@nebulousmenace Methanol (Sabattier process) and analogues of petroleum-based hydrocarbons (via Fischer-Tropsh process, largely alkanes and alkenes) are similar in many regards. The latter however are complete drop-in replacements for petroleum fuels, being largely chemically similar (though probably with far fewer contaminants such as sulfer in bunker fuel and mercury in coal). You still have some emissions concerns: particulates, NOx (any atmospheric combustion or heating results in these), partual combustion, and carbon monoxide.
Alcohol by contrast would require substantial modifications to refining, distribution, storage, and ultimate utilisation (engines, motors, reactors, etc.) infrastructure, and separate development of those. In terms of approach paths, petrol-analogue synfuels seem a more tractable transition path, and the actual synthesis challenges are largely similar for both.
A key benefit of both methanol and hydrocarbon synfuels is that the requisite carbon may be sourced from environmental stores, most notably seawater. I'd read with much excitement some US Naval Research Lab papers that came out in the mid-2010s which turn out to have a ~80 year legacy going back to German and South African coal-to-oil conversion (both operated on an industrial scale), pilot projects in the US (which proved ... difficult), both dating to around WWII (Germany ran its project during the war, South Africa from the 1950s or 1960s to present AFAIK). And to proposals at the US energy labs dating to the 1960s for variously-powered (nuclear, renewable energy) synfuel projects and initiatives, as well as research at M.I.T.
Given applications where hydrocarbons are difficult to replace (marine, air, some rail, and remote/off-grid applications), I see some probably future development, and potentially in the 10--20% of present hydrocarbon usage. Also unlike virtually all other hydrocarbon analogues (mostly biofuels), this one pencils out as at least not obviously prohibitive in terms of resource utilisation required for even modest levels of replacement.
By contrast, a biofuel prospect described by Boeing as the best they'd seen would have required land area equivalent to much of the Western Plains states just to provide current aviation fuel requirements, again being a small fraction of total US hydrocarbon usage. #HANPP and the #PhytosyntheticCeiling, that is, how much total plant growth (and carbon fixation) there is on Earth, and how much of that is already claimed by humans, put some strong limits to any biofuel proposals. We can make biofuels, but either far less per capita than today's petroleum consumption, or for far fewer people. Neither prospect seems to be on mainstream planning trajectories. Though of course plans and reality are often at odds...
@ChrisMayLA6
Paul Wermer, CC BY-NC-SA 4.0
Doc Edward Morbius ⭕