Volume 2, Issue 1, ICCK Transactions on Machine Intelligence
Volume 2, Issue 1, 2026
Submit Manuscript Edit a Special Issue
Article QR Code
Article QR Code
Scan the QR code for reading
Popular articles
ICCK Transactions on Machine Intelligence, Volume 2, Issue 1, 2026: 53-64

Free to Read | Research Article | 12 January 2026
A Data-Driven Framework for Methane Emission Prediction Using Machine Learning Methods
1 Department of Computer Science and Information Technology, Central University of Haryana, Haryana 123031, India
2 Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, Federal University of Petroleum Resources, Effurun, Delta State 320102, Nigeria
* Corresponding Author: Anju, [email protected]
ARK: ark:/57805/tmi.2025.782852
Received: 22 October 2025, Accepted: 25 December 2025, Published: 12 January 2026  
Abstract
Greenhouse gas Methane (CH$_4$) has 86 times more impact on global warming than carbon dioxide (CO$_2$). The emission of methane gas into the atmosphere is increasing due to the reliance on fossil-based resources in post-industrial energy consumption, along with the rise in food demand and the generation of organic waste that accompanies a growing human population. CH$_4$ acts as a vital pollutant in the air. The problem addressed in this study was to accurately estimate CH$_4$ emissions from functional urban areas. This study aims to predict CH$_4$ emissions using Time Series (TS) and Machine Learning (ML) models such as Autoregressive Integrated Moving Average (ARIMA), Seasonal ARIMA (SARIMA), Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM), Random Forest Regressor (RFR), and CatBoost Regressor (CABR), etc. The SARIMA model has the best combination of values (1,0,0) (1,1,0). The methane emission data was collected from the World Bank’s Group from 2019 to 2022. Among all models, the SARIMA model predicted CH$_4$ emissions more accurately than the other models. The results obtained in the study indicate that SARIMA outperforms other techniques. The SARIMA model performed the most accurate results in terms of R-squared score (R$^2$) = 94%; Root Mean Squared Error (RMSE) = 2.8129; Mean Squared Error (MSE) = 7.9126; Mean Absolute Error (MAE) = 1.8391, etc. This type of prediction enables the government to reduce CH$_4$ emissions at the global level.

Graphical Abstract
A Data-Driven Framework for Methane Emission Prediction Using Machine Learning Methods

Keywords
machine learning
methane emission
random forest regressor
prediction

Data Availability Statement
Data will be made available on request.

Funding
This work was supported without any funding.

Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Ethical Approval and Consent to Participate
Not applicable.

