BUT, what if instead of trying to simply reduce the greenhouse gas emissions, we could use them to power the very source of those emissions?

Companies around the world are starting to take on this challenge by using CO₂, a greenhouse gas, as a feedstock for producing renewable methanol fuel.

For instance, Carbon Recycling International (CRI) of Iceland captures carbon dioxide from industrial emissions and converts it into Renewable Methanol.  Its process allows for an economical conversion of renewable energy to liquid fuel by using  any renewable resources such as geothermal, hydro, wind, or solar to produce hydrogen through the electrolysis of water, then combining that hydrogen with captured CO₂ to make GHG emission-free methanol.

In Canada, another company, Blue Fuel Energy, proposes a similar endeavor by taking renewable electricity from hydropower or wind turbines and combining it with CO₂ emissions to create “liquid electricity” in the form of methanol as a renewable fuel.

Also, recently, Qatar Fuel Additives Company (Qafac) signed a pact with Mistubishi Heavy Industries Company for a new project that will capture carbon dioxide from the combustion process resulting from the manufacture of methanol to be used as feedstock for increasing the production of methanol.  This type of carbon recycling will ensure greater efficiency in the plant and will also prevent GHG emissions.

Carbon recycling can help with the two biggest environmental and energy challenges facing the globe: stabilize concentration of CO₂ in the atmosphere and produce new supplies of renewable fuels that help reduce the dependence on petroleum.  Studies have shown that carbon recycling can fill in for nearly 30 percent of the world’s liquid fuel supply and eliminate over 10 percent of the world’s CO₂ emissions.

The fuels produced from carbon recycling technology will potentially create new CO₂ emissions, but the net process is carbon neutral or carbon negative – it does not contribute additional CO₂ to the atmosphere and in many cases decreases the total amount of emissions.  Scientists often refer to carbon recycling as a “carbon negative” technology because it has the ability to go beyond achieving carbon neutrality by actively pulling more CO₂ out of the air than is being put in.

Carbon recycling is a legitimate way to help counteract the rise in GHG emissions.  Not only does it help remove harmful emissions, but now those emissions, as described above, can be turned into renewable fuel sources with a significant economic value.

The article highlights the role of government subsidies in undermining private and public investment in the energy sector by impeding innovation.  The article also examines the role that methanol would play, discussing its potential as an alternative fuel,  which has the ability to reduce our dependence on foreign oil and improve our environment without the backing of any type of subsidies.

The article is available here.

We always aim to bring you the most up to date resources and information available regarding methanol safety, and this frequent newsletter is the best way to keep up to date!

You can view a copy of the newsletter on our site here.

You can also sign up for updates on our site - just fill out the little safety update box on the left hand side.

For a complete list of participants, please click here.

Also, for a detailed agenda and other information on discussion materials for the conference, please click here.

“Low blends of methanol and gasoline are suitable for all gasoline powered cars,” CRI said in a press release announcing the waste study. “Higher blends are suitable for flex fuel vehicles, which are already in circulation in Iceland.”

The article also noted that “Reykjavik based Carbon Recycling International and the city’s waste agency, SORPA, have launched a feasibility study and hope to operate a plant by 2015 making renewable methanol from household waste that normally goes to landfill.”

You can read more over at SmartPlanet here.

MI emphasized that this amendment will allow fuel station owners to be able to make a competitive economic case for installing new pumps and fueling infrastructure, while also providing automakers the opportunity to find market-driven solutions for meeting the requirements of the amendment.  A copy of the letter can be seen here.

More information about the Open Fuel Standard Coalition is available at www.openfuelstandard.org.

Another version of this bill, which enjoys bipartisan support, S-1603, was introduced in the Senate last September by Senators Maria Cantwell (D-WA) and Richard G. Lugar (R-IN).  More recently, it was proposed as an amendment to the pending Senate version of the transportation bill.  The Senate version of the bill is more specific and instructive in providing a road map for the implementation of an open fuel standard. Among other differences, including the addition of a credit trading program for manufacturers, this version requires that between 2015 and 2017, at least 50% percent of a manufacturer’s vehicles must be “fuel-choice enabled,” and 80% by 2018.

Passing the Open Fuel Standard Act will reduce U.S. reliance on imported petroleum and help keep the country less vulnerable to oil supply shocks, said Gen. Wesley Clark, co-chairman of Growth Energy.  “I think it’s important to bring this forward as law as soon as possible because in the 21st century, energy policy is national security policy” he said at the Open Fuel Standard Coalition’s panel discussion on February 29th.

Not everyone agrees the Open Fuel Standard Act should become law.  On February 28, a group of 23 organizations, which included environmentalists and automakers, sent a letter to Sen. Harry Reid, majority leader of the Senate, to protest the amendment’s inclusion in the transportation bill and to assert that it should not become law.  The letter’s authors described the proposed amendment as “a misguided consumer mandate that will lead to unintended consequences on vehicle manufacturers, the supply chain and emerging technologies.”

Robert McFarlane, co-founder of the United States Energy Security Council, on the other hand, asserts that given the abundant supply of natural gas, which can be used in various forms of fuels for vehicles, the time is now for opening up the American fuel market to competition.  In an op-ed written for the Wall Street Journal he stated that “[b]ills are now pending in both houses of the Congress that seek to do exactly that by requiring car makers to enable fuel competition in their own product lines—adding flex-fuel, all electric, hybrid electric, or any other way automakers choose to implement the law.  If Congress acts, we can finally establish energy independence through competition.”

