From waste policy to targeted methane abatement

Waste is the EU’s second largest source of methane and a long-standing problem hiding in plain sight. Across the EU, landfills and organic-waste facilities emit methane for decades, adding to climate pollution long after rubbish has been buried. These emissions often come from concentrated sources, and can be readily addressed with existing technologies, making them precisely the sort that lend themselves to measurement and regulation.  

Yet unlike in the energy sector, methane from waste is only indirectly regulated through waste treatment policy and circular economy objectives. The Landfill Directive and the Waste Framework Directive shape methane outcomes indirectly, with no explicit requirements to measure, report and curb methane emissions. This stands in sharp contrast to the energy sector, where the EU Methane Regulation targets methane emissions from fossil fuels directly, by setting clear obligations and creating a framework that markets and investors can respond to. The regulation provides more certainty on policy support for methane abatement from energy and greater clarity to investors on what a credible methane abatement investment is. 

The imbalance is increasingly hard to justify. Curbing methane from fossil fuels is a necessary and welcome pillar of the EU’s energy transition, but waste deserves similar urgency, not least as it is a larger source of methane than energy. In 2022 the EU waste sector emitted approximately 97 Mt CO₂e of methane, equivalent to the annual CO2 emissions from around 21 million internal combustion engine cars. Around 80% of these emissions originate from solid waste disposal, primarily landfills. Leaving such emissions without a dedicated regulatory framework is not merely a blind spot, but a structural weakness in Europe’s climate governance. 

Elevating methane from the margins of waste policy to a fully governed climate priority does not require new legislation, but the consistent application of regulatory principles the EU already uses elsewhere. 

Most methane emissions from the waste sector come from biodegradable waste disposed of in landfills, where organic material breaks down in the absence of oxygen.v Food waste is a large contributor, along with garden waste, paper, cardboard and other organic-rich materials.vi Methane generation can continue for decades after disposal as these materials break down over time. By contrast, diverting waste to recycling, composting or anaerobic digestion can substantially reduce methane emissions compared with landfill, particularly where organic waste is treated in controlled systems that prevent or capture methane.

Reducing the amount of waste sent to landfill is therefore a priority for both environmental protection and climate policy. This starts with waste prevention, including cutting food waste and improving product design to extend lifetimes. The Waste Framework Directive supports this approach by establishing the EU waste hierarchy, which prioritises prevention, reuse, recycling and recovery, with disposal as a last resort. By diverting biodegradable waste away from landfill and towards options such as composting or anaerobic digestion, the hierarchy also reduces methane emissions. 

Methane from waste is governed only indirectly in the EU

By leaning on national taxes and bans through directives rather than common emissions standards, the EU has allowed methane performance to diverge from one member state to another. As mentioned, there is no regulation directly targeting the abatement of methane from waste in the EU.  

The Landfill Directive (Council Directive 1999/31/EC) is the primary EU instrument governing landfilled waste, including biodegradable municipal waste. The directive requires Member States to meet targets to reduce the quantity of biodegradable waste sent to landfill overall and to manage landfill operations to prevent environmental harm. Landfill taxes became the instrument of choice for most Member States.  

There is a clear correlation between landfill tax levels and landfilling rates. Where landfill taxes are high, landfilling rates tend to be low, but where they are modest, landfilling persists.  The result is a patchwork of outcomes. While flexibility for Member States is the intent of a directive, this nonetheless puts waste policy at a disadvantage when compared to the detailed common provisions for fossil fuel methane under the EU Methane Regulation. 

Only six countries have banned biodegradable waste from landfill altogether - Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Germany, the Netherlands and Sweden. 

The Landfill Directive does not directly target methane emissions from landfills, leaving a significant regulatory gap. While it contains operational requirements that matter for methane, notably the obligation to install landfill-gas collection and treatment systems, typically involving flaring or energy recovery, it stops short of imposing methane-emission limits or comprehensive rules for measuring, reporting and verifying what is actually abated.xiii Compliance monitoring focuses primarily on the management of waste streams and adherence to operational standards rather than on quantifying or verifying methane reductions. Requirements for gas capture are largely framed in general environmental protection terms, with substantial flexibility for Member States in implementation.  

The aims of the Waste Framework Directive are centred on resource efficiency and environmental protection, with climate benefits treated as incidental. Like the Landfill Directive, methane is not the main focus of the Waste Framework Directive. It sets no methane-specific performance targets and does not require systematic measurement or reporting of emissions. As a result, methane reductions occur indirectly rather than as a matter of policy intent, limiting the visibility of waste methane to investors and constraining the ability to mobilise finance at scale. 

