Coal-to-Chemicals Platform | Karandikars & Associates

Home About us Indian Indicators Global Indicators CTC Strategy Platform Conversion Factors Contact us

Areas of Expertise

Upstream Oil & Gas

Oil Refining

K&A Coal-to-Chemicals Platform: Methanol / Chloromethanes

Demonstration disclosure:

This is a pre-feasibility screening-level model intended to illustrate relative sensitivities and typical magnitudes, not a bankable feasibility study. Key caveats:

All capex and opex factors are typical publicly available estimates, not vendor-quoted figures — client needs to benchmark against current EPC quotations before use.
The financial model is technology-agnostic. Accordingly, raw syngas composition and coal carbon content are treated as user inputs rather than being derived from a specific gasifier technology. The default syngas values are representative screening-level assumptions and are not intended to represent a guaranteed output from any particular gasification technology. Project-specific values should be established from the selected gasification technology, coal assay and vendor-guaranteed performance.
Coal gasification is a non-catalytic thermal process; catalyst and chemical costs reflect only downstream shift, AGR, and synthesis duty.
No escalation is applied to prices or costs denominated in US dollars over the plant life; these remain in flat real terms. Prices and costs denominated in Indian rupees change in accordance with the exchange-rate depreciation assumption used in the model.
A range of gasifier module sizes is evaluated for screening purposes, with the lowest gasifier ISBL cost configuration identified as the default selection. The user may select an alternative configuration from the available options based on discussions with the selected technology licensor.

K&A Suggestion for Subscribers

We suggest that clients who subscribe to our Platform first run the model using the K&A Base Case assumptions and review and record the complete set of results before changing any inputs. The Base Case provides a consistent reference point for understanding the model, the interaction between key assumptions and the resulting technical and financial outcomes. Clients can then challenge, refine or replace individual assumptions based on their own project experience, site-specific information, technology licensor inputs and other feasibility-stage assessments.

User Inputs

The entire input section is available for free viewing. An active subscription is required to run the model and access calculated results, sensitivity analysis and the K&A Strategic Perspective.

Enter your subscription password (provided upon registration).

Subscription Password:

Select the desired Methanol plant capacity.
Capacity selection should consider economies of scale, total capital commitment, downstream requirements, and whether methanol is produced for captive use or merchant sale. Default capacity is 5000 tpd

Methanol Capacity (TPD):

Methanol Requirement for Chloromethanes
Chloromethanes is a family of products comprising Methyl Chloride (MC), Methylene Dichloride (MDC), Chloroform (CF) and Carbon Tetrachloride (CTC). The overall reactions, all originating from Methanol, are:

Overall Net Reactions

Product	Overall Net Reaction
Methyl Chloride (MC)	CH₃OH + HCl → CH₃Cl + H₂O
Methylene Dichloride (MDC)	CH₃OH + Cl₂ → CH₂Cl₂ + H₂O
Chloroform (CF)	CH₃OH + 2Cl₂ → CHCl₃ + HCl + H₂O
Carbon Tetrachloride (CTC)	CH₃OH + 3Cl₂ → CCl₄ + 2HCl + H₂O

As can be seen, MC consumes HCl, CF and CTC generate HCl, while MDC neither consumes nor generates HCl. The Chloromethanes pathway is therefore modeled as an integrated chlorination process
The resultant product mix has been derived considering the relative demand for individual chloromethanes together with an internally balanced HCl system, resulting in neither external purchase nor external sale of HCl

Product	Share	Net HCl (t/t)
MC	16.9%	-0.720
MDC	48.0%	0.000
CF	30.7%	+0.307
CTC	4.4%	+0.624
Net HCl Balance	100.0%	0.000

Weighted Methanol & Chlorine Requirement

Product	Share	Methanol (t/t)	Chlorine (t/t)
Methyl Chloride (MC)	16.9%	0.633	0.000
Methylene Dichloride (MDC)	48.0%	0.377	0.835
Chloroform (CF)	30.7%	0.268	1.188
Carbon Tetrachloride (CTC)	4.4%	0.208	1.536
Weighted Average	100.0%	0.377	0.835

Based on this resultant product mix, the weighted average raw material requirements are 0.38 t Methanol per tonne of Chloromethanes and 0.84 t Chlorine per tonne of Chloromethanes.