References
  1. Mar, K. A., Unger, C., Walderdorff, L., & Butler, T. (2022). Beyond CO2 equivalence: The impacts of methane on climate, ecosystems, and health. Environmental Science & Policy, 134, 127–136.
    [CrossRef]   [Google Scholar]
  2. Allen, R. J., Zhao, X., Randles, C. A., Kramer, R. J., Samset, B. H., & Smith, C. J. (2023). Surface warming and wetting due to methane’s long-wave radiative effects muted by short-wave absorption. Nature Geoscience, 16(4), 314–320.
    [CrossRef]   [Google Scholar]
  3. Ahmed, T., Mahmood, Y., Yodo, N., & Huang, Y. (2024). Weather-related combined effect on failure propagation and maintenance procedures towards sustainable gas pipeline infrastructure. Sustainability, 16(13), 5789.
    [CrossRef]   [Google Scholar]
  4. Magazzino, C., Madaleno, M., Waqas, M., & Leogrande, A. (2024). Exploring the determinants of methane emissions from a worldwide perspective using panel data and machine learning analyses. Environmental Pollution, 348, 123807.
    [CrossRef]   [Google Scholar]
  5. Awulu, E. (2021). Gas flaring in Nigeria: A crisis for the environment. Academia Letters, 1–6.
    [CrossRef]   [Google Scholar]
  6. Ezinna, P. C., Ugwuibe, C. O., & Okwueze, F. O. (2024). Gas flaring, sustainable development goal 2, and food security reflections in the Niger Delta area of Nigeria. Discover Global Society, 2(1), 61.
    [CrossRef]   [Google Scholar]
  7. Stern, J. P. (2025). Measurement reporting and verification of methane emissions from the gas and oil sector and consequences for LNG trade: A three year progress report (No. 46). OIES Paper: ET. https://hdl.handle.net/10419/324425
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Zhang, B., LI, H., Zhong, B., & GAO, J. (2022). The situation, problems and countermeasures for the controls of China’s methane emissions. China Mining Magazine, 31(2), 1-10. https://dx.doi.org/10.12075/j.issn.1004-4051.2022.02.026
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Khanna, N., Lin, J., Liu, X., & Wang, W. (2024). An assessment of China’s methane mitigation potential and costs and uncertainties through 2060. Nature Communications, 15(1), 9694.
    [CrossRef]   [Google Scholar]
  10. Mousavi, S. M., Dinan, N. M., Ansarifard, S., Borhani, F., Darvishi, A., Mustafa, F., & Naghibi, A. (2024). Unveiling the drivers of atmospheric methane variability in Iran: A 20-year exploration using spatiotemporal modeling and machine learning. Environmental Challenges, 15, 100946.
    [CrossRef]   [Google Scholar]
  11. Jahan, I., Mehana, M., Matheou, G., & Viswanathan, H. (2024). Deep Learning-Based quantifications of methane emissions with field applications. International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation, 132, 104018.
    [CrossRef]   [Google Scholar]
  12. Ehinmowo, A. B., Nwaneri, B. I., & Olaide, J. O. (2025). Predictive modeling of hydrogen production and methane conversion from biomass-derived methane using machine learning and optimisation techniques. Next Energy, 7, 100229.
    [CrossRef]   [Google Scholar]
  13. Luo, R., Wang, J., & Gates, I. (2023). Machine learning for accurate methane concentration predictions: Short-term training, long-term results. Environmental Research Communications, 5(8), 081003.
    [CrossRef]   [Google Scholar]
  14. Chen, S., Liu, L., Ma, Y., Zhuang, Q., & Shurpali, N. J. (2024). Quantifying global wetland methane emissions with in situ methane flux data and machine learning approaches. Earth’s Future, 12(11), e2023EF004330.
    [CrossRef]   [Google Scholar]
  15. Cusworth, D. H., Duren, R. M., Thorpe, A. K., Pandey, S., Maasakkers, J. D., Aben, I., ... & Miller, C. E. (2021). Multisatellite imaging of a gas well blowout enables quantification of total methane emissions. Geophysical Research Letters, 48(2), e2020GL090864.
