IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Mitigation of Methane Emissions: A Rapid and Cost-Effective Response to Climate Change


  • Claudia Kemfert
  • Wolf-Peter Schill


Methane is a major anthropogenic greenhouse gas, second only to carbon dioxide (CO2) in its impact on climate change. Methane (CH4) has a high global warming potential that is 25 times as large as the one of CO2 on a 100 year time horizon according to the latest IPCC report. Thus, CH4 contributes significantly to anthropogenic radiative forcing, although it has a relatively short atmospheric perturbation lifetime of 12 years. CH4 has a variety of sources that can be small, geographically dispersed, and not related to energy sectors. In this report, we analyze methane emission abatement options in five different sectors and identify economic mitigation potentials for different CO2 prices. While mitigation potentials are generally large, there are substantial potentials at low marginal abatement costs. Drawing on different assumptions on the social costs of carbon, we calculate benefit/cost ratios for different sectors and mitigation levels. We recommend an economically efficient global methane mitigation portfolio for the year 2020 that includes the sectors of livestock and manure, rice management, solid waste, coal mine methane and natural gas. Depending on assumptions of social costs of carbon, this portfolio leads to global CH4 mitigation levels of 1.5 or 1.9 GtCO2-eq at overall costs of around $14 billion or $30 billion and benefit/cost ratios of 1.4 and 3.0, respectively. We also develop an economically less efficient alternative portfolio that excludes cost-effective agricultural mitigation options. It leads to comparable abatement levels, but has higher costs and lower benefit/cost ratios. If the global community wanted to spend an even larger amount of money - say, $250 billion - on methane mitigation, much larger mitigation potentials could be realized, even such with very high marginal abatement costs. Nonetheless, this approach would be economically inefficient. If the global community wanted to spend such an amount, we recommend spreading the effort cost-effectively over different greenhouse gases. While methane mitigation alone will not suffice to solve the climate problem, it is a vital part of a cost-effective climate policy. Due to the short atmospheric lifetime, CH4 emission reductions have a rapid effect. Methane mitigation is indispensable for realizing ambitious emission scenarios like IPCC's "B1", which leads to a global temperature increase of less than 2°C by the year 2100. Policy makers should put more emphasis on methane mitigation and aim for realizing low-cost methane mitigation potentials by providing information to all relevant actors and by developing appropriate regulatory and market frameworks. We also recommend including methane in emissions trading schemes.

Suggested Citation

  • Claudia Kemfert & Wolf-Peter Schill, 2009. "Mitigation of Methane Emissions: A Rapid and Cost-Effective Response to Climate Change," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 918, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
  • Handle: RePEc:diw:diwwpp:dp918

