PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
June 5, 2026ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering0 citationsOpen Access

Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Cost Trade-Offs of Renewable Feedstocks for Methyl Methacrylate Production

SBS. BowlerWHWilliam C. HuntJMJon McKechnie

Key Points

  • This research aims to evaluate the greenhouse gas emissions and raw material costs associated with methyl methacrylate production using different feedstocks.
  • Analyzed cradle-to-gate emissions and costs of MMA production
  • Compared fossil, biomass, and direct-air-capture CO2 feedstocks
  • Performed uncertainty analysis on emissions values
  • Conventional MMA emits 3.43 kg CO2-eq kg–1; switching to biomass or CO2 results in negative emissions of −0.79 and −1.13 kg CO2-eq kg–1, respectively.
  • Raw-material costs for biomass and CO2 feedstocks rise significantly to $1.52 kg–1 and $2.66 kg–1, respectively, compared to $0.65 kg–1 for fossil feedstock.
  • Eliminating price premiums requires carbon prices ranging from $72 to $296 tn–1 CO2 for biomass and $269 to $512 tn–1 CO2 for CO2.

Abstract

Replacing fossil feedstocks with renewable, drop-in intermediates offers a rapid defossilization strategy while exploiting existing infrastructure. This study quantifies the cradle-to-gate greenhouse gas emissions and raw material costs for methyl methacrylate (MMA) via a representative ethylene (“C2”) route using fossil, biomass, and direct-air-capture CO2 feedstocks. Results suggest that conventional MMA emits 3. 43 kg CO2-eq kg–1. Switching to biomass or CO2 feedstocks yields negative emissions of −0. 79 and −1. 13 kg CO2-eq kg–1, respectively. Uncertainty analysis demonstrates −0. 88 to −0. 40 kg CO2-eq kg–1 (biomass) and −1. 23 to −1. 03 kg CO2-eq kg–1 (CO2). Raw-material costs rise from 0. 65 kg–1 (fossil) to 1. 52 kg–1 (biomass) and 2. 66 kg–1 (CO2), driven by renewable ethylene and formaldehyde. The green premium required for cost parity with fossil fuel-based MMA is 0. 31–1. 04 kg–1 (biomass) and 1. 27–2. 12 kg–1 (CO2), equivalent to a 16–52% and 63–106% markup. Propagated to consumer products, the highest premium inflates prices by <15% for an acrylic sheet and <1% for higher-value items (rear car lamps; LCD televisions). Eliminating the premium requires carbon prices of 72–296 tn–1 CO2 (biomass) and 269–512 tn–1 CO2 (CO2). These results position biomass drop-ins as a near-term strategy, while CO2-derived options need further improvements to reach cost parity.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Bowler et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a22672f763171746d545dbbhttps://doi.org/10.1021/acssuschemeng.6c03784
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper