Generic Hero BannerGeneric Hero Banner
Latest market news

EU settles on methane limits for fossil fuels imports

  • Market: Coal, Crude oil, Emissions, Natural gas, Petrochemicals
  • 15/11/23

The European parliament and EU states have agreed methane greenhouse gas (GHG) intensity thresholds, and penalties, for oil, coal and gas importers. Petrochemicals escape the new rules.

With a view to the upcoming UN Cop 28 climate talks in Dubai, parliament's chief lawmaker for methane regulation, Jutta Paulus, said it was "high time" to deliver on the global methane pledge.

"Not all fossil fuel exporting countries will appreciate it. But the US will appreciate the EU restricting imports to those countries that act on methane emissions," Paulus told Argus.

The text agreed between negotiators has to be formally adopted by parliament and by EU ministers. The regulation would then apply directly in the 27 EU states on publication in the bloc's official journal.

Oil, gas and coal importers would, from 1 January 2027, have to demonstrate equivalent monitoring, reporting and verification requirements at production level. And the European Commission would, within three years, have to propose delegated legislation setting methane intensity classes for producers' and companies' crude, natural gas and coal sold in the EU.

Individual EU states retain the right to set penalties. Parliament failed to have a provision for closing the EU market to non-compliant producers.

"On imports, I'm not so much worried about loopholes," said Paulus. "I'm more worried about a very very long timeline [till 2030]. The measures on imports will come pretty late and will not have an effect until at least 2028 when we have equivalency on monitoring, reporting and verification [of methane emissions]."

The regulation obliges oil and gas operators in the EU to detect and repair methane leaks, and to submit a methane-leak detection and repair programme to national authorities within nine months from the regulations' entry into force. A first leak-detection and repair survey of existing sites would have to take place within 12 months. There are strengthened repair obligations and general bans on venting and flaring methane from drainage stations and ventilation shafts.

For coal, EU countries have to measure and report methane emissions from operating underground and surface mines. For mines closed or abandoned in the past 70 years, countries have to draw up public inventories and measure emissions, except for mines flooded for more than 10 years. Coal mine flaring is banned from 1 January 2025 and venting from 1 January 2027, if those mines emit over 5t of methane per kilotonne of coal mined. Venting and flaring is banned from closed and abandoned mines from 1 January 2030.

Paulus regretted a "no go" from EU member states and commission for including methane emissions from the petrochemicals sector. But she said the commission will make sure that updated implementing rules to the bloc's Industrial Emissions directive, so-called Best Available Techniques (BAT), will be amended to include petrochemicals in 2030.

"The rules will be copy-pasted from the methane regulation," she said.

Paulus noted inclusion of an overarching methane target cut in the regulation would have excluded emissions from agriculture and waste, which the European Environment Agency (EEA) notes as responsible respectively for 53pc and 26pc of EU methane emissions compared with the energy sector's 19pc.


Sharelinkedin-sharetwitter-sharefacebook-shareemail-share

Related news posts

Argus illuminates the markets by putting a lens on the areas that matter most to you. The market news and commentary we publish reveals vital insights that enable you to make stronger, well-informed decisions. Explore a selection of news stories related to this one.

News
13/04/25

Keystone oil pipeline to restart by 15 April

Keystone oil pipeline to restart by 15 April

Houston, 13 April (Argus) — The 622,000 b/d Keystone crude pipeline is expected to resume service by 15 April, following a leak in North Dakota that shut deliveries last week. Calgary-based pipeline operator South Bow said the repair and replacement of the leaking section of pipe was taking place over the weekend. Once the company meets the terms of a corrective action order (CAO) issued by the US Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), it will be able to resume service. The pipeline has been off line since early on 8 April, when a leak was discovered in a rural field near Kathryn, North Dakota. An estimated 3,500 bl of crude was released but did not appear to have reached any waterways. "Keystone is targeting restoration of service and energy deliveries by Tuesday April 15, 2025, under the requirements of the CAO," South Bow said. "South Bow will require approval from PHMSA prior to restarting the pipeline." Under the CAO, South Bow must run metallurgical testing of the failed section of pipe, conduct a root cause analysis and meet other requirements. The pipeline system will also have to comply with certain pressure restrictions on Canadian sections of the line. The Keystone system is a major route for Canadian heavy crude destined for both the US midcontinent and the US Gulf coast, delivering about 15pc of the roughly 4mn b/d that the US imports from its northern neighbor. The line runs from the Canadian production and storage hub at Hardisty, Alberta, to Steele City, Nebraska, before splitting in two to head toward Illinois and the Gulf coast. Discounts for Western Canadian Select (WCS) at Hardisty to the CMA Nymex narrowed at the end of last week despite the shutdown, because of low inventories in Hardisty and open pipeline space on Canadian crude pipelines, including Enbridge's 3mn b/d Mainline system to the US midcontinent and the 890,000 b/d Trans Mountain pipeline to the Canadian Pacific coast. Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Find out more
News

