“LNG is not a bridge fuel; it’s a bridge to climate disaster. The Beyond Methane Pledge is a powerful tool for collective action. Commitments around the world to reject LNG in favour of zero-emission solutions that justly address climate, pollution, and biodiversity threats will help us reach the future we need.”

“Halting the use of LNG and the fracking that extracts it is a critical step towards a cleaner, healthier future for our planet and communities. Stand.earth is proud to endorse this ambitious initiative and we call on other organizations to join us in demanding a swift transition away from LNG.”

“Beyond safeguarding our environment and communities most vulnerable to the effects of the climate crisis, saying no to LNG also makes economic sense: channeling investment towards unsustainable LNG projects risks sinking billions in finances in stranded assets that could otherwise have funded solutions aligned with global climate targets.”

“As shipping in the Arctic switches away from heavy fuels responsible for high emissions of black carbon pollution, and moves to cleaner polar fuels, LNG should be dismissed as a potential alternative. Far from kickstarting the decarbonisation of Arctic shipping, replacing one short-lived climate pollutant such black carbon with another – methane will merely prolong the Arctic climate crisis. The shipping industry must look elsewhere for energy sources, including wind power, that do not rely on the burning of fossil fuels.”

“Long-term reliance on LNG, a fossil fuel, makes actual GHG reductions impossible. If LNG facilities are built now, they risk becoming stranded assets, resulting in significant financial risk. This risk is not to be taken lightly, especially considering the transitional cost is vital on the path to 2050 net zero. Therefore, it’s crucial to reconsider current investment strategies and redirect funds from LNG facilities to support the development of carbon-free fuels.”

“The climate crisis is accelerating at high speeds. It is absolutely irresponsible within this situation to accept a technology that releases high amounts of the short-term climate killer methane. LNG does not contribute to shipping decarbonization but puts it at risk. Therefore, it is of highest importance to direct today’s investments to real zero-emission technologies.”

“Ships built today will last for decades. Switching from oil to gas now will simply lock the shipping industry into a future of fossil fuels. Luckily there are truly green solutions available. Ships can become more efficient by using wind power technology, while e-fuels made from green hydrogen would allow giant cargo ships to cross the oceans without damaging the planet. It is not a lack of technology but a lack of will. Thanks to economies of scale, it costs major shipping companies like Maersk and MSC just peanuts to switch to green technologies. It’s time we stopped letting them off the hook.”

“To achieve crucial climate targets, we need to focus on investing resources in true zero-emission shipping solutions. Given their long life, immediate investments in vessels and supportive infrastructure can limit future choices, so we must get them right. To put shipping on a pathway to zero emissions by 2050 we need political interventions like the Methane pledge, not only to better regulate methane but also to improve the economic viability of near-zero and zero-GHG fuels and technologies.”

“LNG poses a grave threat to our climate, environment, and communities. As a potent greenhouse gas, it significantly contributes to global warming and has no place in a sustainable future. When comparing the global warming impact of LNG methane emissions with CO2 emissions from shipping, there is no life-cycle benefit in using LNG for any marine engine technology, and any further investment in LNG would only lead to stranded assets as the industry moves on to zero-emission fuels.”