Methanol Requirement for Chloromethanes (ton per ton):

Percentage of Methanol converted to Chloromethanes (rest sold as merchant Methanol)
This is an integrated Methanol–Chloromethanes model, allowing complete flexibility to allocate any proportion of Methanol production to Chloromethanes
The allocation may vary from 0%, representing a merchant Methanol project with no Chloromethanes plant, to 100%, representing a project in which the entire Methanol production is converted to Chloromethanes
The default Methanol plant capacity is 5,000 TPD, while the default integrated Chloromethanes plant capacity is 1,000 TPD. Based on the weighted average Methanol requirement of 0.38 t Methanol per tonne of Chloromethanes, the 1,000 TPD Chloromethanes plant requires 380 TPD of Methanol
Accordingly, the default Methanol-to-Chloromethanes allocation is 7.6%, with the remaining vast majority available for merchant Methanol sales
Clients can evaluate different Methanol plant capacities as well as different proportions of Methanol allocated to Chloromethanes, enabling the assessment of a wide range of integrated Methanol–Chloromethanes project configurations

Methanol to Chloromethanes Conversion (%):

Realized Methanol Price ($/t):
Methanol is a globally traded commodity and realized prices vary materially by region, market conditions, product specification and delivery basis. The model uses US$350/t as the default long-term screening assumption. Clients should replace this with their own market outlook, applicable benchmark and expected realization for the target market and offtake arrangement

Methanol Price ($/t):

Realised Selling Prices of Individual Chloromethanes
The Chloromethanes pathway comprises four products: Methyl Chloride (MC), Methylene Dichloride (MDC), Chloroform (CF), and Carbon Tetrachloride (CTC). Separate realised selling prices are therefore provided for each product
The model combines these prices with the resultant HCl-balanced product mix to calculate the weighted average realised selling price of Chloromethanes, which is subsequently used for revenue and financial calculations

Methyl Chloride (MC) Price ($/t):

Methylene Dichloride (MC) Price ($/t):

Chloroform (CF) Price ($/t):

Carbon Tetrachloride (CTC) Price ($/t):

Purchased Chlorine Price
The Chloromethanes pathway requires chlorine as a principal raw material. The K&A platform does not model an integrated chlor-alkali plant and therefore treats chlorine as an externally purchased feedstock. The default value is $250/ton. Clients may modify the realised chlorine price to reflect project location, supply agreements, and prevailing market conditions.

Chlorine Price ($/t):

Delivered coal price at plant gate.
Default assumption: US$35/t, equivalent to approximately ₹3,325/t at an exchange rate of ₹95/US$. The price is expressed in US$ to provide an internationally benchmarkable basis. This is also relevant in the Indian context, as import coal prices form part of the National Coal Index methodology for certain grades of non-coking coal.

Coal Price ($/t):

Raw syngas composition — H2 (vol%)
Raw syngas composition is a critical model assumption and should be validated with the gasification technology licensor. H₂ and CO composition, coal carbon content, coal grade, oxygen consumption and gasifier operating conditions are interrelated and should therefore be assessed as an integrated set of assumptions.
H2 concentration in raw syngas. The default assumption is 35 vol%.

H2 (%):

Raw syngas composition — CO (vol%)
CO concentration in raw syngas. The default assumption is 45 vol%.

CO (%):

Raw syngas composition — CO2 (vol%)
Default composition: CO2 15% and CH4 + Others 5%, giving a total raw syngas composition of 100%.

CO2 (%):

Raw syngas composition — CH4 and other minor components (vol%)
Model check: Individual syngas components must sum to 100%.

CH4 + Others (%):

Carbon content of coal (fraction, dry basis)
Carbon content of coal (dry basis) is a principal driver of coal requirement. Indian non-coking coal is generally classified by GCV rather than directly by carbon content; the default assumption of 45% carbon represents a typical mid-grade non-coking coal.
Carbon content should be assessed as part of the client's integrated coal-quality and gasification assessment, together with syngas composition and gasifier operating conditions. The default assumption should be modified to reflect the project-specific coal assay.

Carbon Content of Coal:

Carbon conversion efficiency — accounts for unconverted carbon lost to slag/char
Default assumption: 97%, based on published literature

Carbon Conversion Efficiency (%):

Total ash content in coal
Ash does not directly affect the financial calculations in the current model; it is used to estimate annual ash generation and should be assessed as part of the overall coal assay and ash-handling requirements.

Coal Ash (%):

Total moisture content in coal
Moisture does not directly enter the financial calculations in the current model, but is an important coal-quality parameter and should be assessed as part of the overall coal assay.

Coal Moisture (%):

Total sulphur content in coal
Used to estimate sulphur generation and potential sulphur recovery/revenue from the project. The default assumption is 0.5%, representative of Indian non-coking coal; Indian coals are generally characterized by relatively high ash and moisture content and comparatively low sulphur content. Users should modify the default based on the project-specific coal assay.

