NextFuel demonstrates how electrically heated chemical catalysis can be utilized for best in class production and consumption figures
Impact
The project will enable the production of methanol from a feedstock of biogas or other combinations of methane and CO2 using our eREACT™ approach, to achieve a cost closer to the fossil alternative and to study how this approach can be successfully scaled.
The project’s impact is significant in supporting the EU’s ambitious targets to cut emissions in the maritime sector according to the FuelEU maritime initiative, where the law, hailed as the most ambitious maritime fuel legislation in the world, requires ship emissions to be reduced by 2% by 2025 and 80% by 2050.
The challenge
Currently, more than 99% of the 98 million t/yr. global methanol production is derived from fossil feedstock, gas, and coal, through gasification (coal), steam methane reforming (SMR), and methanol synthesis. This normally takes place on a very large scale at petrochemical plants, burning some 40% of the gas input to create the required temperature for the SMR process. Further, during methanol synthesis, several waste streams exist that also cost approximately 5-7% of the overall carbon and energy efficiency.
These waste streams are typically disposed of as fuel, creating additional CO2 emissions per output unit. Consequently, the methanol industry has an annual CO2 emission of approximately 0.3 GT/year, which roughly corresponds to 10% of the total global chemical sector.
At present, there is very limited production of renewable methanol. The low volume of renewable methanol in the world market is currently produced either by adding biomethane to a conventional, natural-gas-based methanol plant – having the same efficiency issues as above – or via gasification of biomass.
We strongly believe that, if a medium/small scale bio-methanol production facility is available at the estimated cost, a standard bio plant can produce more energy at a greater return than a conventional biogas plant.
We also expect specific segments of consumers to willingly pay more for this energy, based on investment savings on new equipment. Below we compare a base case of a biogas plans to three business cases at different scales of biomethanol production (using eSMR). We have used an interest rate for CAPEX at 6% and a 20 year plant life time.
Business case of biogas base case and several types of eSMR cases.
A major challenge for new fuels is the need to have the production, the infrastructure, and the users ready at the same time. In this case we are fortunate to cooperate with one of the largest shipowners in Europe (Wilhelmsen) that is already now, together with NCL, building two major vessels that will operate on methanol.
Illustration of new Wilhelmsen/TOPEKA/NCL methanol vessels
We look forward to repeating the very promising results we have achieved in the laboratory and at industrial scale. We want to demonstrate that methanol from biogas is one of the most cost-effective routes to renewable methanol production. The eREACT™-Methanol is key in this aspect as its non-combusting and simple configuration is an optimal fit for high yield plants at decentral biogas sites and world-scale productions alike.
Peter Mølgaard Mortensen -
Principal Scientist at Haldor Topsoe
Methanol can work as a direct replacement for fossil fuels
Renewable fuels such as advanced biofuels work as drop-in fuels, with minor modifications to existing infrastructure such as tanks and combustion engines. As a ship fuel, methanol requires very limited changes to vessels. Modern engines from manufacturers like Wärtsilä, MAN and others are often dual-fuel, meaning they can run on either MGO (diesel) or methanol. Likewise you can use the ship tank systems built for MGO with very minor modification.
Also, there is a large-scale infrastructure for methanol already in place, as it is widely used in chemical industries. More than 11 million tonnes of methanol is produced today in Europe, and methanol can easily replace MGO on vessels and also replace this methanol (that today is produced from natural gas).
The project has a perspective from the start to do much more than the first plant. Gasnor and its owners Molgas and InfraVia have a European presence facilitating growth in both Southern and Northern Europe.
Emission reduction relevance beyond its role as a ship fuel
A part of the potential impact of methanol-related innovations is that it is not only well adapted to be a ship fuel but is also highly relevant in the chemical industry, as methanol is used for a variety of industrial processes. Just the process of making methanol production green has a very large potential impact.
Total production in Europe of methanol is around 11.8 million metric tonnes. One tonne of methanol produced results in, when using traditional methods with production from biogas, 1.5-1.8 tonnes of CO2 emissions, meaning that methanol is a substantial source of CO2 emissions, with 17.7 million tonnes.
The potential of our type of technology goes, however, beyond methanol as syngas is used also to produce other energy carriers such as ammonia and hydrogen.
Potential for energy storage and adding flexibility to the energy system
Our type of biomethanol technology combines production from feedstocks, with production from CO2 and hydrogen. Especially when it is scaled with CO2 and hydrogen, it has the potential to add flexibility to the energy system. Present electrolysis allows you to regulate hydrogen production depending on variables such as electricity supply and cost. In our case, we also have a very low cost manner to store the hydrogen, as you will produce methanol with CO2 and hydrogen (in the same biomethanol plant) and through this get an energy carrier that can be stored at atmospheric pressure without cooling needed. This flexibility will be beneficial to the larger energy system, and make it easier to handle peaks in priced and network loads
Our project will be the first type of biomethanol plant of this type, and will both be able to produce biomethanol at much lower costs than previous technologies, and easily facilitate the combination of feedstock with adding CO2 and hydrogen. We believe this has several pathways to reach a substantial scale on a European level.
