Pennsylvania steps up to address methane pollution. Here is what is at stake.  

By John Rutecki

In the Governor’s updated Regulatory Agenda, published in the July 25, 2026 Pennsylvania Bulletin, the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection proposed two rulemakings to regulate methane emissions from new and existing sources at conventional and unconventional oil and gas well sites.

Then at the August 6, 2026, Air Quality Technical Advisory Committee meeting, DEP outlined their approach and proposed to submit draft rules utilizing their authority under the Air Pollution Control Act to the Environmental Quality Board in 2027. 

Governor Shapiro’s administration listened to overwhelming public support for durable methane protections while considering permit updates last summer.  They took the important next step for Pennsylvania, directing the Commonwealth to move forward with rules that cut methane pollution from oil and gas, modeled on federal existing source standards known as OOOOc. That is leadership. The significance of these rules should not be overlooked. The nation’s second-largest natural gas producer is now moving forward with comprehensive regulations to reduce methane. As Washington retreats from federal methane protections, Pennsylvania is moving forward, and the Governor deserves our thanks for this leadership.   

Now the task remains to get it right, because a methane rule only delivers if it covers every source of the problem. 

Pennsylvania has long been at the center of America’s energy economy. What we do here doesn’t just affect our own communities. It shapes markets, jobs, and energy policy across the country. That’s why the conversation around methane emissions matters so much. 

There is united agreement on the need to reduce methane emissions through a state rulemaking

Industry groups, policymakers, and advocates all acknowledge that methane is both a valuable energy resource and a pollutant that should be addressed. In an April 21, 2026, House Natural Resources methane hearing, stakeholders agreed that Pennsylvania should do so through a state rulemaking.  

That’s an important place to start. 

The question facing Pennsylvania is no longer whether to act, but whether the eventual rules will reflect the full environmental, economic and scientific picture – or leave significant sources of pollution unaddressed.  

This is an opportunity we cannot afford to miss 

Methane is the primary component of natural gas, and the very product Pennsylvania produces more of than any state except Texas. When methane leaks, it isn’t just pollution. It’s wasted energy. 

In 2023 alone, Pennsylvania’s oil and gas sector emitted: 

• 1.05 million metric tons of methane.  

• The equivalent of roughly $178 million in wasted natural gas.  

• Enough to serve the heating and cooking needs of more than 820,000 households – or nearly enough for every household in Philadelphia and Pittsburgh combined.  

If market incentives alone were enough to prevent methane loss, we would not be wasting this much product every year. The scale of that waste makes one thing clear: voluntary efforts, while valuable, are not enough on their own. 

The market is already moving towards near-zero emissions.

There’s a competitive dimension, too. Buyers are demanding cleaner sources of energy, and the European Union’s new import rules will require measurement and verification of the emissions tied to the gas it buys by 2029. Importers will need to meet a set methane intensity (or methane loss rate) standard by 2030.  

Producers that can document low-emission output will have the advantage. Those that cannot may face growing commercial and regulatory risk. Clear, statewide standards give Pennsylvania operators the certainty and the credentials to compete, turning strong methane performance into a market asset rather than a liability. 

As demand for Pennsylvania gas grows – from LNG exports to manufacturing and new data center development – the question is not simply how much energy the Commonwealth will produce. The question is whether that production will be managed responsibly and competitively.

Industry data shows a huge disparity in methane loss rates between conventional and unconventional well sites

The Appalachian Basin has among the lowest methane intensity or loss rates in the country. That broad statement leaves out important differences among operators and well types. 

A recent study by the Appalachian Methane Initiative (AMI) offers a fuller picture of methane emissions in the Appalachian Basin based on real-world measurement data.  

Here are a few key findings:  

• Low-producing, conventional well sites had an 18.3% methane loss rate  

• High-producing, unconventional well sites had a 0.09% methane loss rate. 

• Conventional well sites generated 63.5% of emissions. 

• The basin’s overall methane loss rate was an estimated 0.52% (Industry target is a 0.2% loss rate). 