    [CrossRef]   [Google Scholar]
  16. Wang, Z., Feng, M., Johnson, M. F., Lipani, A., & Chan, F. (2025). The role of reservoir size in driving methane emissions in China. Water Research, 279, 123441.
    [CrossRef]   [Google Scholar]
  17. Tayarani-N, M.-H., & Paykani, A. (2025). An ensemble learning algorithm for optimization of spark ignition engine performance fuelled with methane/hydrogen blends. Applied Soft Computing, 168, 112468.
    [CrossRef]   [Google Scholar]
  18. Mansouri, T. S., Wang, H., Mariotti, D., & Maguire, P. (2022). Methane detection to 1 ppm using machine learning analysis of atmospheric pressure plasma optical emission spectra. Journal of Physics D: Applied Physics, 55(22), 225205.
    [CrossRef]   [Google Scholar]
  19. Luo, R., Wang, J., & Gates, I. (2024). Estimating air methane and total hydrocarbon concentrations in Alberta, Canada using machine learning. Atmospheric Pollution Research, 15(2), 101984.
    [CrossRef]   [Google Scholar]
  20. Wójcik-Gront, E., & Wnuk, A. (2025). Evaluating methane emission estimates from Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change compared to Sentinel-derived air-methane data. Sustainability, 17(3), 850.
    [CrossRef]   [Google Scholar]
  21. Li, K., Bai, K., Jiao, P., Chen, H., He, H., Shao, L., ... & Chang, N. B. (2024). Developing unbiased estimation of atmospheric methane via machine learning and multiobjective programming based on TROPOMI and GOSAT data. Remote Sensing of Environment, 304, 114039.
    [CrossRef]   [Google Scholar]
  22. Chang, H. T., Chern, Y. R., Asri, A. K., Liu, W. Y., Hsu, C. Y., Hsiao, T. C., ... & Wu, C. D. (2025). Innovating Taiwan's greenhouse gas estimation: A case study of atmospheric methane using GeoAI-Based ensemble mixed spatial prediction model. Journal of Environmental Management, 380, 125110.
    [CrossRef]   [Google Scholar]
  23. Wei, X., Huang, W., Liu, L., Wang, J., Cui, Z., & Xue, L. (2024). Low-rank coalbed methane production capacity prediction method based on time-series deep learning. Energy, 311, 133247.
    [CrossRef]   [Google Scholar]
  24. Wang, D., Li, Z., & Fu, Y. (2024). Production Forecast of Deep-Coalbed-Methane Wells Based on Long Short-Term Memory and Bayesian Optimization. SPE J, 29(7), 3651-3672.
    [CrossRef]   [Google Scholar]
  25. Ai, X., Hu, C., Yang, Y., Zhang, L., Liu, H., Zhang, J., ... & Xiao, W. (2024). Quantification of Central and Eastern China's atmospheric CH4 enhancement changes and its contributions based on machine learning approach. journal of environmental sciences, 138, 236-248.
    [CrossRef]   [Google Scholar]
  26. Gu, X., Yao, L., Xiao, X., Wu, L., & Yu, H. (2025). Optimizing methane flux prediction and key feature identification based on a novel hybrid machine learning model. Iscience, 28(12).
    [CrossRef]   [Google Scholar]
  27. Venkatesa, P. N. B., Kalpana, M., Balakrishnan, N., Balamurugan, V., Suresh, A., Rajavel, M., & Dhivya, R. (2025). Using machine learning models to forecast methane emissions from agriculture in India. Plant Science Today, 12(2).
    [CrossRef]   [Google Scholar]
  28. Lorente, A., Borsdorff, T., Butz, A., Hasekamp, O., aan de Brugh, J., Schneider, A., ... & Landgraf, J. (2021). Methane retrieved from TROPOMI: improvement of the data product and validation of the first 2 years of measurements. Atmospheric Measurement Techniques, 14(1), 665-684.
    [CrossRef]   [Google Scholar]
  29. Suri, N. M. R., Murty, M. N., & Athithan, G. (2019). Outlier detection: techniques and applications. Springer Nature.
    [CrossRef]   [Google Scholar]

