ABSTRACT
Introduction ......................................................................................................... 470 Process Alternatives ............................................................................................ 471
Process Alternative # 1: Methanol from H2 and CO2 ............................ 471 Process Alternative # 2: Methanol from H2O and CO .......................... 472 Conversion and Energy Efciency .......................................................... 473
Economic Evaluation .......................................................................................... 474 Conclusions .......................................................................................................... 476 Acknowledgments ..............................................................................................477 References .............................................................................................................477
than their biological counterpart. Finally, the conversion and energy ef- ciency of both processes are better than previously proposed designs such as the so called CAMERE process.
