefit such as cost reduction.”
Malaysia’s Petronas has similarly targeted key emission sources, particularly offshore venting and non-routine flaring. Their efforts since 2021 include refining quantification models and deploying vent gas recovery systems to reduce uncertainty and enhance efficiency.
For the coal sector, Yihan Hao of the Rocky Mountain Institute shared that 41% of coal mine methane emissions in China can be reduced with current technologies—and 11% at no net cost. Yet, successful implementation depends on market access and regulatory support for certified methane reductions. Without such mechanisms, especially in ASEAN, abatement remains a financial burden rather than an opportunity.
Learning from global experience
Speakers from outside the region showcased how other countries are integrating methane reduction into broader energy and climate strategies.
China’s national methane plan, launched in 2023, has been adopted by 10 provinces. Dr. Meian Chen of iGDP explained that the approach combines satellite monitoring with economic tools like preferential electricity pricing and voluntary carbon certification through the Methane Abatement Quality (MAQ) program. Sinopec, one of China’s largest oil and gas producers, reported a 3.2% methane reduction and a 9.8% energy efficiency gain.
Editing by Reiner Simanjuntak
Figure 4 Changes in methane emissions by sources in some of China’s provinces that have released methane control action plans
India’s methane strategy took root in a single coal-intensive city that was responsible for over half the nation’s coal methane emissions. Using satellite imagery and on-the-ground evidence, the effort catalyzed policy engagement at the central level, said Swarna Dutt of the Energy Policy Institute. India now plans to integrate methane into its national carbon compliance market.
Qatar, aiming for a 75% methane reduction by 2050, is leveraging financial incentives and advanced MRV systems. Sheikh Dr. Soud Khalifa Al Thani of the Earthna Foundation described how these investments support Qatar’s leadership in LNG exports while aligning with international climate goals.
In contrast, progress in Central Asia has been uneven. Oxana Kravtsova of the CAREC Program noted that while Kazakhstan operates an emissions trading system, many neighboring countries still depend on external funding and technical assistance—underscoring the need for broader capacity-building.
These examples collectively highlighted that reliable data, supportive policy, and market alignment are critical for successful methane control.
Regional Cooperation and Policy Momentum
Within ASEAN, momentum is building to move methane mitigation from a technical issue to a strategic priority—driven by the intersection of climate commitments, energy security, and economic competitiveness.
Margaretha Thaliharjanti of the Pertamina Energi Institute, who also chairs the ASEAN Council on Petroleum (ASCOPE) exploration and production task force, revealed that the region is developing a 50-year Methane Reduction Leadership Program 2.0. With support from the World Bank and JOGMEC, the initiative aims to strengthen regional coordination, leveraging satellite technology and shared standards for accountability.
Figure 5 Methane Reduction Leadership Program 2.0 by Ascope and partners (October, 2024)
“Energy demand in ASEAN is expected to triple by 2050,” Margaretha said. “Gas will still contribute 20% of the mix. That’s why strong leadership in methane reduction is essential.”
Indonesia is also working with the World Bank to eliminate routine flaring by 2030—one of the most significant unintentional methane sources in oil and gas operations. Still, many speakers agreed that voluntary action alone will fall short. Region-wide policy frameworks, such as standardized MRV protocols or incentives for methane-free LNG, are needed to ensure consistency and scale.
Way Forward: Profitability, Policy, and Pressure
Despite current gaps, the Dialogue made one thing clear: methane abatement is not only technically feasible—it can be economically viable, especially when paired with market-based incentives.
Masataka Yarita of Japan’s JOGMEC stressed the importance of shaping demand: “It’s about creating market preference,” he said, suggesting that certification schemes and differentiated pricing could make low-emission LNG more attractive to buyers.
China’s experience reinforces this idea. With MAQ certification already covering 5% of oil and gas exports, methane reductions are being monetized within carbon markets. However, Minhui Gao of the Rocky Mountain Institute warned that without access to similar markets, many coal methane projects in ASEAN “will not reach profitability before 2035.”
ASEAN thus faces a critical opportunity. With fossil fuel demand still growing and long-lived infrastructure being built today, the cost of inaction is rising. By adopting regional standards, enabling early movers, and fostering cross-border collaboration, ASEAN could lead the way on methane in emerging markets.
The Dialogue ended with a unified call: aligning methane reduction with credible data, targeted policy, and financial incentives is no longer optional—it is essential to the region’s energy transition and climate credibility.
Editing by Reiner Simanjuntak
