ArticleNature communications2026
Toward efficient green methanol from biomass and renewable power.
Article in Nature communications, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Green methanol could help decarbonize transport and industry, but its production roadmap remains uncertain because biomass conversion, renewable hydrogen supply, the emissions and cost of electricity are tightly coupled. Here we show, using pilot-scale gasification data and industrial process parameters, how four biomass- and renewable-power-based methanol routes differ in technical performance, life-cycle greenhouse gas emissions and production cost, and identify deployment-relevant boundary conditions. Gasification integrated with renewable hydrogen balances carbon utilization and energy efficiency, reaching 92% and 54%, respectively. Direct combustion followed by carbon dioxide hydrogenation raises carbon utilization to 96% but requires substantially more electrolysis-derived hydrogen. Under hybrid wind and solar power, all routes remain below the European low-carbon fuel threshold, although the maximum electricity emission factors compatible with this threshold vary from 0.057 to 0.373 kilograms of carbon dioxide equivalent per kilowatt-hour. Gasification without added hydrogen is currently the least-cost route. Hydrogen-integrated gasification approaches its cost when renewable electricity falls below US$21 per megawatt-hour, and approaches coal-based methanol costs at carbon prices of US$40-90 per tonne of carbon dioxide. These results define practical boundaries for route deployment.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.