Methanol Institute
MI
MI is the global trade association, representing the world’s leading methanol producers and distributors, transporters, shipowners, and technology companies.
ID: 334674912578-83
Lobbying Activity
Meeting with Kamil Talbi (Cabinet of Commissioner Dan Jørgensen)
10 Mar 2025 · Methanol
Meeting with Miguel Jose Garcia Jones (Cabinet of Commissioner Wopke Hoekstra)
22 Jan 2025 · Discussion on the role of methanol on the EUs transition
Response to COMMISSION DELEGATED REGULATION on extending the scope of traceability of the Union database
7 Nov 2024
The Methanol Institute (MI) is the global trade association for the entire supply chain of the methanol industry, representing the worlds leading methanol producers, consumers, distributors, and technology companies. MI represents its members from offices in Singapore, Washington D.C., Brussels, Beijing, and Delhi. MI welcomes the EUs efforts to ensure increased transparency in fuel production and prevent double counting. Given the importance of UDB and its contribution to the EUs climate objectives, it would be prudent to resolve the existing flaws with UDB before taking action to expand its scope. UDB, as it stands, has three issues that need to be addressed: 1) it lacks certainty and consistency, 2) it places undue burdens on businesses, and 3) it has a negative impact on EU trade relations. MI believes that the full rollout of UDB should be delayed until these matters are resolved and that extending its scope at this time would be imprudent. Ensuring that only sustainable volumes of renewable fuels are counted for the achievement of the EU decarbonization targets is to be supported. At the same time, there is a lack of biofuels available in the EU, which makes further limitations detrimental to growth in this area. In the report by Mario Draghi, The Future of EU Competitiveness, it was made clear that the EU needs to reconsider its approach to regulation when drafting new instruments to ensure regulation is supportive of innovative and sustainable growth. UDB is a clear example of what Mario Draghi had in mind when he made these points. Extending the scope of the database at a time when the system itself is not fit for purpose is not a prudent next step.
Read full responseResponse to Greenhouse gas emissions savings methodology for low-carbon fuels
25 Oct 2024
The Methanol Institute (MI) is the global trade association for the methanol industry, covering the full extent of the supply chain, representing the worlds leading methanol producers, consumers, distributors, and technology companies. MI represents its members from offices in Singapore, Washington D.C., Brussels, Beijing, and Delhi. The Methanol Institute welcomes the European Commission's objective to create a harmonized methodology for emissions accounting for low-carbon fuels produced domestically and imported into the EU. The draft Delegated Act and the proposed annex on methodology have a number of shortcomings that need to be addressed. We have set out the key points of concern in the attached submission.
Read full responseMeeting with Aleksandra Baranska (Cabinet of Vice-President Maroš Šefčovič), Kamil Talbi (Cabinet of Vice-President Maroš Šefčovič)
19 Jun 2024 · Hydrogen
30 Aug 2023
The Methanol Institute expresses its sincere support for the European Commission's efforts in monitoring GHG emissions in maritime transport. However, we have identified a significant risk to alternative fuel integration, found in the DA's provisions on attributing the least favorable default value of a given fuel type in cases where measuring has not yet been conducted or is not available, as indicated in Annex 1.2 on default values. While measuring of CH4 and N20 from methanol--propelled vessels is not yet mainstream, it is clear beyond any reasonable doubt that upon combustion methanol emits less than 10% of both greenhouse gases compared to conventional fuel. Leading literature frequently referenced by the EC itself supports this, such as the 4th IMO GHG study which references testing performed by MAN. Preemptively applying a double penalty on the combustion emission profile of methanol vs conventional fuels in key categories due only to a perceived absence of measured numbers can hardly be considered a measure proportional to its desired end. In fact, it serves to impede methanol's integration into EU maritime transport at a pivotal time in the Union's energy transition, undermining the objectives of key regulations such as the FuelEU Maritime and the ETS extension to maritime transport. Finally, we would like to point out that basing the measure on weight rather than energy density further limits the potential of alternative fuels, as typically they consist of lower energy density than conventional fuels. We offer our support in gaining further data from engine manufacturers to substantiate the argument presented above. Whilst verified emission factors have not yet been ascertained, we call on the European Commission to adopt the approach from the draft LCA guidelines of the IMO (annex 1, page 18 document ISWG-GHG 11/2/3). In addition, we recommend the text to be modified base calculations on the energy content of each fuel type rather than volumetric weight.