Another op-ed in The New York Times written by two other members of the United States Energy Security Council, Tom Ridge and Mary E. Peters, also support the enactment of an open fuel standard to allow natural gas to compete with oil in the liquid fuels market through its conversion to methanol and other alcohol fuels.  Ridge is the former governor of Pennsylvania and served as the Secretary of Homeland Security from 2003 to 2005.  Peters served as the Secretary of Transportation from 2006 to 2009.

To reduce our dependence on the oil-dominated transportation fuel market and to be able to take advantage of the abundant supply of natural gas, consumers need both, alternatives at the pump and cars that can utilize such alternatives. This can be accomplished under the Open Fuel Standard Act.  More specifically, it can be done by providing cars that can run on methanol or GEM fuels.  A recent report from the M.I.T. Energy Initiative, “The Future of Natural Gas,” referred to methanol as “the liquid fuel that is most efficiently and inexpensively produced from natural gas.” Methanol is a high-octane, clean and safe fuel.

According to automakers, producing cars capable of operating on alcohol fuels would only cost about $100 more.  Additionally, the current refueling infrastructure will only require minimal modifications to be able to distribute such fuels.  Moreover, the current spot price for methanol made from natural gas is $1.13 per gallon, without any subsidy, and, even after accounting for methanol’s lower energy content, on a gasoline equivalent basis, it would cost consumers just $3.25 per gallon, compared with regular gasoline now at $3.70.  The Open Fuel Standard Act, which requires vehicles to be able to use GEM fuels and other alternative technologies, would create affordable energy choices and create real competition at the pump, saving consumers money while reducing our dependence on oil and maximizing our advantage of the large supply of natural gas in the United States.

Find more information from a bipartisan coalition supporting the initiative at www.openfuelstandard.org.

The bill amends Renewable Fuel Program of the Clean Air Act to allow domestic alternative fuel to be used to satisfy a portion of the renewable fuel requirement.  The bill creates a new independent fuel category called Domestic Alternative Fuel.  Within this new category, the bill allows ethanol, produced from other sources such as domestic coal and natural gas, to qualify under the program.

The purpose of this bill is to expand the eligibility requirements within the Renewable Fuels Standards (RFS) to allow ethanol from alternative feedstocks to compete with corn-based ethanol.  Rep. Olson’s goal is to reduce the amount of corn used to produce ethanol because, according to him, the focus of the RFS on corn has translated into higher feed costs for livestock producers and higher food costs for working families.

This bill takes a step towards a comprehensive energy policy that would ensure that the United States has a broader supply of energy to keep the domestic economy strong and help to meet our fueling needs.  Although, attempting to increase eligibility requirements within the RFS, this bill provides only one additional pathway to energy production.

Currently, the RFS is limited in the types of energy allowed with specific mandates for particular sources (e.g. corn ethanol, cellulosic ethanol, and biodiesel fuels).  Congressman Olson’s bill seeks to change that, to help make the legislation more fuel neutral and to help us more readily achieve our national energy goals.  The goal of our domestic energy policy has been to reduce dependence on foreign oil and to reduce the environmental impact of our transportation fleet.  This bill should open up our national fuel standard to an even greater set of proven fuels, including methanol, to help attain these goals.

There is great potential to open up our national fuel standard to a broader range beyond just one additional solution.  This bill could do even more good for the nation by allowing the use of both alcohols, ethanol and methanol, to satisfy the RFS requirement –  and use these domestic fuels to reduce the quantity of petroleum used in transportation and reduce overall emissions.

Methanol can be produced from a wide array of feedstocks including biomass, natural gas, municipal solid waste, coal, timber/agricultural waste and even from CO2 pollution itself; methanol can be made from anything that is, or ever was, a plant.  Furthermore, is a low-cost fuel; its current spot price in the Gulf coast is only $1.13 per gallon.  Even accounting for methanol’s lower energy content, on a gasoline equivalent basis, M85 would cost consumers just $3.25 per gallon, compared with regular gasoline now at $3.50 and E85 at $4.08.  This would provide an affordable energy choice and create real competition at the pump, saving consumers money while still reducing emissions and utilizing even more domestic energy resources.

The Methanol Institute sent a letter to Congressman Olson’s staff requesting the opportunity to sit down and discuss this legislation and broader initiatives that could be taken to help meet our energy goals.  While we support efforts to create a more inclusive fuel standard for the United States, we think that there is great potential to expand even further – creating true fuel diversity and competition, where consumers win and domestic energy thrives.

The Methanol Policy Forum 2012 will take place on Tuesday, March 27th at the Hyatt Regency in Washington, D.C.  Space is limited, so we encourage you to register early and find out more information at: http://methanolpolicyforum2012.eventbrite.com/

This event will feature 6 sessions, discussing everything from alternative energy markets to policy initiatives that can help move our nation’s energy agenda forward and meet our goals of reduced reliance on foreign oil and reduced impact on our environment.  U.S. DOE Assistant Secretary David Sandalow will deliver the keynote address about the future of methanol in U.S. policy, and a host of notable speakers and technology experts will share experiences from around the globe.

There will be a special lunch session with the U.S. Energy Security Council – a round table discussion featuring such policy experts as former Louisiana Senator Bennett Johnston, former CIA Director James Woolsey, and President Reagan’s National Security Adviser Robert McFarlane – which will focus on the importance of developing competitive solutions to energy in order to preserve national security.

More information and specific agendas will be released in the near future.  For any questions about the event, please contact Matt Roberts with the Methanol Institute at mroberts@methanol.org.

We hope to see you in Washington D.C. for this one of a kind event!