Coal Sulphur (%):

Sulphur Price($/ton)
Used to estimate revenue from sulphur sales. The default assumption is $80/t. Users should modify the default based on the project-specific realisation

Sulphur Price ($/ton):

Government Coal Gasification Incentives
Capital incentives offered by the Government of India are highly project-specific and depend on the applicable scheme, project eligibility, and milestone-based disbursement. The default model assumes a total capital incentive of Rs 2,000 crore, distributed equally as four annual instalments of ₹500 crore. Clients should modify both the year and amount of each instalment based on their assessment of the incentives likely to be available to the project.

Instalment	Year	Amount (₹ Crore)
Instalment 1
Instalment 2
Instalment 3
Instalment 4

Availability of a single gasifier unit
Individual gasifier online availability accounts for periodic refractory relining and unplanned trips. Typical availability may range from 70%–85%, depending on coal characteristics, refractory life and operating conditions.
Default: 75%. Final assumption should be established with the technology licensor and based on the Client's operating expectations.

Individual Gasifier Online Availability (%):

Reference Single Train Gasifier Capacity
Single-train gasifier capacity is a major project-design decision. For high-ash coal, a 2,000–3,000 TPD range is used as the reference range in this model, with 2,500 TPD as the default. Capacity selection should be assessed together with gasification technology/licensor, coal characteristics, operating conditions, syngas composition and required plant scale.
The reference capacity also provides the basis for scaling gasifier capital cost to the selected project capacity.

Single Train Gasifier Capacity:

Reference Gasifier ISBL Capital Cost
Default assumption is US$100 million for a 2,500 TPD gasifier, equivalent to approximately US$40,000 per TPD of capacity. Actual cost should be assessed with the selected technology licensor and EPC contractor, including the applicable project scope and site conditions

Reference Gasifier Cost:

Oxygen Requirement (ton per ton of Coal
Specific oxygen requirement is a key gasifier operating parameter and directly affects ASU capacity and capital cost. The default assumption is 0.9 tonnes of O2 per tonne of coal. Actual consumption can vary materially with gasification technology, coal characteristics and operating conditions and should be validated with the selected licensor.

Oxygen Requirement (ton per ton of Coal):

Availability of a single ASU unit
Accounts for planned maintenance and unplanned trips. Large-scale ASUs are a mature technology; the model uses a 95% default availability. The final assumption should be assessed with the selected ASU supplier and aligned with the overall plant operating philosophy.

Individual ASU Online Availability (%):

Reference ASU Capacity
Reference ASU capacity is used for scaling ASU capital cost. The model uses 3,000 TPD of oxygen as the default reference capacity, broadly representative of a large-scale single-train ASU. Actual configuration and capacity should be determined from the project's oxygen requirement and selected supplier's design.

ASU Capacity:

Reference ASU ISBL Capital Cost
Default assumption is US$90 million for a 3,000 TPD ASU, equivalent to approximately US$30,000 per TPD of oxygen capacity. Actual cost should be assessed with the selected ASU supplier and EPC contractor based on the required scope and project conditions.

Reference ASU Cost:

Reference Coal Handling Capacity
Coal handling capacity depends on methanol plant scale, coal characteristics, technology and operating conditions. A reference range of 7,000–12,000 TPD is considered for 3,000–5,000 TPD methanol plants, with 10,000 TPD as the default reference capacity. This reference capacity is used as the basis for scaling coal-handling capital cost.

Coal Handling Capacity:

Reference Coal Handling Capital Cost The default reference capital cost is US$50 million for a 10,000 TPD coal-handling system, equivalent to approximately US$5,000 per TPD of capacity. This reference cost is used to scale coal-handling capital cost with capacity; actual cost should be assessed based on the required handling, storage, crushing, conveying and loading scope.

Reference Coal Handling Cost:

Reference AGR Capacity
Acid Gas Removal (AGR) capacity can be expressed in Nm³/hr, Nm³/day, tonnes/hr or TPD. Because raw syngas composition affects conversion between volume and mass, the model expresses the reference capacity in TPD for intuitive comparison. The model internally converts syngas composition and molecular weights to determine the corresponding kmoles/day and mass flow

Reference AGR Capacity:

Reference AGR Capital Cost
Our default capital cost for a 20,000 TPD raw syngas AGR system is US$150 million, equivalent to approximately US$7,500 per daily tonne of raw syngas capacity
Actual cost can vary materially with acid-gas composition, removal requirements, technology selection and project scope

Reference AGR Capital Cost:

Reference Water Gas Shift Capacity
Water Gas Shift (WGS) capacity is defined by the quantity of CO processed through the shift reaction, which converts CO to H₂ and CO₂. The required WGS capacity varies with the downstream product and the desired syngas composition. Capacity can be expressed in Nm³/hr, Nm³/day, tonnes/hr or TPD; the model expresses it as TPD of CO processed for intuitive comparison.
Default reference capacity: 1,500 TPD of CO processed.

