New study finds that tackling methane pollution would pay for itself six times over

Global action to cut methane emissions would pay for itself six times over according to new study by researchers at the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment based at LSE, National Bank of Belgium, Duke University and the University of Delaware, published today (30 October 2025) in the journal Science.

The authors conclude that “achieving the Global Methane Pledge would result in more than $1 trillion in annual avoided market damages by 2050.”  

The Global Methane Pledge – launched at COP26 in 2021 – commits signatories to reduce anthropogenic methane emissions by at least 30% from 2020 levels by 2030. To date, 159 countries have signed on, including the EU, although major emitters, such as China, India and Russia, have not.

Methane reduction is widely recognised as one of the fastest and most effective ways to slow near-term global warming. Its concentration in the atmosphere is once again rising rapidly owing to emissions from fossil fuels, agriculture, and waste, as well as anthropogenic and natural emissions from wetlands. 

The authors highlight that lower-income countries would benefit most from action on methane pollution, given their heightened vulnerability to climate impacts. 

Using an integrated assessment model, the study quantified avoided climate damages globally and nationally, including tipping points and risk. It also assessed air-quality co-benefits and methane abatement costs. 

Even under conservative assumptions, the benefit-to-cost ratio of methane action is at least 3:1 – rising to more than 6:1 when health co-benefits are included. 

The authors also state that methane action “lowers the intensity of several key tipping points by 2050, the likelihood of Amazon rainforest dieback drops by 8% and Indian monsoon disruption by 13%.”

Professor Simon Dietz, Research Director of the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment at the London School of Economics, said: 

“The benefits of global methane action look so much larger than the costs that the economic case for action is clear.

“Our analysis shows that global methane mitigation is not only feasible but also economically compelling.”  

Thomas Stoerk, Climate Advisor at the National Bank of Belgium, said: 

“Major economies also stand to gain significantly on their own, so global cooperation is not strictly necessary for substantial methane action to be in their national interest.” 

“For low and middle income countries, the benefits are even greater, underscoring the equity potential of this policy.”