Recycled resin importers caught in tariff uncertainty


11/04/25
News
11/04/25

Recycled resin importers caught in tariff uncertainty

Houston, 11 April (Argus) — US President Donald Trump's evolving tariff policies have created tremendous uncertainty for US importers of recycled polymers, and constant halts and flip-flopping from the administration have led some to pause their US operations. Multiple importers told Argus that the constantly changing US tariffs on goods have upended business plans, and forced them to pause their US operations for the time being due to uncertainty about the taxes their material will face when it reaches US shores. "You have to have some confidence that conditions will hold in order to import," one trader told Argus . Trump's tariff rollout began on 1 February, when he announced that China would face a 10pc universal tariff, and the US's two largest trading partners, Mexico and Canada, would face 25pc universal tariffs. At the time, market participants speculated that the 25pc tariffs on Canada and Mexico would make operations and sales more expensive for Mexican and Canadian recyclers, particularly those that trade bales or finished resin across the US border. After some negotiations between world leaders, the tariffs on Canada and Mexico were delayed for 30 days, though the 10pc tariff on China went into effect as planned. The 25pc universal tariffs on Canada and Mexico were pushed back again on 6 March, but tariffs on aluminum — a significant competitor to rPET packaging — went into place on 12 March. The tariffs on aluminum have not been rescinded or paused, and the extra cost for imported aluminum as a result of the tariff could incentivize US consumer goods companies to use more PET in their packaging. On 9 April, the US put into place varying reciprocal tariffs on a number of countries that export recycled resin to the US, including India, Malaysia and Vietnam. While rPET and vPET pellets were excluded from the reciprocal tariffs, importers of rPE, rPP and PET waste were not excluded from the tariff. The same day, the reciprocal tariffs were pushed back 90 days in favor of a 10pc universal tariff that excludes Canada and Mexico. China and the US's reciprocal tariffs have escalated into a trade war, and currently material from China faces a 145pc tariff. Since the price is too high for most importers to be willing to pay, in essence all recycled resin imports from China are halted. China is one of the largest buyers of US virgin polyethylene https://direct.argusmedia.com/newsandanalysis/article/2675420), and the current trade war with China has the potential to increase domestic supply as exporters are forced to find new buyers for resin. Increased competition from oversupplied virgin resin could pull down recycled resin pricing. Until some stability in tariff policy returns to the US, traders and importers will continue to turn to other destinations outside the US to sell their recycled resin. By Zach Kluver Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

