The Importance of Tracking Earth-System Methane Fluxes — a Q&A with YCNCC Faculty Sparkle Malone

In late March, YCNCC Faculty and Yale School of the Environment (YSE) Assistant Professor Sparkle Malone co-authored a peer-reviewed article in Science on “A Global Methane Observation System to Track Climate Feedbacks for Verifiable Climate Impact.”

YCNCC Science Communications Fellow Samantha Tracy recently sat down with Malone to discuss why better methane flux measurement is critical for climate mitigation.

YCNCC:  First off, what is methane, what are the major sources of methane, and how does it relate to climate change?

SM:  Methane (CH₄) is a powerful greenhouse gas that traps substantially more heat per molecule than carbon dioxide (CO₂) over shorter timescales. Although it remains in the atmosphere for less time than CO₂, methane is responsible for a significant share of current warming, which means reducing methane emissions can provide relatively rapid climate benefits.

Major methane sources include fossil fuel production and transport, agriculture (especially livestock and rice cultivation), landfills, wetlands, thawing permafrost, inland waters, and biomass burning. Some of these are human-caused, while others are natural Earth system sources. That distinction is important because climate change itself can increase methane emissions from these natural Earth systems, including wetlands, Arctic soils, and other ecosystems, creating feedback that amplifies warming. Our ability to separately measure and monitor human and natural methane sources is therefore central to both climate science and effective policy.

YCNCC:  What motivated this research, and what are the key findings? 

SM:  Methane matters enormously for near-term climate outcomes, but our current global observing systems are not adequate for tracking all methane sources with the confidence needed for policy and climate accountability. We can estimate methane emissions, but large uncertainties remain—especially for natural sources that may be rapidly changing  due to warming.

Our article calls for a coordinated Global Ecosystem Methane Observation System (GEM-OS) that integrates satellites, aircraft, atmospheric monitoring networks, eddy covariance towers, ecosystem field studies, isotopic measurements, and modeling systems. No single tool can solve the problem. Satellites are excellent for broad spatial coverage, but they need ground validation and atmospheric networks to improve attribution.

The key finding is that building an integrated observing framework would dramatically improve our ability to detect methane trends, distinguish anthropogenic from natural emissions, identify climate feedback early, and verify whether mitigation efforts are producing real atmospheric benefits.

YCNCC:  What kinds of collaboration and funding are needed to implement and operate a more robust system for global monitoring of methane emissions from Earth systems?

SM:  This effort requires collaboration at a truly international scale. Methane does not respect political boundaries, so observing systems must connect national agencies, universities, Indigenous communities, NGOs, and multilateral organizations. We need partnerships between atmospheric scientists, ecologists, remote sensing experts, modelers, engineers, and policy institutions.

Funding must support both cutting-edge technology and long-term continuity. That means investing in satellite missions, tower networks, field campaigns, Arctic and tropical monitoring sites, open-access data systems, and workforce development. Just as importantly, funding must support sustained operations—not only one-time research grants. There is also a strong equity dimension. Many methane hotspots are located in regions with limited monitoring infrastructure. Building capacity in under-resourced regions is essential if we want a truly global and credible system. 

YCNCC:  What implications does this work have for climate mitigation?

SM:  Better methane monitoring improves mitigation in several ways. First, it helps identify where emissions are largest and where reductions can happen fastest. Second, it allows governments and companies to verify whether claimed reductions are actually occurring. Third, it helps distinguish progress on human emissions from increases driven by natural feedback cycles.

That last point is increasingly important. If warming causes wetlands, permafrost, or other ecosystems to emit more methane, society needs to know whether rising atmospheric methane is coming from policy failure, climate feedbacks, or both. Without that information, it becomes much harder to design effective responses.

In short, better methane monitoring creates the transparency and accountability needed for credible climate action. It turns methane reduction from aspiration into something measurable. 

YCNCC:  Any final thoughts?

SM:  Methane is one of the clearest opportunities we have to slow warming in the near term, but only if we can measure it well. We are entering a period when natural methane feedbacks may become increasingly important, while nations are simultaneously making methane reduction pledges. That combination makes robust monitoring urgent.  A global methane observation system would help us anticipate change rather than react after the fact. It would strengthen science, improve accountability, and give policymakers better tools to protect climate stability.