The news that Veoneo will be moving its green methanol-to-plastics project from Antwerp to China was greeted with disappointment, but not surprise. A recent interview with the CEO revealed the battle that Europe is facing to keep up with China. A lack of local biomethanol production, the absence of a mandate for bioplastics and slow permitting were the main reasons for quitting Europe. In contrast, China is already strong on biomethanol production.
Just over a hundred years ago Europe was the technology leader. The modern route to methanol was invented in Germany. Coal was transformed into carbon monoxide and hydrogen, which, with the help of a catalyst, was transformed at pressure into methanol. Europe moved from coal to oil as the principal raw material for fuel and chemicals, even when that meant relying on imports, and methanol receded in importance. China continued to exploit its coal reserves to produce methanol, particularly for fuel, to reduce its reliance on imported oil and gas.
Now the world must find new routes to chemicals and fuels from green feedstocks to transition to a net-zero economy. The Chinese government is providing 20% equity grants to biomethanol producers. Europe needs measures which will have the same effect: a mandate for biocontent in chemical and plastics would be a good start. Without meaningful action, established chemical companies will be reluctant to commit substantial funds to new biobased processes.
US and European companies are exploring ways to produce greener chemicals, in response to consumer demands. Producers are capturing and reusing CO2 emitted from their own facilities, to produce lower carbon footprint products. The easiest product to make from this captured CO2 is methanol. The technology is named carbon capture and utilisation (CCU).
Carbon Recycling International developed and demonstrated the CO2 to methanol process in Iceland, but it has been implemented in China. Celanese, SABIC, Methanex and others have since announced that they are working on similar projects in the US and elsewhere. Companies are using independent certification to demonstrate that reused CO2 is only counted once, and that the product carbon footprint is calculated correctly.
Low carbon methanol is a welcome start on the path to decarbonisation of the molecules used as building blocks for chemicals and plastics. CCU uses a relatively concentrated source of waste CO2, which would normally be emitted to the atmosphere. It also displaces virgin fossil raw materials which would otherwise be needed. Hydrogen is also required for the process. Hydrogen produced from electrolysis of water using renewable electricity provides methanol with the lowest carbon footprint.
Critics say that reusing fossil CO2 to make new molecules ‘locks in’ the use of fossil fuel facilities, which implies that existing equipment should be abandoned rather than adapted for net-zero. There is also an argument that the reused CO2 may be emitted later anyway, at the end of the product life. This may occur but the original displacement of virgin fossil material still remains as a benefit.
The concept of a ‘methanol economy ‘was first put forward in 2005. The flexibility afforded by the range of raw materials for methanol production is one of its attractions. Synthesis gas, the raw material, can be produced from biomethane or biomass. Biogenic wastes, both liquid and solid, are preferred over crops to avoid food v fuel controversies. However, there will not be enough biogenic wastes to underpin a full-scale methanol economy. Sustainably grown crops or carbon dioxide will also be needed. It makes sense therefore to develop all promising routes
So, the West is working on new technology, but incentives for widespread implementation are needed, or projects will be commercialised elsewhere. Requiring a bio, or recycled content in chemicals and plastics placed on the market in Europe would stimulate a whole host of new processes not just those that originate from methanol. The question in the title (Can the West keep up with China?) can only be answered positively if Europe addresses this lack of incentives without delay. As the ancient Chinese proverb says; ‘The best time to plant a tree was 20 years ago. The second best time is now.’
Published: 10 July 26