Water Gas Shift Capacity:

Reference Water Gas Shift Capital Cost
The default reference capital cost is US$30 million for a WGS system processing 1,500 TPD of CO, equivalent to approximately US$20,000 per daily tonne of CO processed. This reference cost is used to scale WGS capital cost with capacity; actual cost depends on conversion requirements, catalyst configuration, operating conditions and project scope.

Water Gas Shift Capital Cost:

Reference Methanol Capacity
5,000 TPD represents a world-scale methanol plant capacity and is used as the default reference capacity in the model.

Methanol Capacity:

Reference Methanol ISBL Capital Cost
The default reference Methanol ISBL capital cost is US$250 million for a 5,000 TPD methanol plant, covering the methanol synthesis loop and distillation/purification section. Actual cost should be assessed with the selected technology licensor/EPC contractor and project-specific scope.

Reference Methanol ISBL Cost:

Reference Chloromethanes Capacity
1,000 TPD is used as the default reference capacity for Chloromethanes and represents a commercial-scale plant.

Chloromethanes Capacity:

Reference Chloromethanes ISBL Capital Cost
The default reference Chloromethanes ISBL capital cost is US$150 million for a 1,000 TPD Chloromethanes plant

Reference Chloromethanes ISBL Cost:

OSBL (% of ISBL Capital Cost)
Outside Battery Limits (OSBL) includes infrastructure and facilities outside the main process-unit boundaries. OSBL cost can vary materially with site conditions, existing infrastructure and project scope, and may range from approximately 25% to 100% of ISBL cost. The model uses 40% of ISBL as the default screening assumption

OSBL (% of ISBL Capital Cost):

EPCM (% of ISBL+OSBL Capital Cost)
Engineering, Procurement and Construction Management (EPCM) costs vary with project size, complexity and contracting strategy; the model uses 15% of combined ISBL + OSBL cost as the default screening assumption

EPC (% of ISBL+OSBL Capital Cost):

Owners' Cost (% of ISBL+OSBL+EPC Capital Cost)
Owners' costs include project-specific costs incurred by the owner outside the ISBL, OSBL and EPCM scope. The model uses 10% of combined ISBL + OSBL + EPC cost as the default screening assumption; actual requirements depend on project structure, ownership arrangements and scope allocation.

Owners' Cost (% of ISBL+OSBL+EPC Capital Cost):

Coal Handling Plant Scaling Exponent
Capital cost exponent, or capital cost scaling factor, is commonly known as the Six-Tenths Rule. It is used to estimate the capital cost of a new plant or piece of equipment from the known cost and capacity of a different-sized unit, taking into account economies of scale.
For most process equipment and industrial plants, scaling exponents generally fall in the range of 0.4–0.8, meaning that capital cost increases less than proportionately as plant capacity increases.
Our default scaling factor is 0.6 for all plant and equipment categories. This is a widely used general-purpose assumption and is the basis for the commonly used term “Six-Tenths Rule.”

Coal Handling Plant Scaling Exponent:

AGR Plant Scaling Exponent (Default = 0.6)

AGR Plant Scaling Exponent:

WGS Plant Scaling Exponent (Default = 0.6)

AGR Plant Scaling Exponent:

Methanol Plant Scaling Exponent (Default = 0.6)

Methanol Plant Scaling Exponent:

Chloromethanes Plant Scaling Exponent (Default = 0.6)

Chloromethanes Plant Scaling Exponent:

Electricity Price
Default assumption is US$70/MWh. Users should modify this to reflect the applicable project-specific electricity cost or power sourcing arrangement

Electricity:

Methanol Plant Power Consumption
Default assumption is 150 kWh per tonne of Methanol produced. Actual consumption should be assessed against the selected technology and project configuration

Methanol Unit Power Consumption:

Methanol Catalyst Consumption
Default assumption is US$5/t of Methanol. Actual catalyst consumption and replacement cost should be assessed with the selected technology/licensor.

Methanol Catalyst Consumption:

Chloromethanes Plant Power Consumption
Default assumption is 200 kWh per tonne of Chloromethanes produced. Actual consumption should be assessed against the selected technology and project configuration

Chloromethanes Unit Power Consumption:

Chloromethanes Catalyst Consumption
Default assumption is US$8/t of Chloromethanes. Actual catalyst consumption and replacement cost should be assessed with the selected technology/licensor.