Read full responseResponse to 2040 Climate Target Plan
23 Jun 2023
Methanol plays an important role in the transition to a low-carbon and then carbon neutral economy and the achievement of the climate objectives set by the European Union (EU). It is encouraging to see that the EU recognizes the importance of setting emission reduction targets for 2040. The Methanol Institute and the methanol industry can play an essential role in the energy transition by offering low-carbon and sustainable solutions for various sectors, such as transport, the chemical industry. The proposal to set a climate target for 2040 sends a clear signal to stakeholders and strengthens certainty and predictability for industry policy decisions and investments. This is a crucial step to guide the development of the post-2030 policy framework, thus guaranteeing an effective reduction in EU GHG emissions with a view to achieving carbon neutrality by 2050. MI welcomes the EU's ambition and new targets for 2040 and recommends a clear and ambitious legislative framework: 1. Transition to renewable energy sources: The EU should promote the use of renewable energy sources to power its production processes and more particularly biofuel and efuel. 2. Promotion of the use of methanol as a clean fuel: The EU should encourage the use of methanol as a clean fuel in different sectors, such as maritime transport in order to achieve carbon reductions. As a low-carbon carbon fuel, methanol can help reduce greenhouse gas emissions and improve air quality. 3. Development of carbon capture and utilization technologies: The EU should invest in research and development of technologies for carbon capture and its use (CCU) to reduce CO2 emissions from methanol production. Carbon capture and use can help reduce the environmental impact of the industry and achieve carbon neutrality goals. The promotion of Direct Air Capture technology is also recommended. 4. The EU should be able to put the current low carbon fuel certification when they can be mixed with biofuels and green fuels to meet the demands of the industry and achieve the ambitious goals that are set. A framework in this sense on the 2040 objectives can help the methanol industry to play an active role in the transition to a low-carbon economy and to contribute to the emission reduction objectives for 2040 and achieve carbon neutrality in 2050.
Read full responseMeeting with Vera Tax (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur)
31 May 2023 · Event on FuelEU Maritime (Assistant participated)
Meeting with Ruud Kempener (Cabinet of Commissioner Kadri Simson)
24 Apr 2023 · Introducing CEO Greg Dolan and MI's contribution to achieve carbon neutrality by 2050
17 Jun 2022
The Methanol Institute welcomes the introduction of the implementing act, recognizing the importance of setting uniform rules to lay the foundation for the increased integration of sustainable fuels sourced from captured carbon to address the challenges of decarbonization of mobility. While a concrete regulatory framework is necessary, it must be based on pragmatism and a future vision which balances decarbonization with the continued existence of industry. In its draft form, the regulation is bound to impede investment in Carbon Capture and Utilization (CCU) fuel production, debilitating multiple projects aimed at meeting the foreseen demand for sustainable fuels. With the capacity of fuel suppliers to delivering on the Union’s promises to attain net carbon neutrality by 2050 at jeopardy, we recommend the Commission acknowledges the contribution of carbon capture and utilization irrespective of carbon source.
Our Recommendations
1. Exclusion of CO2 emissions from industrial sources
As is in fact recognized under recital 7 of the draft delegated act, the origin of carbon used for production of renewable fuels of non-biological origin or recycled carbon fuels is not relevant for determining emission savings of those fuels, as plenty of carbon source are available and can be captured and re-used at scale to offset the use of fossil fuels. In recognition of this key principle, and to avoid lock-in of non-sustainable industrial processes, we recommend that only when the situation arises that CCU-fuels would no longer be reasonably expected to displace fossil fuels would they no longer be considered as contributing to GHG savings. In line with the objectives of the European Green Deal and the Fit for 55 package as a whole, these circumstances will arrive in 2050. Article 11 a) of Annex A should thus refer to 2050 instead of 2035. We would also highlight the fact that industrial emissions are financially addressed under the ETS system, making locking-in of such assets unlikely for that reason alone. Furthermore, we suggest Article 11a) state that its provisions do not apply to installations producing RFNBOs that come into operation before 1 January 2050, to ensure that the full advantages of CCU for fuel production be exploited during the decarbonization of the Union. In fact, grandfathering during any period in which industrial CO2 emissions will be allowed is a fundamental premise to direct any investment to projects utilizing point source emissions.