Proven value for a significant share of 10 000 biogas sites in Europe
First, we can introduce our technology on typical sites for biogas plants, and there are more than 18 000 biogas plants in Europe. Our solution targets use cases of 10 million Nm3/year and up, which is in line with an average biogas plant in Europe having an annual production of 12-16 million Nm3. So, our solution will be relevant for a significant share of sites that also allow biogas production. If the biogas plant also has a liquefaction process plant, our solution has a CAPEX and OPEX similar to that of the biogas plant. At the same time, it has several advantages compared to biogas such as lower logistics costs in many applications due to its liquid form.
Methanol has an energy density of approximately 20 megajoules per liter (MJ/L), while biogas typically has an energy density of around 6 to 7 MJ/m3 (cubic meter). This means that methanol can provide more energy per unit volume than biogas. It thus has a similar energy density to liquefied biogas (LBG) at 23-28 MJ/L at standard temperature and pressure, which is also roughly the same as compressed natural gas (CNG) and liquefied petroleum gas (LPG). However, LBG is much more complicated to store and handle than methanol. Methanol can be treated as diesel. For LBG you need specialised cryogenic storage tanks that are typically double-walled and insulated to maintain the low temperature of the liquid, and you use a vaporizer to convert LBG back to its gaseous state (where you heat the liquid).
Value for scaling with hydrogen and CO2 (key is a hybrid solution).
Our process plant is a hybrid solution. It can be operated as a standard biomethanol plant, utilising almost only feedstocks (with moderate added hydrogen). But it can also scale using hydrogen and CO2. We design the plant to allow initial use of hydrogen and CO2, and there is potential to further extend the plant (and add new plants). A major challenge for biogas is that the volume produced is not large enough to replace MGO. The energy in waste that can be economically utilised is not at the same level as oil and natural gas. At the same time, there are potentially almost no limits to the possible supply of CO2 and hydrogen if you have capture technologies (like onboard carbon capture for ships, as Wilhelmsen/TOPEKA participating in this project is working towards) and renewable energy for electrolysis to produce hydrogen. Our technology allows an “easy start”, where you can get the production up and running through available feedstocks (that are available in communities across Europe), and then you can add CO2 and hydrogen when this is beneficial and available. It combines ease of start (which is a challenge for pure synthetic plants) with the possibility to scale through the hybrid solution.
Value for scaling as a ship fuel
The experts disagree on what will become the “winning” ship fuel. The reason why we invest in methanol is that we believe it has strong advantages for some ship types over competing solutions like e-diesel, compressed hydrogen, liquid hydrogen and ammonia (especially in the short to medium term, and perhaps in the long term). Ammonia, compressed hydrogen and liquid hydrogen are all costly to store, as they need to be compressed and/or cooled. Also, there are high risks involved. Ammonia is poisonous, and there are major challenges with both passenger traffic and also with crew acceptance. Liquid hydrogen storage today cannot be done except in small tanks, and is therefore very expensive. Compressed hydrogen requires pressurized tanks with (like liquid hydrogen) explosion risk. E-diesel is less energy efficient than methanol to produce synthetically, and also the process onboard for carbon capture is much less energy efficient. Both as a winning fuel for shipping, and to replace current methanol production from fossil sources (that is more than 11 million tonnes in Europe), there is a large potential for biomethanol.
The consortium is ideally placed to take advantage of this as it consists of a leading technology provider (including this biomethanol plant), a provider of ship fuel (as well as a major biogas producer) and one of the world’s largest ship operators in order to ensure the successful implementation of the project’s objectives. The consortium has the knowledge, capital, and infrastructure to scale when we prove this to be commercially viable beyond the first projects motivated by companies with an additional will to pay for zero emission solutions (as it could be if you get a carbon tax of close to 200 EUR). Wilhelmsen operates cargo ships, container ships, and other types of vessels. Many of its deep-sea ships have fuel use much larger than the 12,500 tonnes of fuel for one feeder container that we plan to use in this project. It is thus possible to scale this substantially, only supplying the planned transition to sustainable fuels at Wilhelmsen. Combined with its position as a leading innovator in sustainable fuels, this is a very strong position for maximising the growth of methanol as a ship fuel and through that maximising impact. Wilhelmsen, through its various roles (including as a ship agent), is present in 2 200 ports, and its leadership will have a global impact.