Chloromethanes Catalyst Consumption:

Plant utilization in first year of operation
Year 1 utilization is assumed at 80%, increasing to 90% in Year 2 and 100% under normal operating conditions from Year 3 onward. These assumptions are considered reasonable ramp-up assumptions in conjunction with the separately specified equipment availability

Year 1 Utilization (%):

Plant utilization in second year of operation
Year 1 utilization is assumed at 80%, increasing to 90% in Year 2 and 100% under normal operating conditions from Year 3 onward. These assumptions are considered reasonable ramp-up assumptions in conjunction with the separately specified equipment availability

Year 2 Utilization (%):

Plant Normal utilization
The model assumes 100% utilization from the third operating year onward, subject to the separately specified availability assumptions. Given the default 75% individual gasifier availability, the 80% / 90% / 100% utilization profile is intended as a ramp-up and operating-utilization assumption and is not intended to imply 100% physical equipment availability

Normal Utilization (%):

Project construction period
Integrated gasification and downstream chemical projects are technically complex and involve multiple major process units and interfaces. The model uses 4 years as the default construction period, while allowing users to test construction periods from 2 to 7 years. The appropriate period should ultimately be established from the project execution schedule, technology/licensor requirements and EPC strategy

Construction Period (Years):

Total operating life of the project.
The total operating life assumed for the project after commercial operation. The model uses 25 years as the default for project financial evaluation

Plant Life (Years):

Depreciation (in Years)
The period over which the depreciable project investment is depreciated for financial modelling purposes. The model uses 20 years as the default.

Depreciation (Years):

Annual fixed operating cost.
Represents recurring fixed operating and maintenance costs that do not vary directly with production volume. The model assumes 2.5% of applicable project CAPEX per year as the default

Plant Fixed O&M (% of CAPEX):

Project discount rate
The discount rate used to calculate the present value of project cash flows and Project NPV. The model uses 10% as the default screening assumption. The appropriate rate should reflect the project's risk profile, financing structure, currency and investor return requirements and should be assessed by the Client for detailed investment evaluation.

Discount Rate (%):

Equity discount rate
The discount rate used exclusively to calculate the present value of post-tax equity cash flows and Equity NPV. This represents the shareholders' required rate of return. The model uses 14% as the default screening assumption, while the Project Discount Rate continues to be used for Project NPV. Clients may modify this assumption to reflect project-specific investor hurdle rates.

Equity Discount Rate (%):

Debt portion of project financing
The percentage of project cost assumed to be financed through debt. The model uses 70% debt financing as the default, with the balance funded through equity

Debt (%):

Interest rate on US Dollar debt
The annual interest rate assumed on US Dollar-denominated project debt. The default assumption is 7%.

US Dollar Debt Interest Rate (%):

Rupee debt interest rate spread over US Dollar debt
The additional interest rate assumed for Rupee-denominated debt relative to the US Dollar debt rate. The default spread is 3 percentage points.

Rupee Debt Interest Rate Spread (%):

Working Capital as a percentage of Sales
The default assumption is 10%.

Working Capital as a % of Sales:

Interest rate on Working Capital
The annual interest rate assumed on Working Capital. The default assumption is 6%.

Working Capital Interest Rate (%):

Rupee / US Dollar Exchange Rate for 1st Year
The exchange rate assumed for Project Year 1, which is the first year of the construction period. The model uses ₹95/US$ as the default assumption.

Rupee / US Dollar Exchange Rate for 1st Year:

Annual Rupee Depreciation
The assumed annual depreciation of the Rupee against the US Dollar over the project period. The model uses 3% per year as the default assumption, applied from the Year 1 exchange-rate base.

Annual Rupee Depreciation:

Tenor of debt repayment
The period over which project debt principal is repaid following commercial operation. The model assumes a 12-year repayment tenor as the default

Debt Tenor (Years):

Corporate income tax rate
The corporate income tax rate applied to taxable project/equity cash flows in the financial model. The default assumption is 25%.
The model is intended for screening-level financial evaluation and does not optimise project-specific tax depreciation schedules, tax holidays, credits or other tax incentives. Clients should incorporate applicable tax provisions and project-specific incentives during detailed financial evaluation

Tax Rate (%):

Sustaining Capital (pct of Project Cost)
Annual capital expenditure assumed to maintain the plant and replace or refurbish equipment over its operating life. The model assumes 1.5% of project cost per year as the default

Sustaining Capital (%):