2. Methodology - GHG Savings
We suggest that emission savings from excess electricity benefits and carbon capture and replacement be deducted from the emissions generated, as is currently the case under RED2. The Methanol Institute also suggests that in recognition of the capture and re-use of the carbon component, end of life emissions be set to zero for rigid inputs. Carbon intensity reduction of RFNBOs enabled by other components than the use of renewable electricity for hydrogen generation should be acknowleged to give a full and transparent picture of RFNBO carbon intensity.
3. Mixture of fuels produced in common process
We suggest the following wording of recital 8, to ensure separate accounting of GHG intensity of fuels produced in the same process.
"Renewable liquid and gaseous transport fuels of non-biological origin and recycled carbon fuels can be produced in various processes, which may give rise to a mixture of different types of fuels. The methodology to assess the greenhouse gas emissions savings should therefore be able to derive the actual emission savings per process. Where a common fuel conversion process is applied to a mix of feedstocks to produce a common fuel that could be a mix of biofuel, fossil, RFNBO or RCF in nature, the resulting fuel takes a common greenhouse gas intensity for the fuel conversion process phase, with GHG emissions associated with any additional processing steps unique to each fuel input accounted for separately."
Read full responseMeeting with Jutta Paulus (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur) and CMA CGM and FEPORT
7 Apr 2022 · Roundtabel
Response to Revision of the Renewable Energy Directive (EU) 2018/2001
18 Nov 2021
Please find attached the Methanol Institute's Position Paper on the proposed changes to RED2
Read full responseResponse to Revision of the CO2 emission standards for cars and vans
4 Nov 2021
The Methanol Institute agrees with the European Commission's assessment that in order to achieve the European Green Deal's objective of climate neutrality in the EU by 2050, significant policy action must be undertaken in the passenger vehicle segment. We uphold that such policy action should enable the contribution of renewable, low carbon and net-carbon neutral fuels, as recognized under the revision of the Renewable Energy Directive and that such fuels will be instrumental in attaining climate progress. In the attached paper, the Methanol Institute offers its recommendations on how to amend the proposed CO2 emission standards to reflect technology neutrality, the true environmental performance of energy carriers and the inclusion of renewable and low carbon fuel in the energy transition.
Read full responseResponse to Revision of Alternative Fuels Infrastructure Directive
3 Nov 2021
The Methanol Institute welcomes the opportunity submit feedback concerning the Alternative Fuel Infrastructure Regulation. We support the spirit of the regulation, but suggest it be refined to reflect the plurality of solutions capable of delivering the necessary climate benefits to attain the Union's climate ambition. Thus, we urge policymakers to apply a technology neutral and fuel agnostic approach to avoid the creation of artificial barriers for the entry of renewable, low carbon and net carbo neutral alternative fuels into the EU fuel mix. To that end we offer the recommendations listed in the attached paper.
Read full responseResponse to FuelEU Maritime
20 Oct 2021
We strongly endorse the adoption of a Well-to-Wake accounting approach to measure maritime emissions under the FuelEU Maritime initiative, as it gives a complete picture of the environmental profile of fuels and avoids a shift of emissions to upstream production processes. However, to ensure consistency and significant enforcement challenges, it is important that all instruments pertaining to measuring GHG emissions of fuels be based on the same methodology and principles. While the Methanol Institute fully supports the extension of ETS grounded on LCA and CO2eq to maritime mobility, we propose a phase-in approach to help overcome industry resistance to change and allows lessons learned in the early stages to be incorporated into the overall policy moving forward. Furthermore, development of fuel supply incentivized under the proposed legislation is limited today and will take several years to develop. Thus, we suggest a 5-year phase-in of ETS to marine mobility. Furthermore, and to the same end, the complexity of regulating extra EU voyages warrants a degree of caution. A holistic problem, climate change impacts the entire world and would better be fought through collective action.
To facilitate increased supply and use of fuels in addition to the instruments already introduced under the Commission’s proposals, the Methanol Institute offers the recommendations outlined in the attached position paper.
Read full responseResponse to Revision of the Energy Tax Directive
13 Oct 2021
The Methanol Institute endorses the Commission’s proposal for the revision of the Energy Taxation
Directive (ETD). Restructuring taxation to be based on energy content and consumption, represents an
effective method to decrease the relative tax burden for low carbon and net carbon neutral fuels. This will
do so without increasing the minimum tax rate and corresponding burden on European taxpayers, while
maintaining the principle of subsidiarity and proportionality in the European Union. By moving from volumetric
excise taxation to an energy content basis, the Commission’s proposal effectively provides pricing signals to
encourage investment in energy-efficiency and reduced carbon intensity. Moreover, it attains these results in
a technology neutral manner, allowing the market to decide which form of alternative energy carriers to use.
