The thing with methane is that it has a lifespan of something like 10 years in the atmosphere before it breaks down to CO2 + water, while CO2 persists for centuries. I suspect that burning would release more net CO2 than emitting the methane and having it eventually break down to CO2.

[1] https://science.nasa.gov/earth/explore/earth-indicators/meth...

> A molecule of methane traps more heat than a molecule of CO2, but methane has a relatively short lifespan of 7 to 12 years in the atmosphere. CO2 can persist for hundreds of years or more.

I you emit the methane, you have one molecule of CH₄ for 10 years, then one molecule of CO₂ for x years.

If you burn the methane, you have one molecule of CO₂ for x years.

Burning seems strictly better.

(If you use the heat of the burning to offset other emissions, it gets even better)