Techno-economic analysis of methanol production units coupling solid oxide cells and thermochemical biomass conversion via the TwoStage gasifier

Energy dense liquid biofuels are needed where direct electrification is infeasible, such as the heavy-transports sector. A novel flexible methanol production unit with highly integrated solid oxide cells, characterized by five operating modes, is compared with two non-flexible units from a techno-economic perspective. The aim is to investigate whether a more complex flexible methanol production facility that is able to both store and produce electricity could be cost-competitive with single-mode solutions, by ensuring a higher capacity factor. The flexible solution has the highest capital cost (620 M$(2019)), followed by the so-called electricity storage single mode unit (490 M$(2019)) and the conventional unit (390 M$(2019)). Decomposition of the methanol production costs shows that electricity and biomass are the major cost factors. The minimum fuel selling price is generally lowest for the conventional unit (92-117 $/MWh(th)), followed by the electricity storage single-mode unit (87-127 $/MWh(th)), and the flexible system (93-125 $/MWh(th)). Flexibility is generally not a key-strength for the flexible unit, as the increased investment cost associated to a major complexity represents a disadvantage. However, flexibility becomes relevant when imposing constraints on the use of electricity produced from fossil fuels to produce methanol, since it ensures higher capacity factor and methanol yield.

Automated summary

Comparison between a novel flexible methanol production unit and two non-flexible units shows that although the flexible solution has a higher capital cost, it ensures a higher capacity factor, potentially giving it a competitive advantage. The study reveals that flexibility becomes relevant when constraints are imposed on the use of electricity from fossil fuels to produce methanol, leading to higher capacity factor and methanol yield.