| This study examined several dimensions of the prospect for widescale (i.e., nationwide) use of methanol in internal combustion engines. The dimensions include the cost to produce methanol from natural gas and coal, an examination of the availability of methanol including the potential for capacity to increase over time, an estimate of the relative costs to a consumer of various methanol-technology options, and an examination of whether methanol is a cost effective way to increase gasoline octane. A number of engineering-economic models were developed to examine these dimensions from either the producer or the consumer perspectives.;From the producer perspective, it was found that the excess capacity of current methanol plants is insignificant relative to the volume of gasoline consumed nationwide. Producing methanol from coal to supplement the limited methanol capacity was found to be expensive with the product methanol being approximately three times as expensive as the cost of gasoline from petroleum at the current petroleum price level. If methanol were to be blended, fuel producer profits were estimated to be higher than most schemes for raising gasoline octane which, normatively speaking, should encourage blending. Estimates of the industry capacity to increase the volume of methanol used annually were made. The results showed that the fuel industry could substantially increase methanol capacity by as much as 1.45 billion gallons every year.;From the consumer perspective, the discounted costs of using any of the methanol-technology options (which include methanol blends, near neat methanol, neat methanol, use of methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE) as gasoline octane enhancer, and methanol to gasoline) were estimated. Methanol blends and the use of methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE) in gasoline for octane enhancement were found to be the least cost options for the consumer.;The role of the Federal Government was also examined. A 1988 Congressional Act designed to promote methanol commercialization was reviewed and found to be too limited in scope and underfunded to achieve the objectives of the Act. (Abstract shortened with permission of author.). |
