Turning Methane Pledges into Real Change for Nigeria’s Oil and Gas Communities

For decades, oil and gas communities in Nigeria’s Niger Delta have lived with a crisis that is both visible and invisible. Towering gas flares light up the sky while the toxic effects of methane—an odorless, colorless greenhouse gas that is 84 times more potent than carbon dioxide, continue to worsen climate change and public health. Could Nigeria’s big bet on gas as a key pillar of its energy further complicate these issues? 

Nigeria has pledged to reach net zero emissions by 2060 and included methane reduction targets for the energy sector in its Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), a plan that outlines how it aims to achieve its climate goals. But so far, these commitments have not yielded significant change. In 2023, the country ranked eighth worst globally for gas flaring, burning about 5 billion cubic feet of gas. Experts blame this on weak enforcement, lack of accountability from oil companies and aging infrastructure. 

There is hope that things will improve with Nigeria’s new rules, such as the Gas Flaring, Venting and Methane Emission Regulations of 2023 and guidelines to manage gas leaks in oil production. 

Communities paying the price 

The impacts of methane are not abstract concerns. They are daily realities for many oil communities. In Igwuruta, Rivers State, where pipelines and flare stacks surround the town, residents are dealing with constant health concerns. Many say that children often suffer from respiratory issues and adults struggle with high blood pressure due to prolonged methane exposure. “My youngest has been in and out of the clinic with chest problems,” says Philip Hail, a local resident. 

The story is the same in Aiyetoro, a coastal, oil-producing town in Ondo State. There, farmers say their soil is no longer as fertile and their harvests are smaller. Fishermen also complain that they catch far fewer fish than before. “We used to fill our nets by midday,” says Chief Oluwanbe Ojagbohunmi, the community chief. “Now, sometimes we go days without enough to feed our families.” 

"The impacts of methane are not abstract concerns. They are daily realities for many oil communities."

The impact is especially harsh on women. In many homes, they use heat from gas flares to dry garri, a staple food made from cassava, which exposes them to toxic chemicals that increase the risk of asthma, stillbirths and reproductive health issues. At the same time, water pollution and acid rain are damaging farmlands, making it harder for smallholder farmers to support their families. This is worsening poverty and food shortages in many communities. 

Weak accountability is holding back progress 

Efforts to curb methane emissions in Nigeria continue to falter due to three major gaps: weak enforcement of legal and regulatory frameworks, poor community inclusion and a lack of accountability. Although Niger Delta communities face the direct impacts of methane pollution, regulators rarely include them in policy decisions that shape their environment and health. This explains why programs like the Nigerian Gas Flare Commercialisation Programme (NGFCP) and regulations by the Nigerian Upstream Petroleum Regulatory Commission (NUPRC) have yet to yield noticeable improvements. Communities say weak enforcement allows companies to sidestep their obligations, placing corporate interests over community concerns.  

Another key challenge is the failure of leadership to ensure that accountability systems are responsive and accessible. In many cases, authorities communicate formal accountability channels poorly, apply the rules inconsistently or keep the process deliberately unclear. Some even undermine advocacy efforts through incentives or intimidation. 

"Although Niger Delta communities face the direct impacts of methane pollution, regulators rarely include them in policy decisions that shape their environment and health."

Turning methane commitments into action 

To bridge the gap between policy and impact, Nigeria needs a coordinated, accountable and data-driven approach. Here are some practical steps:  

1. Set clear methane emissions baselines: The National Council on Climate Change (NCCC) and the Federal Ministry of Petroleum Resources must set asset-level, disaggregated methane emissions baselines on how much methane companies release, track reduction progress and ensure transparency across the oil and gas value chain.  

2. Improve monitoring and enforce regulations: Regulators like NUPRC and the Nigerian Midstream and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority (NMDPRA) must strengthen regular monitoring using field inspections and satellite data. They must verify company-reported data through third-party checks and hold accountable those that violate flaring rules. They must ensure continuity in compliance during asset transfers, especially to local companies, by making environmental performance a condition for license retention and access to capital. 

3. Commercialize flared or wasted gas: NUPRC must ramp up flared or wasted gas commercialization efforts either through the Nigerian Gas Flare Commercialization Programme (NGFCP) or by offering incentives to companies that act. 

4. Reward companies that follow the rules: The government should incentivize oil and gas operators to fully comply with national methane guidelines and align with global frameworks to enhance competitiveness and preserve market access. This includes emissions-reduction financing for companies that meet set methane reduction targets. 

5. Include communities in monitoring and accountability: Civil society organizations should empower community members to monitor flaring, document irregularities and report violations. Regulators like NUPRC and NMDPRA should work together to create clear ways for communities to monitor and report emissions, making sure that they hear and include local voices in decision-making. 

Methane reduction is not just about climate targets—it’s about justice for the communities who live with its harms every day. Nigeria’s progress will depend not just on strong policies, but on whether decision-makers listen to those that are most affected.