The Case For Methanol As A Green H2 Carrier

THE CASE FOR METHANOL AS A GREEN HYDROGEN CARRIER
by Dave Edlund
Element 1 Corp.
Dave@e1na.com
December 16, 2020
As global society edges toward decarbonizing the energy sector, two leading pathways have emerged
for clean transportation: battery-electric vehicles (BEVs) and fuel-cell electric vehicles (FCEVs). The
argument, of course, is that if renewable electric power is used to charge batteries or drive water
electrolysis to make green hydrogen, then we have succeeded in removing carbon from the transportation
sector (cars, buses, trucks, trains, maritime vessels). However, the U.S. national grid is presently only 17%
based on renewable power generation, comprised of 10% hydroelectric and 7% nonhydroelectric (wind,
PV, etc.)1 and the carbon footprint of the U.S. grid is 0.4759 kgCO2e/kWh (2016 data).2
For various environmental and legal reasons, significant expansion of hydroelectric capacity in the
U.S. is doubtful at best. Therefore, “greening” the grid would require surmounting enormous challenges
related to vastly expanding wind and PV generation, plus adding large amounts of storage for backup (see
graph). Due to the intermittent nature of weather conditions, wind generation has a capacity factor of
about 35%, while PV is about 26% (U.S. data).3 This intermittency in power generation gives rise to two
engineering and fiscal challenges. First, renewable generation capacity would have to be overbuilt by at
least 3x to 4x. Second, large-scale battery storage projects would have to be completed in parallel with
the shift toward 100% renewable generation. The cost of achieving both of these goals is conservatively
estimated to be at least US$5.7 trillion,4,5 or more than 20% of the U.S. national debt. Not included in this
cost estimate is the value of land required to site the vast wind and PV farms, which has been estimated
to be equivalent to ⅓ of the land area of the U.S.2 Given that a project of this magnitude has never been
attempted in a short period of only 2 to 3 decades, major cost and schedule overruns are almost certain.
1
Electricity generation, capacity, and sales in the United States - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)
2
Carbon Footprint; Country Specific Electricity Gris Greenhouse Gas Emission Factors; June 2019;
www.carbonfootprint.com
3
The 100 Percent Renewable Energy Myth - IER (instituteforenergyresearch.org)
4
Cost of Transitioning to 100-Percent Renewable Energy - IER (instituteforenergyresearch.org)
5
What it Costs to Go 100 Percent Renewable - AAF (americanactionforum.org)
Page 1 of 2
Element 1 Corp. – The case for methanol as a green hydrogen energy carrier -- Dec2020
With the average industrial electricity rate at US$0.0701/kWh (September 2020)6, the cost of energy
to make hydrogen by water electrolysis is US$3.5/kg H2.7 Historical data shows that with expansion of
renewable generation capacity, electric rates rise substantially.3 So it is reasonable to expect that under
the 100%-renewable-grid scenario, industrial rates will be 1.5x to 2x current rates, perhaps even higher,
pushing the cost of electricity for electrolysis into the range of US$6/kg H2 to US$8/kg H2.
In light of the above engineering challenges and crippling expense, alternative pathways to
decarbonizing transportation are worth considering. One obvious and often overlooked alternative is
renewable methanol. With more than a dozen operational plants globally, and many more under
construction, renewable methanol is here now. Renewable methanol is made from biogas (a mixture of
methane and CO2), as well as from captured carbon dioxide (even direct air capture), offering a route for
reducing CO2 in the atmosphere.8
In comparison to electrolysis, using a methanol-to-hydrogen generator operating at 75% to 80%
energy efficiency,9 offers the following compelling advantages:
▪ The cost of making hydrogen is less, about US$2.4/kg H2 (at US$315/MT methanol).
▪ The well-to-wheel emissions of combining renewable methanol with FCEVs can result is
negative emissions of from -50 gCO2e/MJ to -250 gCO2e/MJ.10
Even on relevant issues such as capex (electrolyzer versus methanol-to-hydrogen generator) and
transportation (compressed hydrogen versus liquid methanol), renewable methanol is favored.
In summary, my point is not that water electrolysis and renewable electrical power generation should
be abandoned. On the contrary, these are important aspects of producing renewable methanol from CO2
captured from ambient air or industrial waste streams. Rather, my argument is that renewable methanol
offers a technically feasible and economically viable (and favored) pathway to decarbonize transportation,
one that deserves serious consideration.
6
Electric Power Monthly - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)
7
Assume 50 kWh/kg hydrogen
8
MethanolReport.pdf (netdna-ssl.com)
9
Demonstrated efficiency for hydrogen generator technology offered by Element 1 Corp. www.e1na.com
10
PowerPoint Presentation (stanford.edu)
Page 2 of 2
Element 1 Corp. – The case for methanol as a green hydrogen energy carrier -- Dec2020

The Case For Methanol As A Green H2 Carrier

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Case For Methanol As A Green H2 Carrier

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Case For Methanol As A Green H2 Carrier

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

THE CASE FOR METHANOL AS A GREEN HYDROGEN CARRIER

You might also like