Preparing for the EU 2025 LDAR and Reporting Deadlines

The European Union is taking significant steps to address methane emissions with the introduction of Regulation EU 2024/1787, which establishes stringent requirements for operators across the region. By May 5, 2025, operators are mandated to submit a comprehensive Leak Detection and Repair (LDAR) program which must specify the measurement technologies to be used, the schedule for conducting measurements, and the methodologies to be implemented. Furthermore, throughout 2025, operators must conduct Type 2 measurements for all assets and submit annual LDAR reports along with Monitoring, Reporting, and Verification (MRV) documentation.

With the clock ticking, the industry faces increasing pressure to act and align with these ambitious targets. To better understand the regulatory requirements and the challenges that lie ahead, we spoke with Brandon Locke, Europe Policy Manager for Methane, Clean Air Task Force, and Cristina Lopez, Research and Development (R&D) Project Manager, NaTran (Ex GRTgaz).  

Download the case study or continue reading for insights into how operators can navigate these regulatory changes, employ best practices in training and cost management, and leverage technology to meet regulatory, voluntary, and company-specific goals.  

The Speakers 
Maryam Irfan, Industrial Decarbonization Network: Brandon, can you tell us about your work as the Europe Policy Manager for Methane, and provide an overview of the Clean Air Task Force's (CATF) role in the oil and gas landscape in Europe? 

Brandon Locke, CATF: Clean Air Task Force (CATF) has been working on reducing methane emissions for nearly two decades, and while we focus heavily on methane, CATF also addresses other clean energy solutions, such as zero carbon fuels, superhot rock energy, and carbon capture and storage. 

Within the methane team, our primary focus is on advancing regulatory development and helping both governments and industries identify abatement opportunities using best practices and technologies. 

In Europe specifically, we've  focused on the development of the new Methane Regulation. Our efforts involved providing technical support and analysis to ensure the regulation reached its full potential, which included understanding the potential of methane import standard to regulate emissions outside EU’s borders. We’re now focused on developing the tools, methodologies, and capacity to support an ambitious implementation of the Regulation. 

Maryam Irfan, Industrial Decarbonization Network: Cristina, can you tell us about your role and work as an R&D Engineer, in charge of piloting and managing projects for methane emissions reduction at GRTgaz?

Cristina Lopez, NaTran: I've been working at GRTgaz for more than four years, focusing on methane emissions detection and reduction. One of my main responsibilities is organizing site-level campaigns, which are currently a key priority due to European regulations and the OGMP 2.0 reporting standards. Additionally, I am responsible for evaluating different technologies for methane detection, I then advise operators on the best solutions depending on their use cases.

My role also involves overseeing activities related to both detection and quantification. On the reduction side, we explore methods for mitigating methane emissions. Lastly, we collaborate with other laboratories and groups, such as GERG, the European Gas Research Group, to broaden our research and development efforts. 

READ: A Guide to OGMP 2.0 Level 4 and Level 5 Reporting and Measurement Framework

Understanding and Preparing for Upcoming Methane Regulation in Europe 
Maryam Irfan, Industrial Decarbonization Network: Can you give us an overview of the upcoming methane regulatory requirements across Europe?

Brandon Locke, CATF: A lot of the requirements in the methane regulation are fairly prescriptive and include measures like leak detection and repair (LDAR), and the banning of routine venting and flaring. Competent authorities will conduct routine inspections to ensure operators are undertaking their obligations in reducing significant quantities of methane emissions from operations.

Additionally, some parts of the regulation will be phased in over time, such as the monitoring, reporting, and verification (MRV) rules. These will be introduced gradually to allow operators time to improve their levels of quantification and measurement from basic default emissions factors to source-level reporting, then supplementing it with site-level reporting, and ultimately reconciling the two.

The biggest component, however, is the methane import standard. These obligations will apply to all imported fossil fuels and will include the data reporting requirements that  start in May 2025, as well as a requirement to meet MRV standards that starts in 2027. Eventually, this will lead to the implementation of a performance standard, which will limit the maximum number of emissions per unit of imported oil, gas, or coal, and start in 2030.

Maryam Irfan, Industrial Decarbonization Network: What do you see as the biggest challenge for operators in complying with the 2025 LDAR deadline, and how can they best address it?

Brandon Locke, CATF: Many operators in Europe are already performing LDAR, either themselves or through a third party, so in many cases this may simply be a question of increasing the frequency of surveys. For operators performing LDAR for the first time, building the capacity to ensure it’s done correctly will be crucial, especially as studies have shown that the experience of an OGI camera operator has a significant impact of leak detection rate. To get buy-in, it’s important for every stakeholder to understand why the rules are being implemented  and the broader understanding of methane mitigation objectives.  

Maryam Irfan, Industrial Decarbonization Network: Let’s also talk about the rollout of the "You Collect, We Buy" initiative and how that incentivizes oil and gas operators in EU. Have you seen any success with this approach so far?

