Syngas and carbon monoxide are related but distinct industrial feedstocks. Carbon monoxide (CO) is a single compound, one carbon atom bonded to one oxygen atom, while syngas is a mixture, primarily composed of carbon monoxide and hydrogen in varying ratios. The right choice between them depends entirely on the downstream chemistry a facility needs to run.

Both feedstocks can be produced from CO₂-rich industrial off-gases through electrified conversion processes, making them central to the shift away from fossil-based inputs. The sections below address the most common technical questions procurement engineers, sustainability directors, and plant operators ask when evaluating these two feedstock pathways.

What industries use carbon monoxide as a feedstock?

Carbon monoxide is a critical feedstock in several heavy industries, most notably chemicals, steelmaking, and synthetic fuel production. As a pure compound rather than a mixture, CO offers precise chemical reactivity that makes it indispensable for specific synthesis routes where hydrogen presence would be counterproductive or require additional separation steps.

The chemical industry is the largest consumer of carbon monoxide feedstock. CO is a key building block in the production of acetic acid via the carbonylation of methanol, as well as in the manufacture of polycarbonates, isocyanates, and formic acid. These are high-volume base chemicals that underpin plastics, coatings, and pharmaceuticals, sectors where feedstock purity and consistency directly affect product quality.

In steelmaking, CO plays a dual role. It functions as a reducing agent in blast furnaces, where it strips oxygen from iron ore to produce metallic iron. Steel producers operating blast furnaces and direct reduction plants generate large quantities of CO₂-rich process gases, gases that can be recycled back into CO feedstock rather than vented. This creates a circular carbon loop within the steelmaking process itself, reducing both emissions and fossil input dependency. D-CRBN’s plasma conversion technology was first validated industrially at a steel plant for precisely this application.

Synthetic fuel producers also draw on CO as a feedstock component, particularly in Fischer-Tropsch synthesis, where it reacts with hydrogen to produce liquid hydrocarbons. And for industrial operators focused on supply chain resilience, on-site electrified CO production offers a way to decouple from geopolitically exposed fossil supply chains.

What is syngas made of, and how does its composition vary?

Syngas is a mixture of carbon monoxide and hydrogen, with the ratio between these two components varying depending on the production method and the feedstock used. A syngas derived from CO₂ and methane will have a different CO-to-H₂ ratio than one produced from coal gasification or biomass, and that ratio determines which downstream processes the syngas can efficiently feed.

The syngas composition is typically described by its H₂/CO ratio. For Fischer-Tropsch fuel synthesis, a ratio of around 2:1 (H₂ to CO) is generally preferred. For methanol synthesis, ratios closer to 2.1:1 are common. For direct reduction of iron ore, syngas with a higher CO content may be more suitable. This variability is a feature, not a limitation, it means syngas can be tuned to match specific industrial requirements.

When CO₂ and methane are co-fed into a plasma reactor, the process known as dry reforming of methane produces syngas through the reaction CO₂ + CH₄ → 2CO + 2H₂. This route avoids the need for external hydrogen supply, which is a significant cost and infrastructure advantage. D-CRBN’s Plasma ARC™ technology enables exactly this pathway, converting CO₂-rich off-gases and methane into syngas feedstock without fossil-based inputs or separately sourced hydrogen.

Small quantities of other gases, including unreacted CO₂, water vapor, or trace hydrocarbons, may also be present depending on conversion efficiency and process conditions. At D-CRBN’s pilot scale, a 90.5% single-pass CO₂ conversion rate minimizes these residuals, producing a cleaner output stream than many conventional reforming routes.

Which feedstock is better for producing synthetic fuels?

Syngas is generally the preferred feedstock for synthetic fuel production. The reason is straightforward: most synthetic fuel pathways, including Fischer-Tropsch synthesis and methanol-to-fuels routes, require both carbon monoxide and hydrogen as co-reactants. Syngas provides both in a single stream, eliminating the need to source and blend hydrogen separately.

Pure CO feedstock can be used in fuel synthesis, but it typically requires the addition of hydrogen before entering the reactor, adding cost, infrastructure, and supply chain complexity. Syngas sidesteps this by delivering the necessary H₂/CO ratio directly from the conversion process. For e-fuel producers targeting drop-in liquid fuels for aviation, shipping, or road transport, syngas derived from CO₂ and methane represents a cleaner and more integrated production pathway.

