EU energy ministers, meeting in Luxembourg on 29 October, confirmed that member states hope to agree on 6 November how long to postpone the bloc’s Methane Emissions Regulation. The direction of the talks points to a longer postponement than the one-year delay proposed by the European Commission.
Romania is among the countries that formally endorsed a call for a three-year delay. Austria, the Czech Republic and Slovakia led that call at an earlier ministerial summit, and Belgium, Bulgaria, Hungary, Italy, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Poland, Romania and Sweden joined it. The opinion was presented during the energy ministers’ summit in Luxembourg.
The European Parliament adopted the proposal with a three-year delay in a vote on 22 October and is ready to open negotiations once member states settle their position. Lawmakers used a fast-track procedure and did not endorse the Commission’s preferred one-year timeline.
An amendment from 36 MEPs, mainly from Romania, extends the timeline for EU-based oil and gas producers to report both source-level and site-level emissions. Companies must report data on sites they operate by February 2030 and on non-operated assets by August 2031.
Under the parliamentary text, importers of gas, crude oil and coal would have until 31 May 2031 to show that supply contracts for the previous year meet EU rules on monitoring, reporting and verifying methane emissions. Importers and EU-based producers would have until August 2031 to report the methane intensity of products marketed in the EU. The rules still apply to contracts signed or renewed after 4 August 2024.
The provisions would delay rules that require fossil-fuel importers to monitor and report upstream methane emissions, currently due to apply from 1 January 2027. Related requirements for importers and EU producers to report methane intensity, and later keep it below maximum allowed values, would also be postponed.
The item was not on the Luxembourg summit agenda, and no political agreement was expected after confirmation on 26 October that diplomat-level discussions would be pushed back a week. Irish energy minister Darragh O’Brien, chairing for Ireland’s Council presidency, told reporters there was a desire to find a workable compromise that also took account of Parliament’s vote, and that work was continuing.
EU energy commissioner Dan Jorgensen said he felt one year was sufficient. He did not directly answer whether the Commission would withdraw its proposal. He said he wanted to see what Parliament and Council could agree, that the Commission would help facilitate the discussion, and that there was a reason he had put forward the proposal he did. EU treaties allow the Commission to withdraw a proposal if the co-legislators distort or defeat its intent, but the proposal itself accepts a need to delay implementation. Withdrawing it would mean keeping the original timetable.
Belgian energy minister Mathieu Bihet told reporters his country would insist the issue be discussed that day and that he supported Parliament’s three-year approach. During the meeting, Bulgaria’s energy minister Iva Petrova called for a minimum delay of three years so affected operators have time to prepare and compliance conditions are workable. German state secretary for energy Frank Wetzel told reporters a realistic approach was important and that the Commission still had work to do on certification of emissions. He said he was confident trilogue talks could produce a transitional arrangement.
Spain has been the most vocal opponent of a delay. Ecological transition minister Sara Aagesen Munoz was not at the meeting, which took place a day after a fatal Spanish train crash. She has previously said she does not favour any delay and will want the period limited.
Legislators also approved amendments from centre-left and centrist groups so that Russian energy imports would not benefit from the longer timeline. Existing deadlines would apply to fuels produced in or exported from EU-sanctioned countries, as defined by the Commission, and importers would have to report those volumes separately in mixed cargoes. The report presents this as a sign of continued political commitment to phasing out Russian gas and LNG during 2027. MEPs also want the Commission to report on implementation by 1 July 2029 and have proposed further legal changes if implementation problems or a threat to security of supply continue.
Industry groups including Energy Traders Europe, Eurogas and the International Association of Oil and Gas Producers wrote to EU leaders earlier in October that a delay was a useful step but that more than one year was needed. Over the summer the Commission had urged countries to implement on schedule while waiving fines. Industry criticised that guidance, and in September the Commission accepted a delay shorter than most governments and Parliament had sought.