A question of regulation, not capability 

The lack of methane-specific rules in waste policy is not due to technical constraints. From a monitoring perspective, member states already report waste-sector methane emissions under the EU Monitoring Mechanism Regulation and UNFCCC frameworks, using established IPCC methodologies.xvi At site level, landfill operators commonly monitor gas flows and methane concentrations as part of permitting requirements, under the EU Landfill Directive.xvii  

Introducing methane measurement, reporting and verification (MRV) standards into waste legislation would therefore build on existing practices. 

Building mandatory MRV standards into waste legislation would be consistent with the EU’s approach to addressing methane from other sources. In energy policy, the EU Methane Regulation takes inspiration from existing standards from the Oil and Gas Methane Partnership and makes them mandatory. Applying a similar approach to waste, mandating methane measurement, reporting and verification, would strengthen accountability and clarity on an important source of emissions. 

Low-cost technology is available to abate methane from waste 

Methane from waste is relatively straightforward to address. The available measures such as food-waste prevention, separate collection of organic waste, composting, anaerobic digestion, mechanical-biological treatment and improved landfill-gas capture, are well established and already in use across many countries. Around 45% of emissions can be addressed with existing technologies. Many can be implemented quickly and at low cost as around 60% of abatement options in the waste sector are low- or negative-cost. 

Investment, however, has lagged: globally, investment in solid waste methane mitigation reached just USD4 billion in 2022, compared to the USD12 billion needed each year.  

Where methane reductions are not explicitly recognised in regulation, they are difficult to value in investment decisions. Responsibility for waste infrastructure typically sits with municipalities and regional authorities, where decisions can often be driven by constrained budgets and service-delivery priorities rather than emissions outcomes. Costs are often upfront, while benefits accrue over time and across multiple domains, from cleaner air to healthier soil.  

The absence of EU-wide methane MRV requirements adds to this constraint. Harmonised methane data would strengthen comparability across projects, improving investors’ ability to assess performance and aggregate investments, including for public investors such as the European Investment Bank and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development.xxi  Financing is therefore channelled mainly through grants and ad hoc public support, rather than through standardised instruments linked to verified emissions reductions. 

Over the past 25 years, EU waste policy has achieved significant progress in environmental protection and resource management. A clear, dedicated framework for regulating and measuring methane emissions from waste has yet to be developed. 

Five priorities for EU action on waste methane 

If waste methane is to move from a peripheral concern to a governed climate priority, the EU does not need to invent new tools. It needs to apply existing regulatory logic more consistently. Five steps would address the main structural gaps. 

1. Recognise waste methane explicitly in EU climate policy. 
   Methane emissions from waste should be targeted as a significant emissions source. This could be achieved through targeted amendments to the Landfill Directive and Waste Framework Directive, or through a dedicated waste-methane framework aligned with the EU Methane Regulation. Explicit recognition would clarify policy intent and anchor subsequent regulatory and financial measures. 

    

2. Introduce binding methane MRV requirements for waste facilities. 
   The EU should require systematic measurement, reporting and verification of methane emissions from landfills and relevant waste-treatment facilities, using harmonised methodologies. Given that monitoring already takes place through permits and greenhouse gas inventories, this would largely formalise existing practice while improving comparability, transparency and enforcement. 

    

3. Move from operational standards to performance outcomes. 
   Current waste legislation focuses on process requirements, such as the installation of gas-capture systems, rather than on emissions performance. Introducing methane-related performance benchmarks would shift the focus from compliance with equipment rules to demonstrable emissions reductions, in line with the approach taken in the energy sector. 

    

4. Align waste methane regulation with EU climate finance frameworks. 
   Clear emissions performance standards would allow waste methane abatement to be integrated more effectively into EU and public-bank financing instruments, including those of the European Investment Bank and European Bank for Reconstruction and Development. This would support the aggregation of projects, reduce transaction costs, and enable standardised investment products linked to verified methane reductions. 

    

5. Preserve national flexibility while harmonising emissions outcomes. 
   Member states should retain discretion over fiscal tools, waste-management models and infrastructure choices, but methane outcomes should be governed by common EU rules. Harmonised standards would reduce the current divergence in performance while allowing countries to choose how best to deliver results. 

Together, these steps would go some way to correcting a long-standing imbalance in EU climate policy.  

Europe has shown in the energy sector that explicit methane regulation can unlock markets and mobilise capital. Applying the same approach to waste would not only close a governance gap, but build the case for rapid, low-cost emissions reductions from a source that has often been overlooked.