Renewable methanol

a low-/zero-carbon fuel carrier

offers the dual benefits of reducing shipping emissions and enabling carbon recycling in energy systems. However

its scalability is hindered by the high production costs and the limited availability of carbon source. This study evaluates the economic viability of two primary synthesis routes—E-methanol and biomethanol—analyzing how production pathways

feedstock inputs

and energy consumption affect costs while proposing development strategies. For E-methanol

three processes are compared: CO2 hydrogenation to methanol

CO2 hydrogenation to syngas followed by methanol synthesis

and natural gas reforming integrated with CO2 direct hydrogenation (gray–green methanol). The process coupled with electrolytic hydrogen has the lowest cost (USD 500–600/t)

yet remains 3–5 times higher than conventional methanol. Key cost drivers are electricity for electrolysis (60%–70% of total cost) and CO2 capture (20%–30%). Industrial off-gases are currently the preferred source over direct air capture due to their lower cost. For biomethanol

three processes are compared: biomass gasification

gasification coupled with green hydrogen

and biogas reforming. Feedstock costs are the dominant factor (40%–60%)

with biomass gasification showing low carbon efficiency. Integrating green hydrogen improves carbon negativity and reduces feedstock reliance but increases electricity demand. Biogas-based methanol is economically viable only in specific locales due to feedstock constraints. To reduce costs

advancements in renewable energy

electrolysis efficiency

and localized feedstock integration are critical. Policy measures

including carbon trading systems and tax/subsidy mechanisms

are recommended to enhance competitiveness. Findings offer insights for optimizing production pathways and designing supportive policies to accelerate renewable methanol adoption.