Methanol’s Moment: How New Pathways and Energy Benchmarks Are Redefining a Critical Chemical (Part 1)

Thoughts from Jeff Brimhall - CFO & Co-Founder, HYCO1 Inc.

Methanol’s Moment: How New Pathways and Energy Benchmarks Are Redefining a Critical Chemical (Part 1)

Methanol is quietly powering a revolution in energy and industry. While it might not have the household name of hydrogen or ammonia, this versatile chemical is an unsung workhorse—blending into everything from clean fuels to building-block plastics. With global production topping 100 million metric tons annually, methanol’s journey from feedstock to finished product is drawing new attention from investors and sustainability leaders alike.

Rethinking How We Make Methanol

The traditional path to methanol begins—and largely ends—with natural gas. Today, two main processes dominate the industrial landscape:

Steam Methane Reforming (SMR):
Historically, the backbone of methanol manufacturing has been based on SMR Technology to reform methane and steam into carbon monoxide and hydrogen (together known as syngas), which are then converted to methanol in a second process unit using a methanol synthesis catalyst. This method is how most methanol is made today. SMRs are most often used for plants designed to produce 2,500 tons per day or less.

SMR Process Flow

Autothermal Reforming (ATR):
This more capital-intensive technology combines partial oxidation of methane with steam reforming in a single reactor enabling additional efficiency and heat integration. It requires a high-purity oxygen supply (produced by air separation units) which adds cost and complexity. ATR’s are typical for methanol plants designed to produce 3,000 tons per day or more.

ATR Process Flow

Coal-to-Methanol (CTM) or Dirty Methanol

Regions like China that are flush with coal reserves but short on natural gas rely on coal gasification—a process that comes with a significant CO₂ penalty unless paired with carbon capture. Methanol derived from coal has a carbon intensity that is 3X to 4X greater than methanol made from methane.

The Illusion of Green Methanol

Green methanol production technologies center on using renewable or recycled carbon sources to dramatically reduce lifecycle carbon emissions. Some of the more promising pathways include biomass gasification to syngas, CO₂ hydrogenation using green hydrogen (produced via electrolysis using renewable power), and renewable electricity-driven electrochemical conversion of CO₂ directly to methanol.

Biomass-to-methanol offers the promise of abundant feedstocks and near-term scalability but this production pathway is fraught with difficult problems of producing chemical grade syngas suitable for methanol synthesis. Many have tried and failed in this sector.

CO₂-to-methanol technologies offer long-term potential for carbon-negative fuels but are extremely energy intensive. The cost of producing base load (or near base load) renewable power is a key driver of the future of green methanol. Although it’s easy to envision a world of sunshine and wind powered renewable energy projects that result in plentiful and inexpensive green power, that vision is proving to be a mirage—turns out the world’s demand for green energy is far outstripping it’s supply. Nowadays and for the foreseeable future the cleaner and more reliable the power, the higher its price. This makes electrolytic technologies and electrochemical conversion of CO₂ directly to methanol among the most expensive ways to produce methanol. High priced green just isn’t the answer. Not for methanol or any other commodity chemical.

Chasing the Gold Standard: Best-in-Class Energy Performance

For commodity chemicals, efficiency is everything. At the cutting edge, world-scale SMR and ATR methanol plants now convert natural gas to methanol using 31–34 MMBTU/ton (HHV). This is today’s best-of-class methanol production. These facilities, operated by industry leaders such as Methanex, SABIC, OCI, Mitsubishi, and YCI, leverage technology from process giants including Johnson Matthey, Topsoe, Mitsubishi, and Air Liquide.

The Aging Curve: When Efficiency Starts to Slip

As plants age, so does their energy efficiency. Catalyst deactivation, fouled heat exchangers, warped reactor tubes, and mounting pressure drops collectively and steadily chip away at production efficiency. For many facilities past their prime, natural gas consumption creeps up to 35–38 MMBTU per ton—with poorly maintained outliers using even more. The fix? It’s all about regular catalyst replacement, strategic upgrades, and relentless process tuning.

The Road Ahead

Methane-based production of methanol remains the world’s most efficient and scalable methanol pathway, especially for facilities deploying the latest SMR and ATR designs. Still, the energy and carbon landscapes are shifting. Companies that are able to fine-tune their efficiency and utilize more CO₂ will maintain a competitive edge and stay ahead of tightening emissions targets, while those proving and commercializing CO₂ Reforming may soon write the next chapter in this critical industry.

Stay tuned for Part 2, where we explore economics, emissions, and the emergence of new CO₂ Reforming technologies.

About the author:
Jeff Brimhall - CFO & Co-Founder, HYCO1 Inc.

Jeff Brimhall is Chief Financial Officer of HYCO1 and a contributor on energy, industrial innovation, and sustainability topics.

Jeff is a 5-Star deal guy with 35 years of funding experience and hands-on company building. His passion is funding sustainable technology companies, projects, and assets that make the world a better place to live and work. Over many years, Jeff has developed relationships with hundreds of funding sources, manufacturers, technology companies, and project developers. Through these relationships, he and his colleagues at Supraxis have developed practical expertise in providing strategic, programmatic funding solutions to help businesses scale up.

Jeff has a strategy and management consulting background from working at Bain & Co in Boston. He also has decades of energy project development and finance experience from his work at Energy Strategies and Sentry Financial. Just prior to founding Supraxis, where Jeff serves as a Managing Partner, he served as the President of the Sustainable Investments Division at Sentry Financial. Jeff earned a Bachelor’s Degree in Business Management and a Masters of Business Administration Degree both from Brigham Young University.

What is the most common method for methanol production?

The most widely used method is Steam Methane Reforming (SMR), where natural gas is converted into syngas and then synthesized into methanol. SMRs are operating around the world at scales from under 100,000 tonnes per year to over 2 million tonnes per year. Typically, the larger the plant size the more cost-effective and energy-efficient it is.

How does Autothermal Reforming (ATR) differ from SMR in methanol production?

ATR combines partial oxidation (POX) and steam reforming in one reactor, offering better heat integration for larger-scale plants (typically 3,000+ tons/day). However, ATR requires a pure oxygen supply and other specialty equipment, making it more complex and capital-intensive than SMR.

Is green methanol truly sustainable?

Green methanol made from CO₂ and renewable hydrogen or biomass can significantly reduce carbon intensity, but current technologies are energy-intensive and/or process intensive which makes them far more expensive (typically at least 2X) than blue methanol. In the case of methanol made from electrolysis, methanol production cost depends on cheap renewable electricity and improved conversion efficiency both of which have been hard to achieve. There is very little cheap renewable electricity around the world because the demand for it is so high. When it comes to methanol made from biomass the primary challenge is that biomass gasification technologies have not been able to produce syngas at a purity required by the methanol synthesis unit. In addition, handling and processing of biomass feedstocks – even when free – has proven to be very CapEx and OpEx intensive.

What is the carbon intensity of coal-based methanol?

Coal-to-methanol (CTM) can have up to 3–4 times the carbon intensity of natural gas-based methanol, making it one of the dirtiest forms of methanol production unless paired with robust carbon capture and storage (CCS) solutions.

How efficient are modern methanol plants?

Best-in-class methanol facilities using SMR or ATR can achieve energy efficiency levels as low as 31–34 MMBTU per ton (higher heating value basis). Older plants may exceed 38 MMBTU/ton due to aging equipment and inefficiencies.