However, as a key instrument to drive the carbon ambition of the bloc, the ETD should not only present a level
playing field but also provide incentives to transition from polluting fossil sources, in conjunction with other
Fit for 55 legislative proposals. To ensure effectiveness in reforming the legislative framework to reflect the
ambition Green Deal, the Methanol Institute offers the recommendations listed in the attached position paper.
Read full responseResponse to Detailed implementing rules for the voluntary schemes recognised by the European Commission
27 Jul 2021
The Methanol Institute (MI) firmly supports the climate action plan of the European Union and its objective to become climate neutral by 2050. The Methanol Institute welcomes this opportunity to comment on the draft implementing regulation on rules to verify sustainability and greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) saving criteria (the Draft regulation).
Methanol is increasingly used as an energy carrier, either as a clean fuel for road transportation, an alternative marine fuel, or as a practical hydrogen carrier. And with the transition toward sustainable renewable methanol production pathways, bio-methanol and synthetic e-methanol provide practical, affordable opportunities to enable climate neutral transportation in existing and new engines as well as fuel cells.
As will follow from our attached comments, the Methanol Institute of the opinion that the Draft regulation should clarify rules on the verification of the sustainability and GHG savings criteria. One of the elements in this verification is the principle of mass balance that assures the traceability of materials and biofuels. Further, we support comments submitted by our member company OCI N.V.
Read full responseMeeting with Filip Alexandru Negreanu Arboreanu (Cabinet of Commissioner Adina Vălean) and FuelsEurope and
23 Mar 2021 · Renewable fuels to climate neutrality and economic growth
Response to Revision of the CO2 emission standards for cars and vans
26 Nov 2020
Feedback on CO2 emissions for cars and vans – revision of performance standards
26 November 2020
Dear Executive Vice-President Timmermans,
Dear Commissioner Vălean,
Dear Commissioner Simson,
The Methanol Institute (MI) firmly supports the climate action plan of the European Union and its objective to become climate neutral by 2050. Methanol is increasingly used as an energy carrier, either as a clean fuel for road transportation, an alternative marine fuel or as a practical hydrogen carrier. And with the transition toward sustainable renewable methanol production pathways, bio-methanol and synthetic e-methanol provide practical, affordable opportunities to enable climate neutral transportation in existing and new engines as well as fuel cells.
And herein lies one of the challenges for policy design. Because in order for Europe to reach its climate objectives it cannot solely rely on new propulsion technologies that promise zero tail pipe emissions. Even in the most optimistic scenarios for market penetration of these new technology options, Europe would run out of its carbon budget well before 2050.
Therefore, it is important to strike a balance between promise of future carbon savings from new technologies – which we encourage - and more immediate carbon savings that can be achieved with existing engines and existing infrastructure.
MI urges the European Commission to recognize the importance of the contribution brought by renewable bio- and synthetic fuels to our climate neutrality objectives. This requires a holistic well-to-wheel approach rather than focusing on tail pipe emissions only.
To benefit from the substantial carbon savings of sustainable, affordable, renewable fuels it is essential that vehicles with the appropriate (combustion) engine remain available to the general public. By further improving the efficiency of these engines, further emission reductions are within our grasp.
This does require a technology neutral policy which is geared toward the common objective, i.e. climate neutrality.
Smart policies that integrate the promise of future technologies with the increasing use of renewable fuels will:
[a] increase our options to reach our climate objective,
[b] reduce our dependence on the use of fossil fuels, and
[c] lower the burden on society related to the cost of mitigating CO2 emissions
The methanol industry is ready to work with the Commission, industry, and society in ensuring a sustainable, clean future
Sincerely,
Gregory Dolan, CEO
Methanol Institute
Read full responseResponse to FuelEU Maritime
24 Apr 2020
The Methanol Institute would like to thank the European Commission for the opportunity to comments on the Inception Impact Assessment (IIA) of the Fuel EU Maritime initiative.
The Methanol Institute serves as the trade association for the global methanol industry and exists to promote Methanol as a marine fuel. It’s a clean and efficient propulsion medium that can provide an effective bridge between our current fuel oil-dominated industry and one that enables the industry to still use internal combustion engines, though in a much cleaner way.
