what i’m excited about in co2-to-fuels

mapping the near-term plays in e-saf, e-methanol, and co2-to-ethylene

23-Jul-25

When people think about the energy transition, they usually imagine wind farms, solar panels, or maybe hydrogen pipelines. What I keep coming back to is carbon: the millions of tonnes of CO₂ pouring out of smokestacks every year. If you can turn that waste stream into something useful, you don’t just reduce emissions; you create new products, new markets, and new ways of running industries that already exist.

Three technologies stand out right now: e-SAF, e-methanol, and CO₂-to-ethylene. Each has different risks, costs, and timelines. Each also has the potential to scale into a serious business.

e-SAF: Synthetic Jet Fuel from CO₂ + H₂

Airlines want it, governments are paying for it, and the chemistry is proven. The idea is simple: upgrade CO₂ with hydrogen into a synthetic kerosene that drops straight into jet engines.

The challenge is not whether it works; it’s how much power and hydrogen it consumes.

In the reverse water-gas shift (RWGS) to Fischer–Tropsch train, high-selectivity electro- or catalytic upgrading can raise carbon efficiency. That trims the power required per litre and drops the unit cost, especially where hydrogen is the main driver.

But the practical differences depend on the source:

  • Steel mills could host e-SAF hubs. They have the scale and the policy support, but they need two to three times more green hydrogen per tonne of product. That pushes electrolyser sizing and exposes projects to long-term PPA (power purchase agreement) risk.
  • Refineries have CO₂ streams around 8% purity, which means capture costs creep toward the high end of industrial ranges. Turnaround windows make tie-ins complicated.
  • Cracker off-gas streams hold potential, but catalyst life and power price remain in the R&D phase. Polymer buyers aren’t yet willing to pay a premium that functions like a carbon credit.

e-SAF sits at the high end of policy support and customer pull. The bottleneck is hydrogen intensity and integration risk.

e-Methanol: Green MeOH from CO₂ + H₂

Methanol is not as glamorous as jet fuel, but it has a quiet advantage: it’s already everywhere. It fuels ships, feeds plastics, and drops into today’s infrastructure with fewer changes.

The lever here is Cu-based catalysts and electro-assisted reactors. They can lift CO₂-to-methanol conversion per pass, shrinking recycle loops and the compressors that come with them. Smaller loops mean cheaper plants, which is exactly what distributed sites like pulp mills need.

Why pulp mills?

  • They vent concentrated biogenic CO₂ that’s already considered carbon-neutral.
  • Many sit on cheap hydro grids, especially in Quebec and BC.
  • Methanex, the global methanol major, has its headquarters in Vancouver, making it a ready-made partner and customer.

Methanol doesn’t need to wait for airlines or new infrastructure. It has a buyer base today.

This is the lowest capital entry point of the three. First-plant financing is easier, and smaller distributed units can teach lessons without requiring multi-gigawatt hydrogen builds.

CO₂-to-Ethylene and Other C₂ Chemicals

Ethylene is the largest-volume organic chemical in the world. If you can make it from CO₂ and renewable power, the prize is enormous.

The key unlock is catalyst durability and current density. Doubling life from 2,000 to 5,000 hours, or doubling current density, would enable the first commercial skids. That still leaves big hurdles:

  • Multi-gigawatt clean power buildouts in provinces like Alberta or Ontario.
  • A market that isn’t yet offering a carbon credit-like premium for CO₂-derived polymers.
  • Catalyst and stack reliability still in research territory.

The payoff can dwarf the other routes, but so can the risk.

Ranking the Opportunities

If you had to pick where to put the first serious dollars, the order looks like this:

  1. e-Methanol at pulp-mill clusters
    • Cheap hydro and existing CO₂ vents make it feasible without hydrogen transport.
    • Lower capital than e-SAF, easier to finance the first unit.
    • Proximity to Methanex provides a built-in anchor buyer or equity partner.
  2. e-SAF at steel or refinery hubs
    • Biggest policy premiums and most visible customer demand.
    • But hydrogen demand is massive, so efficiency gains must be significant.
    • SAF+ and other groups are already building, so the JV pathway is clear.
  3. CO₂-to-ethylene at crackers
    • Total addressable market is huge.
    • But requires cheap gigawatt-scale power and durable catalysts before FID (final investment decision).
    • Higher technical and timing risk, though the upside is massive.

Why This Matters

These aren’t science projects anymore. Companies like Twelve, Liquid Wind, and Carbon Recycling International are proving that carbon-to-fuels is a live market. The next five years will decide which technologies find their niche and which ones stall out.

The opportunity is not just in building new fuels. It’s in choosing the right entry points.

e-Methanol can be the starter play. e-SAF is the flagship that governments and airlines want to push. CO₂-to-ethylene is the moonshot. Together, they sketch a path where industrial CO₂ becomes feedstock rather than waste.

And that’s what excites me most: the idea that the pipes and furnaces of today’s industry can become the foundation of tomorrow’s fuels, not their obstacle.