That said, the calculus shifts depending on the specific fuel target. For some chemical intermediates that are precursors to fuels, such as methanol or dimethyl ether, the CO/H₂ balance matters precisely, and a tunable syngas source is more valuable than either pure CO or pure H₂ alone. Facilities evaluating their feedstock strategy for synthetic fuel production should assess their specific synthesis route before committing to either pathway.

For industrial operators weighing these options, electrifying feedstock production through plasma-based CO₂ conversion offers the flexibility to produce either CO or syngas from the same core technology platform, adapting output to match downstream demand without rebuilding infrastructure.

Can syngas and carbon monoxide be produced from the same process?

Yes. Both syngas and carbon monoxide can be produced using the same underlying plasma conversion technology, with the output determined by the feedstock inputs and process configuration. When CO₂ alone is the input, the primary product is carbon monoxide. When CO₂ and methane are co-fed, the reaction produces syngas, a mixture of CO and H₂.

This flexibility is one of the most commercially significant characteristics of plasma-based CO₂ recycling. A single modular system can be configured to deliver either CO feedstock or syngas feedstock depending on what the downstream process requires, without requiring a fundamentally different reactor design. The same Plasma ARC™ platform that D-CRBN deploys for CO production can be adapted for syngas output by adjusting the input gas composition.

This matters for industrial operators who may need to switch between feedstock types as market conditions change, or who want to serve multiple internal process streams from a single on-site production unit. It also reduces capital risk: rather than investing in separate dedicated systems for CO and syngas, a facility can deploy one scalable platform and configure it to match evolving production needs.

The modular architecture of D-CRBN’s systems, designed for plug-and-play integration with existing industrial infrastructure, supports this flexibility at scale. Systems can be deployed below 100 ktpa for distributed sites or above 100 ktpa for large industrial operations, with the same core technology underpinning both configurations. Learn more about the Plasma ARC™ platform and how it handles both conversion pathways.

How do carbon regulations affect the choice between syngas and CO?

Carbon regulations, particularly the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS), directly influence feedstock economics by putting a price on CO₂ emissions. Facilities that produce CO or syngas from recycled CO₂ rather than fossil-based processes can reduce their reportable emissions, lowering their ETS cost exposure. This makes the CO₂ recycling feedstock route increasingly cost-competitive as carbon prices rise.

The regulatory effect is not identical for syngas and CO, because the two feedstocks serve different downstream applications that carry different carbon intensities. For synthetic fuel producers, regulatory frameworks such as the EU’s ReFuelEU Aviation regulation and the FuelEU Maritime regulation are creating demand for low-carbon fuels with verifiable carbon footprints. Syngas derived from captured CO₂ and renewable electricity can qualify as a sustainable feedstock under these frameworks, opening access to premium markets that fossil-derived syngas cannot reach.

For chemical producers using CO feedstock, the ETS creates a more direct financial incentive. Every tonne of CO₂ converted into CO on-site rather than emitted is a tonne that does not require a carbon allowance. At current and projected ETS price levels, this translates into a meaningful cost reduction per unit of feedstock produced, shifting the economic comparison between fossil-derived and electrified CO in favor of the latter.

There is also a supply security dimension that regulations are beginning to formalize. European industrial policy is increasingly linking carbon compliance with feedstock origin, creating regulatory tailwinds for on-site, electrified production over imported fossil inputs. Facilities that establish electrified CO or syngas production now are better positioned to meet tightening requirements without disruptive retrofits later.

For industrial decision-makers ready to evaluate how electrified feedstock production fits their specific regulatory and operational context, speaking with D-CRBN’s team is a practical starting point. The company’s modular systems are designed to integrate directly into existing assets, no write-offs, no major infrastructure overhaul, making the transition from fossil-dependent to circular carbon operations a commercially viable step rather than a distant aspiration. Explore the full range of CO and syngas production options to understand which pathway aligns with your production requirements.

Related Articles

• What is a plasma reactor and how is it used for CO2 conversion?
• What is syngas and how is it produced from CO2?
• What is the CAPEX advantage of plasma CO2 conversion over competing technologies?
• How does plasma technology work at industrial scale?
• How does CO2 plasma conversion compare to steam methane reforming?