Cite This Article
APA Style
Arya, S., Anju, & Onah, J. N. (2026). A Data-Driven Framework for Methane Emission Prediction Using Machine Learning Methods. ICCK Transactions on Machine Intelligence, 2(1), 53–64. https://doi.org/10.62762/TMI.2025.782852
Export Citation
RIS Format
Compatible with EndNote, Zotero, Mendeley, and other reference managers
RIS format data for reference managers
TY  - JOUR
AU  - Arya, Suraj
AU  - Anju
AU  - Onah, Jonas Nnaemeka
PY  - 2026
DA  - 2026/01/12
TI  - A Data-Driven Framework for Methane Emission Prediction Using Machine Learning Methods
JO  - ICCK Transactions on Machine Intelligence
T2  - ICCK Transactions on Machine Intelligence
JF  - ICCK Transactions on Machine Intelligence
VL  - 2
IS  - 1
SP  - 53
EP  - 64
DO  - 10.62762/TMI.2025.782852
UR  - https://www.icck.org/article/abs/TMI.2025.782852
KW  - machine learning
KW  - methane emission
KW  - random forest regressor
KW  - prediction
AB  - Greenhouse gas Methane (CH$_4$) has 86 times more impact on global warming than carbon dioxide (CO$_2$). The emission of methane gas into the atmosphere is increasing due to the reliance on fossil-based resources in post-industrial energy consumption, along with the rise in food demand and the generation of organic waste that accompanies a growing human population. CH$_4$ acts as a vital pollutant in the air. The problem addressed in this study was to accurately estimate CH$_4$ emissions from functional urban areas. This study aims to predict CH$_4$ emissions using Time Series (TS) and Machine Learning (ML) models such as Autoregressive Integrated Moving Average (ARIMA), Seasonal ARIMA (SARIMA), Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM), Random Forest Regressor (RFR), and CatBoost Regressor (CABR), etc. The SARIMA model has the best combination of values (1,0,0) (1,1,0). The methane emission data was collected from the World Bank’s Group from 2019 to 2022. Among all models, the SARIMA model predicted CH$_4$ emissions more accurately than the other models. The results obtained in the study indicate that SARIMA outperforms other techniques. The SARIMA model performed the most accurate results in terms of R-squared score (R$^2$) = 94%; Root Mean Squared Error (RMSE) = 2.8129; Mean Squared Error (MSE) = 7.9126; Mean Absolute Error (MAE) = 1.8391, etc. This type of prediction enables the government to reduce CH$_4$ emissions at the global level.
SN  - 3068-7403
PB  - Institute of Central Computation and Knowledge
LA  - English
ER  - 
BibTeX Format
Compatible with LaTeX, BibTeX, and other reference managers
BibTeX format data for LaTeX and reference managers
@article{Arya2026A,
  author = {Suraj Arya and Anju and Jonas Nnaemeka Onah},
  title = {A Data-Driven Framework for Methane Emission Prediction Using Machine Learning Methods},
  journal = {ICCK Transactions on Machine Intelligence},
  year = {2026},
  volume = {2},
  number = {1},
  pages = {53-64},
  doi = {10.62762/TMI.2025.782852},
  url = {https://www.icck.org/article/abs/TMI.2025.782852},
  abstract = {Greenhouse gas Methane (CH\$\_4\$) has 86 times more impact on global warming than carbon dioxide (CO\$\_2\$). The emission of methane gas into the atmosphere is increasing due to the reliance on fossil-based resources in post-industrial energy consumption, along with the rise in food demand and the generation of organic waste that accompanies a growing human population. CH\$\_4\$ acts as a vital pollutant in the air. The problem addressed in this study was to accurately estimate CH\$\_4\$ emissions from functional urban areas. This study aims to predict CH\$\_4\$ emissions using Time Series (TS) and Machine Learning (ML) models such as Autoregressive Integrated Moving Average (ARIMA), Seasonal ARIMA (SARIMA), Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM), Random Forest Regressor (RFR), and CatBoost Regressor (CABR), etc. The SARIMA model has the best combination of values (1,0,0) (1,1,0). The methane emission data was collected from the World Bank’s Group from 2019 to 2022. Among all models, the SARIMA model predicted CH\$\_4\$ emissions more accurately than the other models. The results obtained in the study indicate that SARIMA outperforms other techniques. The SARIMA model performed the most accurate results in terms of R-squared score (R\$^2\$) = 94\%; Root Mean Squared Error (RMSE) = 2.8129; Mean Squared Error (MSE) = 7.9126; Mean Absolute Error (MAE) = 1.8391, etc. This type of prediction enables the government to reduce CH\$\_4\$ emissions at the global level.},
  keywords = {machine learning, methane emission, random forest regressor, prediction},
  issn = {3068-7403},
  publisher = {Institute of Central Computation and Knowledge}
}

Article Metrics
Citations:

Crossref

0

Scopus

0

Web of Science

0
Article Access Statistics:
Views: 236
PDF Downloads: 91

Publisher's Note
ICCK stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and Permissions
Institute of Central Computation and Knowledge (ICCK) or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
ICCK Transactions on Machine Intelligence

ICCK Transactions on Machine Intelligence

ISSN: 3068-7403 (Online)

Email: [email protected]

Portico

Portico

All published articles are preserved here permanently:
https://www.portico.org/publishers/icck/