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Stephan Sauer & Jan-Egbert Sturm, 2007. "Using Taylor Rules to Understand European Central Bank Monetary Policy," German Economic Review, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 8, pages 375-398, August.
    2. Mesonnier, Jean-Stephane & Renne, Jean-Paul, 2007. "A time-varying "natural" rate of interest for the euro area," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 51(7), pages 1768-1784, October.
    3. Nelson, Edward & Nikolov, Kalin, 2003. "UK inflation in the 1970s and 1980s: the role of output gap mismeasurement," Journal of Economics and Business, Elsevier, vol. 55(4), pages 353-370.
    4. Athanasios Orphanides & Simon van Norden, 2002. "The Unreliability of Output-Gap Estimates in Real Time," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 84(4), pages 569-583, November.
    5. Y. Adema, 2003. "A taylor rule for the euro area based on quasi-real time data," WO Research Memoranda (discontinued) 738, Netherlands Central Bank, Research Department.
    6. Coenen, Gunter & Levin, Andrew & Wieland, Volker, 2005. "Data uncertainty and the role of money as an information variable for monetary policy," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 49(4), pages 975-1006, May.
    7. Hodrick, Robert J & Prescott, Edward C, 1997. "Postwar U.S. Business Cycles: An Empirical Investigation," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 29(1), pages 1-16, February.
    8. Athanasios Orphanides, 2001. "Monetary Policy Rules Based on Real-Time Data," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(4), pages 964-985, September.
    9. Richard H. Clarida & Mark Gertler, 1997. "How the Bundesbank Conducts Monetary Policy," NBER Chapters,in: Reducing Inflation: Motivation and Strategy, pages 363-412 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Ansgar Belke & Thorsten Polleit, 2007. "How the ECB and the US Fed set interest rates," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(17), pages 2197-2209.
    11. Lars E. O. Svensson, 2003. "What Is Wrong with Taylor Rules? Using Judgment in Monetary Policy through Targeting Rules," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 41(2), pages 426-477, June.
    12. Ball, Laurence, 1999. "Efficient Rules for Monetary Policy," International Finance, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 2(1), pages 63-83, April.
    13. Aastrup, Morten & Jensen, Henrik, 2010. "What Drives the European Central Bank's Interest-Rate Changes?," CEPR Discussion Papers 8160, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    14. Jesus Garcia-Iglesias, 2007. "How the European Central Bank decided its early monetary policy?," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(7), pages 927-936.
    15. Carlo Altavilla & Luigi Landolfo, 2005. "Do central banks act asymmetrically? Empirical evidence from the ECB and the Bank of England," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(5), pages 507-519.
    16. Orphanides, Athanasios, 2003. "Monetary policy evaluation with noisy information," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(3), pages 605-631, April.
    17. Odile Chagny & Jörg Döpke, 2001. "Measures of the Output Gap in the Euro-Zone: An Empirical Assessment of Selected Methods," Vierteljahrshefte zur Wirtschaftsforschung / Quarterly Journal of Economic Research, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, vol. 70(3), pages 310-332.
    18. Janko Gorter & Jan Jacobs & Jakob de Haan, 2008. "Taylor Rules for the ECB using Expectations Data," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 110(3), pages 473-488, September.
    19. Gerdesmeier, Dieter & Roffia, Barbara, 2004. "Taylor rules for the euro area: the issue of real-time data," Discussion Paper Series 1: Economic Studies 2004,37, Deutsche Bundesbank.
    20. Paolo Surico, 2003. "Asymmetric Reaction Functions for the Euro Area," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 19(1), pages 44-57.
    21. Orphanides, Athanasios & Porter, Richard D. & Reifschneider, David & Tetlow, Robert & Finan, Frederico, 2000. "Errors in the measurement of the output gap and the design of monetary policy," Journal of Economics and Business, Elsevier, vol. 52(1-2), pages 117-141.
    22. Gerlach, Stefan & Schnabel, Gert, 2000. "The Taylor rule and interest rates in the EMU area," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 67(2), pages 165-171, May.
    23. Peersman, Gert & Smets, Frank, 1999. "The Taylor Rule: A Useful Monetary Policy Benchmark for the Euro Area?," International Finance, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 2(1), pages 85-116, April.
    24. R. Fendel & M. Frenkel, 2009. "Inflation differentials in the Euro area: did the ECB care?," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(10), pages 1293-1302.
    25. Jesús Cuaresma & Ernest Gnan & Doris Ritzberger-Gruenwald, 2004. "Searching for the natural rate of interest: a euro area perspective," Economic Change and Restructuring, Springer, vol. 31(2), pages 185-204, June.
    26. Newey, Whitney & West, Kenneth, 2014. "A simple, positive semi-definite, heteroscedasticity and autocorrelation consistent covariance matrix," Applied Econometrics, Publishing House "SINERGIA PRESS", vol. 33(1), pages 125-132.
    27. Jesús Cuaresma & Ernest Gnan & Doris Ritzberger-Gruenwald, 2004. "Searching for the natural rate of interest: a euro area perspective," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 31(2), pages 185-204, June.
    28. Dieter Gerdesmeier & Barbara Roffia, 2004. "Empirical Estimates of Reaction Functions for the Euro Area," Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics (SJES), Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics (SSES), vol. 140(I), pages 37-66, March.
    29. Colavecchio, Roberta & Carstensen, Kai, 2004. "Did the Revision of the ECB Monetary Policy Strategy Affect the Reaction Function?," Kiel Working Papers 1221, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW).
    30. Gerlach-Kristen, Petra, 2003. "Interest rate reaction functions and the Taylor rule in the euro area," Working Paper Series 258, European Central Bank.
    31. Taylor, John B., 1993. "Discretion versus policy rules in practice," Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 195-214, December.
    32. Tao Wu, 2005. "Estimating the "neutral" real interest rate in real time," FRBSF Economic Letter, Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, issue oct21.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item


    Methane; mitigation; climate change; cost-benefit analysis;

    JEL classification:

    • Q52 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Pollution Control Adoption and Costs; Distributional Effects; Employment Effects
    • Q53 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Air Pollution; Water Pollution; Noise; Hazardous Waste; Solid Waste; Recycling
    • Q54 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Climate; Natural Disasters and their Management; Global Warming

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:


    Access and download statistics


    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:diw:diwwpp:dp918. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Bibliothek). General contact details of provider: .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.