Brandon Locke, CATF: It is still in the process of being implemented, but the broader concept of monetizing gas that would otherwise be vented or flared has been in practice for many years now. There’s a clear business case that when large quantities of gas are flared, vented, or leaked, it can instead be captured, put into a pipeline, and sold.  

However, there are barriers that often restrict these types of projects. One challenge is capital competition because while a project may be profitable, it may not be as lucrative as, for example, new Greenfield exploration, which can lead to it being deprioritized. Legal hurdles are another issue, especially in joint ventures. For instance, in oil fields where associated gas is produced, the parties involved may not have the rights to the gas pipeline infrastructure or even to the gas itself.  

We do believe it has potential, and we’re looking forward to COP29 for more clarity on the direction of the project. It is critical to recognize that this requires an ecosystem of stakeholders working together, from governments and companies to financial institutions and downstream marketers. There are a lot of moving parts that need to cooperate to make the concept of monetizing flared gas work, and there is still a lot of work to be done.

Maryam Irfan, Industrial Decarbonization Network: What role does technology play in helping operators achieve flaring efficiency targets and methane detection? Are there specific tools or systems that you would recommend? 

Brandon Locke, CATF: Technology is fundamental to detecting methane and achieving flaring targets, and we already have the technology we need to reduce 77% of emissions, which can be cut with existing technologies. These include a variety of technologies that detect leaks, retrofit sites with zero-emitting equipment, and infrastructure to capture and utilize gas that would otherwise be flared.  It’s important for companies to remember that technologies are complementary, and that’s because each has its own limitations.  
 
When it comes to leaks, OGI cameras are good for detecting leaks, but bad weather conditions like strong winds and rain reduce its effectiveness to spot leaks. Precipitation can also increase uncertainty for laser-based detectors. Alternatively, satellites are great for detecting large leaks and quantifying them, but the high limits of detection make it impossible to use to catch smaller, more common leaks.  
 
This is why it’s so important for new technologies to undergo rigorous peer-reviewed evaluation, to fully understand the capabilities and limitations, that makes each technology more suitable for leak detection considering the variables that might impact its performance and accuracy in detecting leaks. 
 
Technological solutions to reduce flaring broadly require proper planning and investments in gas capture capacity and other gas utilization infrastructure, permitting gas to be used onsite for local operations, brought to market, reinjected, or used to produce other petroleum products. While existing efforts to capture and utilize gas that would otherwise be flared are commendable, regulation and other incentives are needed to increase the pace of these projects in order to match the size of the problem on a global scale. 
 
Maryam Irfan, Industrial Decarbonization Network: How can operators balance the need for advanced methane detection technology with cost-effectiveness, especially when considering smaller operators with limited resources?

Brandon Locke, CATF: On a more general level, when we look at data from the IEA and the abatement cost curves, about 52% of emissions can be mitigated at either low or no net cost. There is more granular data available at a country-by-country level, as abatement costs may be higher in wealthier countries where labor or technology might be more expensive.  

When it comes to assessing the financial or economic feasibility of abatement, a lot of it boils down to evaluating the opportunity cost of investing that money elsewhere, where higher returns might be made. So, for an operator under pressure to deliver high returns, we don’t see those low-cost opportunities materialize, even though, in the broader context of decarbonization and emissions reduction strategies, it is the lowest-hanging fruit.  

There needs to be a strategic repositioning of the importance of methane mitigation as a company target, maybe through some form of internal incentive. For example, some operators tie bonuses to hitting certain production or output targets, which helps incentivize employees, from facility managers to operators, to work toward a company goal. Methane mitigation, and other emissions reductions, could be framed similarly, with internal rewards for achieving those reductions.

It can be challenging if you're a facility manager, juggling numerous targets and responsibilities to make methane reduction opportunities a top priority, so there needs to be a framework in place that incentivizes action at every level of the company for it to become a practical and achievable goal. 

DOWNLOAD OUR ANNUAL INFOGRAPHIC: The 2025 State of Methane Emissions Regulations Around the Globe

Ensuring Emission Reduction through Research & Development and Effective LDAR Campaigns 
Maryam Irfan, Industrial Decarbonization Network: GRTgaz has committed to a 40% reduction in methane emissions by 2025, building on significant progress already made. What initiatives are driving this effort, and what are the biggest challenges you foresee in reaching this target?

Cristina Lopez, NaTran: The initiative driving this effort is our strong commitment to the OGMP 2.0 program and our aim to reach Level 5 compliance. To that end, we began conducting site-level campaigns in 2022, and this year we've managed to conduct nine campaigns for GRTgaz (which is a big increment in two years and illustrates our commitment!). This has been a major effort in methane emissions quantification, and I believe we’ve fostered good communication across various departments within our company, not only in the regulatory aspects but also in the technical and operational sides, especially with our field operators.  

Organizing these campaigns also requires coordination with field operators and the availability of different service providers, so we occasionally face scheduling issues, and are trying to effectively manage them.

We are also promoting various technologies to reduce emissions, particularly in areas like the seals of our compressors. By concentrating on the parts of our operations that emit the most, we’ve been able to reduce emissions by a significant percentage. Reaching our ultimate target, however, is the biggest challenge.  

