How gas certification has gained a policy foothold.
Even as it fails to prove it can accurately detect emissions.
One year after the release of Certified Disaster, Earthworks, and Oil Change International’s new investigative report, Certified Gaslighting provides additional evidence that gas certification relies on unreliable technology and methods that allow fossil fuel companies to make unfounded claims about methane gas. While the oil and gas industry is increasingly turning to these so-called gas certification schemes, no matter the label – “natural” gas, “responsibly sourced,” “differentiated,” “certified,” or “next-gen” – the truth remains the same. Methane gas is a threat to people and the planet.
Findings
Certified Gaslighting compares first-hand field evidence to operators’ emissions monitoring data and finds:
-
Industry-operated continuous emissions monitors (CEMs) at well sites miss nearly all pollution events detected by our researchers.
-
“Continuous” monitors belonging to Project Canary – a certifying company – are inexplicably offline over 25% of the time.
-
Fossil fuel companies rarely take action to address pollution when it is detected. Industry and regulators see the opportunity for profit in certification schemes.
Replicating the methods of the Certified Disaster report, Earthworks thermographers captured evidence of 23 emissions events over 10 months in 2023. Just one of those events was recorded by on-site monitors used by operators. This shows the industry’s use of monitors and the monitor technology itself have not improved despite clear evidence of major flaws.
Recommendations
Phasing out fossil fuels is the first and most critical step towards reducing pollution that contributes to the climate crisis and harms communities. Furthermore:
-
Methane reduction must only happen under government oversight and regulation that puts community and consumer protection first.
-
Certification should not be a part of regulatory frameworks.
-
Effective deployment of continuous emissions monitors requires full transparency, public availability of monitoring data, and real-world deployment that matches peer-reviewed test conditions.