News

Opec+ overproducers cast doubt on compensation pledges


11/04/25
News
11/04/25

Opec+ overproducers cast doubt on compensation pledges

Output is set to rise in the coming months, with Kazakhstan and Iraq unlikely to live up to commitments to rein in production, writes Aydin Calik London, 11 April (Argus) — The Opec+ alliance's planned production increases in April and May should, in theory, be offset by pledges to compensate for past overproduction, particularly by Kazakhstan and Iraq. But there are few signs that either country will significantly reduce output in the coming weeks. If anything, Kazakhstan has signalled that production will continue at or near record levels of around 1.8mn b/d , putting it some 300,000 b/d above its Opec+ target. Opec+ members subject to targets cut output by 90,000 b/d to 33.93mn b/d in March, according to Argus estimates, but this was still 80,000 b/d above the group's collective crude production target of 33.85mn b/d. The decision by a core group of eight Opec+ members to accelerate the return of 2.2mn b/d of production cuts is a key reason for the recent slide in oil prices, alongside US tariff announcements. But Opec+ has stressed that its implied output increase of 137,000 b/d for April and another 411,000 b/d in May should be cancelled out by compensation-related cuts of 249,000 b/d for April and 309,000 b/d in May. In reality, this is unlikely to happen — the group's output is set to rise. Kazakhstan is the main reason why Opec+ has exceeded its target over the past two months. Kazakh production has surged following a major output increase at the Chevron-led Tengiz field in January — part of the field's future growth project (FGP). Tengiz production rose to a record 901,000 b/d in March, compared with previous levels of 600,000-660,000 b/d. The increase came several months earlier than anticipated, Kazakh officials say, and they have subsequently asked international oil companies that operate Tengiz and the Kashagan oil field to reduce output. But the answer has so far been negative. "Unfortunately, we have not yet agreed with them to the reduction, because for them it is a very challenging action, especially Chevron, [which] spent $50bn on the FGP project. They told us it's not possible for them to reduce [output]," deputy energy minister Alibek Zhamauov said this week. Kazakhstan will try to reduce production from smaller fields operated by domestic producers such as state-controlled Kazmunaigaz, Zhamauov said. But any decrease from these fields will not be enough to offset the rise from Tengiz. Target practice Iraq's output dipped below its 4mn b/d target in March at 3.98mn b/d, but this was still well above the country's effective target of 3.88mn b/d under its compensation plan. If Iraq's past production record is anything to go by, its output is unlikely to fall much further in the months ahead. While Kazakhstan and Iraq are unlikely to see much change in their production, members such as Saudi Arabia and the UAE are set to drive the alliance's output higher. The biggest increase is expected from Saudi Arabia, which will see its 8.98mn b/d target rise by 222,000 b/d by May, offset only marginally by its compensation plans. Riyadh has already signalled that it is preparing to increase production after state-controlled Saudi Aramco cut the official formula price of its May-loading crude exports. The largest cut was for buyers in Asia-Pacific, Saudi Arabia's biggest market. Formula prices can indicate intentions on output, as producers fine-tune how affordable their crude is for marginal refiners. The second-largest production increase is set to come from the UAE, which has long been eager to raise output . The UAE will see its target rise by 103,000 b/d by May, which will also only be offset marginally by its compensation plan. Russia is also scheduled to deliver a significant production increase over the next two months, with its target rising by 105,000 b/d. But all of this increase will be cancelled out if the country sticks to its compensation plan. Opec+ crude production mn b/d Mar Feb* Mar target† ± target Opec 9 21.22 21.36 21.23 -0.01 Non-Opec 9 12.71 12.66 12.62 0.09 Total Opec+ 18 33.93 34.02 33.85 0.08 *revised †includes additional cuts where applicable Opec wellhead production mn b/d Mar Feb* Mar target† ± target Saudi Arabia 8.98 8.93 8.98 0.00 Iraq 3.98 4.05 4.00 -0.02 Kuwait 2.42 2.43 2.41 0.01 UAE 2.91 2.93 2.91 -0.00 Algeria 0.92 0.92 0.91 0.01 Nigeria 1.49 1.58 1.50 -0.01 Congo (Brazzaville) 0.26 0.24 0.28 -0.02 Gabon 0.20 0.22 0.17 0.03 Equatorial Guinea 0.06 0.06 0.07 -0.01 Opec 9 21.22 21.36 21.23 -0.01 Iran 3.34 3.38 na na Libya 1.36 1.39 na na Venezuela 0.87 0.84 na na Total Opec 12^ 26.79 26.97 na na *revised †includes additional cuts where applicable ^Iran, Libya and Venezuela are exempt from production targets Non-Opec crude production mn b/d Mar Feb* Mar target† ± target Russia 8.97 8.96 8.98 -0.01 Oman 0.75 0.75 0.76 -0.01 Azerbaijan 0.47 0.47 0.55 -0.08 Kazakhstan 1.79 1.76 1.47 0.32 Malaysia 0.36 0.36 0.40 -0.04 Bahrain 0.18 0.18 0.20 -0.02 Brunei 0.10 0.09 0.08 0.02 Sudan 0.02 0.02 0.06 -0.04 South Sudan 0.07 0.07 0.12 -0.05 Total non-Opec 12.71 12.66 12.62 0.09 *revised †includes additional cuts where applicable Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

