From the Eurogas Methane Emissions Conference: What Comes Next for EU Compliance

This month at the Eurogas Methane Emissions Conference in Brussels, there was much discussion about the upcoming EU Methane Regulation, particularly through the lens of the current geopolitical space. Europe remains a net energy importer, and its dependence on global LNG markets makes this an issue of continued urgency.

A recurring theme throughout the conference was “stop the clock”—reflecting industry concerns around implementation timelines and the need for clearer guidance.

The reality is – yes, it’s seemingly complex and data is currently fragmented. The controversy remains due to a lack of clarity and a structured way forward for organizations. Yet the EU is moving forward, and while the upcoming regulations are ambitious, we can look tangibly at how tackling these requirements together can be of a benefit to corporate goals: compliance, reducing methane emissions and maintaining energy security and affordability.

With these challenges in light, how do we prepare for a future with the new EU Methane Regulation?

Traceability: Bridging Physical Reality and Policy Requirements

One of the more practical issues discussed is traceability. There is a clear requirement to associate emissions with traded gas. However, physical traceability at the molecular level is not feasible, and is often a misunderstood translation to true traceability. In practice, the market relies on aggregation of operational and measurement data, mass balance approaches, and commercial linkages across the supply chain.

So, how can we compromise between physical reality and regulatory need?

We circle back to the source. What is the best data available, and how we can utilise that to our best advantage to enable regulatory, commercial and operational goals?

The Policy Shift: From Claims to Evidence

In order to set up for agility and scale, the market is moving from emissions claims to usable emissions quantification evidence. A claim—whether based on averages, assumptions, or isolated measurements—does not meet the threshold required for enforcement. From a regulatory perspective, enforcement depends on evidence that can be independently assessed, verified, and reproduced.

At the heart of all of this, we underline the importance of the best available evidence. There will likely be multiple certificate types, certifying bodies, and many verifiers.
The market is moving from emissions claims to usable emissions quantification evidence that is certified, independently verified, compared across jurisdictions, and relied upon in both regulatory and commercial contexts.

With these elements as a focus, we can trust that underlying data can support both compliance and market confidence.

What Makes Evidence Usable

For evidence to be meaningful in practice, several conditions must be met:

1. It must be discoverable, so that regulators and market participants can locate and use it
2. It must be transparent across organizations, enabling independent scrutiny
3. It must be understandable and usable across jurisdictions, given the EU’s member-state implementation model
4. It must be trustworthy, supported by traceability, accuracy, and timeliness

Taken together with technological solutions, these data milestones can set up for scalable compliance.

Certification and Verification: Necessary, but Not Sufficient Alone

Certification continues to play an important role, but its function is often misunderstood.

Certification is the process of assessing evidence. It does not replace the need for high-quality underlying data, nor does it remove the requirement for independent verification.

As highlighted in the conference discussions, certification and verification must operate together:
• Evidence is generated and aggregated
• Certification assesses that evidence
• Independent verification validates the certification

This layered structure reflects a broader policy objective: ensuring that claims are not only made, but can be independently substantiated.

At the same time, verification capacity remains limited, and accreditation will occur at the member-state level. This introduces practical constraints on how quickly compliance systems can scale.

The System-Level Gap: Connecting the Evidence

While the tools out there exist to evolve measurement and certification, a gap remains at the system level.

The market lacks a shared way to connect and use evidence across systems, counterparties, and jurisdictions

This creates several policy-relevant challenges:
• Interoperability: different registries and systems must be able to exchange and interpret data
• Resolution: environmental attributes must resolve consistently across transactions
• Double counting: the system must prevent duplication or conflicting claims

Without a way to link evidence across the value chain, even high-quality data risks becoming fragmented and unusable.

On Transparency and Data Availability

A consistent theme across the conference was the need for greater transparency. Currently, we’re restricted by fragmented registries.

Evidence must not only exist—it must be accessible and auditable across organizations. This is essential for regulatory oversight, independent verification and market participation.

There are different ways to achieve this. Centralized systems are one option, but they introduce their own constraints. An alternative approach is to enable shared access to data across a distributed network, allowing multiple parties to interact with the same underlying evidence.

From a policy perspective, data must be available in a way that supports consistency, auditability, and scalability.

Towards a System of Evidence Quality

Methane regulation in Europe is moving toward a system where compliance depends on the quality, traceability, and usability of evidence—not on isolated measurements or standalone certifications.

This has several implications:
• evidence must be built from operational data and maintained with integrity
• certification and verification must be scaled and coordinated
• systems must support interoperability and prevent fragmentation
• data must be accessible across organizations and jurisdictions

Is there a solution to building the evidence infrastructure that allows regulation to work as intended?

Context Labs is building an open source solution. Learn more abut FAR – the Federated Attribute Resolution (FAR) Network.

Sign up to learn more:

---

Related