Policy Context

Methane import standards—such as those recently introduced by the European Union—are designed to reduce methane emissions beyond a country’s borders. These policies regulate emissions tied to the production and transport of fossil fuels before they reach the importer.

For countries like South Korea, which imports 98% of its fossil fuels, this kind of regulation could be transformative. The report outlines four policy approaches:

• Information-based: Requires exporters to monitor, report, and verify methane emissions (MRV)

• Prescriptive: Mandates the use of specific methane reduction technologies

• Performance-based: Sets limits on methane intensity of imported fuels

• Market-based: Applies fees or penalties for excessive methane emissions

These policy options were closely examined in a previous joint study by SFOC and Carbon Limits, which assessed their feasibility and potential effectiveness in the Korean context. Read more here.

Why It Matters

Implementing methane standards for imports would directly support South Korea’s climate commitments—including its 2030 NDC and 2050 carbon neutrality target—while also strengthening its global leadership under the Global Methane Pledge, which aims for a 30% reduction in methane emissions by 2030.

Moreover, methane reduction has multiple co-benefits: it improves air quality, lowers premature mortality from pollution, and reduces near-term warming—buying time to scale long-term climate solutions. Early action can also position Korea as a standard-setter in methane governance and unlock new economic opportunities, including technology exports and cleaner energy trade.

Importantly, the benefits of methane reduction are global in nature and can be realized relatively quickly due to methane’s short atmospheric lifetime (about 12 years). By avoiding future climate damages—especially in vulnerable regions—these reductions deliver measurable economic and social gains. This report applies the concept of the Social Cost of Carbon (SCC) to quantify how much damage can be avoided under different methane reduction scenarios.

Figure 1. Relationship Between Damage Costs and Benefits