Conventional Methanol is derived from fossil fuels but its carbon emissions ‘in sector’ in other words while it is being consumed, are very low – certainly enough to provide a pathway to a low carbon emission future. Like LNG it has negligible SOx and PM emissions so it can enable the industry to comply with the IMO’s 2020 regulations as of now.
Methanol-fuelled ships are already safely in operation on a global basis and the regulatory backdrop is building all the time. The ISO has already agreed to develop a standard for Methanol as marine fuel like that for conventional bunker fuel and in September 2018, the IMO agreed draft interim guidelines covering the safety of ships using methyl/ethyl alcohol as fuel.
Methanol is proven as a marine fuel and in service on the eleven ships in service with seven more on order for Waterfront Shipping, another 4 vessels on order from Proman Stena Bulk, as well as the Stena Germanica Ropax ferry.
Further, initiatives like the Green Maritime Methanol program in the Netherlands, and the recently EU-funding approved FASTWATER program will demonstrate the use of methanol as a future proof fuel for short-sea shipping and inland waterways.
Recent testbed projects have proven Methanol’s suitability as a fuel for small diesel engines as well as large ones, with minimal conversion necessary and a virtually straight swap for gasoil or low sulphur diesel. The recent MethaShip project concluded that conventional and Biomethanol were fuels with potential application on large cruiseships.
There are no barriers to the wider adoption of Methanol as a marine fuel on a variety of ships though its energy profile means it is ideally suited to coastal, short sea, cruise, liner and inland shipping. Any mode that makes regular port calls is positioned to take advantage of Methanol which is available at 88 of the world’s largest ports.
Conversion and installation costs are a fraction of those for LNG because Methanol does not require cryogenic tanks or a complex delivery system. A simple tank with double-walled piping is as complicated as it gets, it can be stored, bunkered and consumed in a way that is no different from fuel oil. Methanol can be a dual-fuel option for both new build vessels and a retrofit solution for the existing fleet of vessels.
Methanol can be produced from renewable sources including landfill gas, biomass, or by utilizing renewable electricity to produce green hydrogen through electrolysis and adding CO2 to make liquid methanol.
As it stands there are no other renewable fuels that can do this on a large enough scale to satisfy the demand of the merchant. We don’t imagine that methanol alone is the long term solution to shipping’s carbon emissions, but it can play a key role in the transition and moving forward towards net carbon neutrality.
The shipping industry is many things, but it is not always collegiate in its attitude to problem solving. First movers are often punished and owners are wary of investing in unproven technologies.
We would propose that the EU look to directly reward innovation in this space in the first instance with a programme that looks for new ideas and then, in co-operation and collaboration with industry, supports and rewards their development with the funding needed to gain a degree of acceptance. Research and development is a key tool that must be deployed.
Unfortunately, the IIA identifies sustainable low and zero-ca
Read full responseResponse to Evaluation Energy Taxation Directive
26 Sept 2017
Energy taxation, and fuel excises in particular, are an important policy instrument to influence industry and consumer behaviour in a transition to cleaner, sustainable low carbon alternative fuels.
The current taxation directive unfortunately creates unfair and possibly unintended differences between liquid fuels, gaseous fuels and electricity.
This results in market distortions, and unfair competition between alternative fuel solution with similar or in some cases even better environmental credentials.
To add to the complexity, different production processes convert different feedstock into fuels which are taxed differently.
In the case for methanol for example, low carbon (bio-)methanol is taxed according to the liquid fuel it displaces, even though methanol only contains half the energy.
As a result, the fuel excise per unit of energy is twice as high.
Considering most methanol is produced from natural gas, it would at least make more sense to tax methanol at the same rate as LNG when methanol is used as a fuel in road transportation.
Another, even more challenging example are Power-to-X technologies.
Power-to-X enables the conversions of (renewable) electricity into various fuels, either gaseous (e.g. methane, ammonia) or liquid (e.g. methanol, FT diesel).
On an energy equivalent basis though the same electrons are taxed at very different levels ranging from very low for electricity, to very high for liquids.
The source and conversion of the feedstock should become a more important part of the excise system to enable the fair competition on a level playing field.
The Methanol Institute supports an approach which introduces a taxation system based on energy content, with a tax component for the carbon footprint.
This ensures that differences in energy density and efficiency are not impacted by volumetric measures, whilst ensuring a transition to cleaner solutions with a lower carbon intensity.
Read full response