Qatar & The US Warn EU Of Gas Crunch Over Methane Regulation

Authored by Irina Slav via OilPrice.com,

• Major LNG suppliers say the EU’s methane regulations are too burdensome to comply with and could lead to reduced gas supplies.

• The U.S. and Qatar contend that tracking methane emissions across complex gas supply chains is technically difficult or impossible.

• With nearly 60% of its LNG imports coming from the U.S., the EU risks straining relations with key suppliers as it pursues stricter climate policies.

The United States and Qatar have once again warned the European Union against doubling down on climate policies seeking to penalize the LNG industry, saying that if it continues on this course, the EU will face a gas crunch and higher prices.

“There is no viable path to compliance with the regulation”, the top energy officials of the U.S. and Qatar, Chris Wright and Saad al-Kaabi, wrote in a letter quoted by the Financial Times.

“Because legal compliance remains paramount, exporters and importers alike are unwilling to enter into contractual agreements that knowingly violate EU law,” the U.S. energy secretary and the Qatari energy minister also wrote. “Significant supply and price impacts are a certainty.”

The letter comes ahead of a meeting on Friday when the energy ministers of EU member states will discuss the policies of the bloc. It was also signed by two other large gas suppliers to the European Union, Algeria and Nigeria, the FT also reported.

The so-called methane regulation, adopted by the European Union two years ago, aimed at reducing not only the bloc’s own emissions of the greenhouse gas that constitutes almost 100% of natural gas but also forcing countries outside the EU that do business with the bloc to cut their emissions as well, notably gas suppliers.

The regulation, starting this year, extends to all energy suppliers to the EU, and these suppliers were anything but happy about it.

Both the United States and Qatar have already repeatedly warned the EU that they are unwilling to do business with it under the methane regulation that requires gas producers to track their methane emissions from the wellhead to the liquefaction plant and the LNG carrier after that, report them, and take pains to reduce these emissions, or face financial penalties.

Qatar was blunt about it, saying last year that if the EU was so concerned about methane emissions, they should look for some other source of LNG because Qatar would stop selling to the bloc. Secretary Wright also said last year that the methane regulation was impossible to implement and described it as “a critical non-tariff trade barrier that imposes an undue burden on U.S. exporters and our trade relationship.”

In response, Brussels caved partially, saying it will not enforce the penalties stipulated in the regulation until 2030. LNG exporters are still not happy with this option, insisting on what would effectively be the cancellation of the regulation—and they are not alone because there are EU member states that are not really eager to pay the additional cost of low-methane LNG, which would be inevitable, as pointed out by Wright and al-Kaabi.

Not only are higher gas prices for European buyers inevitable, but Secretary Wright was not exaggerating when he said the regulation would be impossible to enforce in the U.S. shale gas patch. The reason is quite simple: U.S. natural gas is produced by multiple companies that then feed their output into a complex gas network that takes the gas to the liquefaction facilities on the Gulf Coast. Tracking every molecule to ensure it was produced and shipped with as few methane emissions as possible is quite literally, physically impossible.

According to energy consultancy Rystad Energy, however, there is no problem with the EU methane regulation, because there are three times as much compliant natural gas available in the world as the EU imports, it said in a study commissioned by climate outlet the Environmental Defense Fund, as cited by the FT. One wonders, however, if that is indeed the case, why would both Qatar and the United States, which together account for a pretty solid portion of global LNG output, claim compliance is impossible, meaning there is not enough compliant gas in the world.

The EU, for all its power posturing, is not in a position of strength. Bloomberg’s Javier Blas reported in a recent column that the bloc buys some 59% of its LNG from the United States, with the figure going all the way to 64% in April. As a result, Blas wrote, some in Brussels are starting to worry that the EU has become too dependent on a single supplier of a vital commodity—and it does not exactly have many alternatives should anything strain relations, such as, perhaps, an ill-conceived methane regulation.

Yet it appears the purpose of the methane regulation is not necessarily to make sure the gas that Europeans buy is “clean”. The purpose, as described by the FT and attributed to proponents such as the Environmental Defense Fund, is to reduce gas consumption, apparently by making the conditions for purchasing that gas unpalatable. For those proponents, reducing gas consumption would improve the EU’s energy security. European industrial energy consumers beg to differ. Who will prevail should become clear pretty soon.