This tracks with earlier work by EDF scientists on the outsized role of low-producing well sites. EDF estimates that about half of all emissions in Pennsylvania are from low-producing well sites that contribute just 1% of total production. 

Some operations perform extremely well, while others do not. Top-performing operators have already shown that low-emissions production is possible. However, the basin’s overall methane performance is undermined by approximately 175,000 low-producing well sites – including more than 73,500 in Pennsylvania—that contribute disproportionately to methane pollution. Ignoring that reality would risk designing policy around the industry’s best performers while leaving a significant share of emissions unaddressed.  

The rules must address every major source

This is why the details of the Pennsylvania rules will matter so much. To deliver real, meaningful reductions, they need to cover all sources, including low-producing, conventional well sites.  

That runs against a familiar argument: that regulation will put small, independent “mom and pop” operators out of business. Legitimate operational realities deserve a real answer, and flexibility can and should be built in to protect truly small operators. Nearly $1 billion in Methane Emission Reduction Program grants, much of which target low-producing well sites, are moving forward that can offer assistance.  

Flexibility should be targeted since most Pennsylvania’s low-producing well sites are owned by larger oil and gas corporations.  

Here in Pennsylvania, just 11 oil and gas corporations owned nearly half, 49%, of all low-producing well sites in Pennsylvania with portfolios of more than 1,000 low-producing well sites and generated $2.7 million to $298 million in revenue.  

Operators of most low-producing well sites have the means

Just over 100 oil and gas corporations owned nearly 90% of all low-producing well sites with portfolios of 100 low-producing well sites or more. Operators with portfolios of 100-200 low-producing well sites generated an average of $2.7 million of revenue. 

Just 3.6% of sites are owned by operators with 30 or fewer well sites with an average revenue of $472,000.  

Pennsylvania should address the genuine challenges facing a discreet subset of operators without allowing those challenges to become a shield against action across the entire sector. 

The industry has the capacity to address this problem and cut a substantial share of emissions. 

The 2024 U.S. EPA methane rule built in flexibility such as allowing well sites near the end of their useful life to forgo equipment upgrades.  

Emissions-reduction requirements should focus on the sources responsible for the greatest pollution. Flexibility can and should be built into the rule to minimize costs for truly small operators. 

There is also a smarter path for the lowest-producing well sites, where emissions are disproportionately high, production is minimal, and the economics often do not support long-term operation. Rather than allowing pollution in perpetuity, the state should prioritize these well sites for plugging and remediation, cutting emissions at the source while preventing future orphaned well sites and taxpayer liability.

There is a practical path forward

The data points toward a clear, workable approach. A smart methane policy should: 

• Build on what’s already working. Many operators are demonstrating that low-emissions production is achievable today. 

• Strong rules are critical, and flexibility should be targeted. Most low-producing well sites are owned by corporations with the means to address emissions. Flexibility should target truly small operators and well sites nearing the end of their useful life. 

• Strengthen competitiveness. Global markets increasingly demand low-emissions natural gas, and clear standards help Pennsylvania compete. 

• Deliver real benefits for communities. Reducing methane also reduces harmful co-pollutants, improving air quality for all of the Commonwealth, including the nearly one million Pennsylvanians living near oil and gas operations.

It is time to get to work

Often, stakeholders do not begin with a shared premise, but here we do. We agree on three things: methane emissions must be reduced, solutions exist and policy should be practical.  

Governor Shapiro has taken the first step, and both he and DEP Secretary Jessica Shirley have our thanks for it.  

The work ahead is to carry that commitment through a lengthy rulemaking process and ensure the final standards reflect reality. That means covering the major sources of pollution, supporting DEP in designing solutions that match the problem and avoiding broad exemptions that would leave significant emissions unaddressed.  

Pennsylvania has the tools, the data, and now the momentum to lead.  

As the nation’s second-largest natural gas producer, Pennsylvania now has an opportunity to demonstrate that energy leadership and methane accountability can go hand in hand. Governor Shapiro and Secretary Shirley should continue to carry this process forward with strong and commonsense rules that reduce waste, protect communities, and strengthen the Commonwealth’s energy economy. 

The work has just begun. Now we roll up our sleeves to get the job done.