News

US tariffs cast a shadow on global gas market


11/04/25
News
11/04/25

US tariffs cast a shadow on global gas market

Steel can make up nearly a third of an LNG terminal's pricetag, so the new levies could push up costs and push back start-up dates, writes Xiaoyi Deng London, 11 April (Argus) — US president Donald Trump's volatile tariff policy and some of the countermeasures already announced by large trade partners are unlikely to cause any direct disruption to global gas markets. But they will have a direct impact on future US liquefaction capacity. And the indirect effects on gas supply and demand could be huge, stemming from a weaker macroeconomic outlook, fuel substitution and inflationary pressures on infrastructure development. US LNG developers hailed Trump's return to office, after complaining that his predecessor complicated the issuance of additional export licences. But Trump's imposition of 25pc tariffs on all foreign-sourced steel and aluminum, from 12 March, will increase infrastructure costs in the US' upstream and midstream sectors. These present an immediate risk for US LNG developers, particularly for the five projects under construction and the six others expected to reach final investment decisions (FIDs) this year. Metals account for up to 30pc of the cost of an LNG export plant. A terminal can cost $5bn-25bn to build, depending on its size, with steel used for pipelines, tanks and other structural frameworks. Facilities can be built using some domestically produced metal, but higher prices for this might lead to construction and FID delays for the country's planned liquefaction projects. US tariffs' primary effect on the domestic gas market stems from duties levied on non-energy goods used by the oil and gas industry, including steel and specialised pipeline components such as valves and compressors, which are imported. The US remains a net natural gas importer from Canada , but these flows are unlikely to be affected by trade tariffs, given the lack of alternative supply sources available to some northern US states. Tariff baiting Trump's latest tariff round , unveiled on 2 April, involves a a minimum 10pc on all foreign imports from 5 April,with much higher tariffs on selected countries that briefly came into force on 9 April, before Trump bowed to panic in financial markets and announced a 90-day pause. China is the key exception. It has announced retaliatory tariffs that could disrupt US energy exports, resulting in an escalation that leaves the overall levy at 145pc in the US and 125pc in China. China had already stopped importing US LNG earlier this year. But disruption to trade between the world's two largest economies may weigh heavily on manufacturing activity in China, in turn reducing industrial gas demand. And the ripple effects of disruption to US LPG exports to China may alter fuel-switching economics in the region and beyond. Most other countries in Asia-Pacific have opted not to follow China's lead by retaliating. The Japanese government intends to negotiate a better tariff deal and is considering investing in the US' proposed 20mn t/yr Alaska LNG export project as part of wider efforts to reduce its trade surplus with the US. Countries in Asia-Pacific have been hit with some of the highest of Trump's targeted duties. The EU is keeping retaliatory measures on the table, but these are unlikely to involve US LNG. Europe has become much more reliant on LNG imports after losing the bulk of its Russian pipeline supply, and imposing tariffs on energy imports would only reignite inflationary pressures that European countries have tried to curb over the past three years. The bloc says it is ready to negotiate on possibly increasing its US LNG imports to reduce its trade surplus and would axe tariffs on industrial imports if the US agrees to do the same. But Trump says this is not enough, citing the EU's upcoming Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism as one of the "unfair trade practices" that justifies a tariff response. US LNG project pipeline mn t/yr Project Capacity Expected start/FID Under construction Plaquemines 19.2 2025 Corpus Christi stage 3 12.0 2025 Golden Pass 18.1 2026 Rio Grande 17.6 2027 Port Arthur 13.5 2027 Waiting for final investment decision Delfin FLNG 1 13.2 mid-2025 Texas LNG 4.0 2025 Calcasieu Pass 2 28.0 mid-2025 Corpus Christi train 8-9 3.3 2025 Louisiana LNG 16.5 mid-2025 Cameron train 4 6.8 mid-2025 Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

News

Q&A: IMO GHG scheme in EU ETS could be 'challenging'


11/04/25
News
11/04/25

Q&A: IMO GHG scheme in EU ETS could be 'challenging'

London, 11 April (Argus) — Delegates have approved the global greenhouse gas (GHG) pricing mechanism proposal at the International Maritime Organization's (IMO) 83rd Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) meeting. Argus Media spoke to ministerial adviser and Finland's head representative at the IMO delegation talks, Anita Irmeli, on the sidelines of the London MEPC meeting. What is your initial reaction to the text? We are happy and satisfied about the content of the agreed text, so far. But we need to be careful. This week, all member states were able to vote. But in October, when adaption will take place, only those states which are parties to Marpol Annex VI will be able to vote if indeed a vote is called for, and that changes the situation a little bit. Here when we were voting, a minority was enough — 40 votes. But if or when we vote in October, then we need two thirds of those party to Marpol Annex VI to be in favour of the text. Will enthusiasm for the decision today remain by October? I'm pretty sure it will. But you never know what will happen between now and and the next six months. What is the effect of the decision on FuelEU Maritime and the EU ETS? Both FuelEU Maritime and the EU ETS have a review clause. This review clause states that if we are ambitious enough at the IMO, then the EU can review or amend the regulation. So of course, it is very important that we first consider if the approved Marpol amendments are ambitious enough to meet EU standards. Only after that evaluation, which won't be until well after October, can we consider these possible changes. Do you think the EU will be able to adopt these the text as it stands today? My personal view is that we can perhaps incorporate this text under FuelEU Maritime, but it may be more challenging for the EU ETS, where shipping is now included. What was the impact of US President Donald Trump's letter on the proceedings? EU states were not impacted, but it's difficult to say what the impact was on other states. By Madeleine Jenkins Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Generic Hero Banner

Business intelligence reports

Get concise, trustworthy and unbiased analysis of the latest trends and developments in oil and energy markets. These reports are specially created for decision makers who don’t have time to track markets day-by-day, minute-by-minute.

Learn more