To fully achieve our goals, I believe a mindset shift is needed across the company, both in the field and management level. Every stakeholder needs to understand that methane detection isn't just about safety, but also about environmental policies and new regulations.  

Maryam Irfan, Industrial Decarbonization Network: GRTgaz has been enhancing its LDAR (Leak Detection and Repair) internal capabilities. Can you share how these improvements have evolved, and what new tools or technologies are being introduced to support more effective leak detection?

Cristina Lopez, NaTran: At RICE, the research and development department of GRTgaz, we support the rest of the company by identifying the best detectors to use in reduction campaigns. We promote the use of infrared sensors equipped with an aspirating pump, which ensures high sensitivity to detect leaks, including those as small as 1 ppm. Our work involves assessing these sensors to ensure optimal sensitivity and faster campaign execution.

We also advocate for the use of OGI cameras and other remote sensors to access areas that are otherwise hard to reach. This ensures we stay compliant with the thresholds set by the European Commission for different types of facilities, such as Type 1 and Type 2, which have different frequency requirements.

Additionally, we advise our operations teams on the best sensors to use and work with clients to develop protocols that allow them to conduct campaigns under the best possible conditions, tailored to their specific assets.  

We have also developed a high-flow sampler in the research center, a device which can aspirate leaks and quantify them by combining measurements from other sensors. We’ve already tested this solution in the field with excellent results, and it serves as a complementary tool that we can use in our campaigns.

Maryam Irfan, Industrial Decarbonization Network: How can operators ensure their workforce and partners are adequately trained to implement the latest technologies and methane mitigation practices?

Cristina Lopez, NaTran: For reduction campaigns to be effective, a change in mindset is crucial. Currently, many companies rely on external contractors to conduct these campaigns but as regulations evolve and become stricter across different countries, operators themselves will need to take on the responsibility.

That is why training on standard protocols offers valuable guidance, and we make sure to be involved right from the beginning of the training process. This ensures that operators have enough time to absorb the new information and learn how to use the technology efficiently. Ultimately, it's all about empowering them to carry out these campaigns in the most effective way.

Maryam Irfan, Industrial Decarbonization Network: How can operators balance the cost of implementing LDAR technologies and training with the need for operational excellence and regulatory compliance?  

Cristina Lopez, NaTran: From an R&D perspective, we assess the best technologies and provide guidance on how to conduct the most effective LDAR campaigns. We also address uncertainty calculations to challenge and refine these methods for other companies, with the aim of striving for excellence in regulatory compliance.

We tend to focus on sites where we know emissions are likely to be higher and this targeted approach allows us to prioritize key areas and maximize the impact of our efforts. 

Maryam Irfan, Industrial Decarbonization Network: What lessons can operators learn from GRTgaz’s R&D approach to reducing methane emissions across a wide range of assets?

Cristina Lopez, NaTran: We are an innovation center focused on testing a wide range of technologies, so we don’t limit ourselves to a single provider for site-level campaigns. Since 2022, we’ve been testing various providers to better understand the technologies, the limitations, and to determine the best solutions for different sites. We’re also open to testing other future solutions, such as continuous monitoring.

Our approach is to stay open-minded and test as many technologies as possible, while maintaining high performance and adhering to OGMP 2.0 guidance. We’re not afraid to challenge our solution providers either, through uncertainty calculations, for example. Additionally, we’re keen on developing new solutions, like the high-flow sampler to better quantify emissions, and other technologies like the ‘blue flaring’.

Maryam Irfan, Industrial Decarbonization Network: GRTgaz has earned a "gold standard" ranking by UNEP for its methane emissions reporting. What specific measures have been taken to ensure that your reporting process is robust and continues to meet the highest standards of credibility and transparency?

Cristina Lopez, NaTran: To achieve this gold standard, you have to reconcile two different types of reporting: site-level reporting, which uses drones or other platforms, and source-level reporting, which is more similar to our usual campaigns. Many people assume that for this reconciliation exercise, you need to combine the uncertainties from both approaches, but that's not the case. The key is to understand why discrepancies may occur between the two methods, and to learn from these differences.

A big part of this process involves understanding what's happening with our assets during the campaigns. It requires constant communication with the field operators, who can provide performance data and insight into the operational mode of the assets, to ensure that our reporting is accurate and robust. So, when we do the reconciliation exercise, we take into account factors like asset functionality and focus on uncertainty calculations to improve our reporting and make it more reliable. 

Download your free copy of the case study: Preparing for the EU 2025 LDAR and Reporting Deadlines

Learn more about measuring, monitoring and mitigating methane emissions in the oil and gas industry at our upcoming events: 

Methane Mitigation Technology & Innovation Summit
June 2-4, 2025 | Austin, TX

Methane Mitigation Canada Summit
September 23-25, 2025 | Calgary, AB

Methane Mitigation America Summit
December 2-4, 2025 | Houston, TX

Methane Mitigation Europe Summit
February 24-26, 2026 | Amsterdam