Conversion, making the molecule.
Hydrogen and biogenic CO₂ combined into green ammonia and methanol. The biogenic premium on the methanol fraction is a structural financing dependency, not an upside assumption.
Where power becomes a tradeable fuel.
This node takes hydrogen and combines it into molecules that can be stored and shipped. Two parallel routes run from the same hydrogen stream: ammonia synthesis, which needs nitrogen from an air separation unit, and methanol synthesis, which needs carbon, supplied here as biogenic CO₂. The output is 500 kT/yr of methanol and 150 kT/yr of ammonia, each carrying the certification that lets it sell as a renewable fuel.
The carbon source is what makes the methanol valuable. Because the CO₂ is biogenic, the methanol qualifies for the RFNBO certificate premium, and that premium is not a bonus on top of a viable project, it is the thing that makes the project finance work. A conversion developer taking this node is taking both the synthesis technology and the carbon-sourcing logic that the premium depends on.
What drives the node.
| Parameter | Value | Basis |
|---|---|---|
| Hydrogen feed | 126 kT/yr | From the generation node (Sim 1) M |
| CO₂ feed | 708 kT/yr | Incl. process loss; 460 kT biogenic P |
| Biogenic fraction | 65 % | Drives the RFNBO-eligible methanol share P |
| Methanol price | $1,100/t | Base-case screening price E |
| RFNBO premium | $130/t | On the biogenic methanol fraction only P |
| Ammonia price | $750/t | Base-case screening price E |
| CO₂ cost | $88/t | Delivered biogenic CO₂ feedstock P |
What the node produces.
| Revenue / cost line | Basis | Annual |
|---|---|---|
| Methanol revenue | 500 kT + biogenic premium | $592M |
| Ammonia revenue | 150 kT × $750/t | $113M |
| CO₂ feedstock | 708 kT × $88/t | ($62M) |
| Methanol plant CAPEX | 500 kT × $1.20M/kt | $600M |
| Ammonia + ASU CAPEX | 150 kT × $1.50M/kt | $225M |
The premium is structural, not upside.
It is tempting to treat the RFNBO premium as the cherry on top of a project that works without it. The numbers say the opposite. The premium on the biogenic methanol fraction contributes roughly $42M/yr of revenue. Strip it out, and that margin disappears, dropping the corridor below its lender DSCR floor.
The biogenic CO₂ premium is a structural financing dependency, not an optimistic assumption. This reframes how the node must be presented to a credit committee: the carbon-sourcing arrangement is not a commercial nicety, it is part of the capital structure. A conversion developer taking this node inherits that dependency, and the binding question is the security of the biogenic CO₂ supply and its certification, not the synthesis technology, which is mature.
Where the numbers come from.
Synthesis CAPEX ($1.20M/kt methanol, $1.50M/kt ammonia): bottom-up plant cost coefficients from the technical documentation, the ammonia figure including the air separation unit.
Biogenic fraction (65%): the share of methanol carbon from biogenic CO₂, which determines RFNBO eligibility and therefore the premium-bearing volume.
Prices ($1,100/t methanol, $750/t ammonia, $130/t premium): base-case screening prices. The premium applies only to the biogenic methanol fraction, not the full output.
Operational economics trace to Sim 2; CAPEX to Sim 3. Screening-stage, modelled, not quotes.
How this node stands alone.
The node takes hydrogen and carbon in, finished fuel out. It connects to a hydrogen source upstream and a storage-and-shipping chain downstream, and it can be sited wherever both feedstocks meet.