https://www.patsnap.com/resources/blog/rd-blog/methanol-to-olefins-and-chemicals-patent-landscape/ · Patsnap · data cut-off 2026-07-31 · downloaded from the live page
Patent Landscape · Efuels & Methanol
Methanol to olefins and chemicals patents: mapping the fluidized-bed and zeolite catalyst claims
  • 35.1% concentration. The top five assignees combined hold 5,526 of 15,742 records in scope — filing here is not evenly spread.
  • 2017 was the peak filing year at 572 records and 2021→2024 filings fell 26%, from 307 to 226 — though 2025-26 counts are still filling in as publication catches up.
  • C07C and B01J classes dominate, at 54.6% and 50.7% of records respectively, while separation processes and coke-handling claims sit well under 5%.
Get a prior-art report on your approach
15.7K
Published Records
35%
Top-5 Share of All Records
-26%
Filing Growth 2021→2024
US
Leading Jurisdiction

Filing growth compares 2021 (307 records) with 2024 (226) — a three-year span. 2024 is the most recent year we treat as complete: publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, so 2025 onwards are still filling in and any growth rate that ends there would understate the field. Top-5 share is the combined record count of the five largest assignees divided by all 15,742 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.

Published byPatsnap Research··6 min readSourced from Patsnap Eureka
Overview

What this landscape covers

This dataset tracks patent activity at the intersection of methanol-to-olefins (MTO) and methanol-to-gasoline (MTG) conversion routes, built around zeolite catalyst chemistry and the operational problems that determine whether a plant runs economically: coke deposition, catalyst regeneration, fluidized-bed heat removal, and the propylene-to-ethylene ratio a given process delivers. It spans 15,742 published records filed between 2015 and mid-2026.

The search logic pairs core conversion-route terms with the operational and reactor-engineering language that separates a lab-scale zeolite claim from a commercially defensible process claim. That combination is deliberate: a catalyst composition claim without a fluidized-bed or regeneration limitation is a different, much larger prior-art space than the one mapped here.

Filing activity and technology composition, 2015-2026
  1. 1MOBIL OIL CORP1,753
  2. 2EXXONMOBIL CHEMICAL PATENTS INC1,626
  3. 3CELANESE INTERNATIONAL CORP788
  4. 4UOP LLC774
  5. 5EXXONMOBIL TECHNOLOGY & ENGINEERING CO585
  6. 6SHELL INTERNATIONALE RESEARCH MAATSCHAPPIJ BV451
  7. 7CHEVRON USA INC393
  8. 8SHELL OIL CO346
  9. 9FINA TECH INC316
  10. 10SAUDI ARABIAN OIL CO292
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee ranking and totals. Derived from a Patsnap search on Methanol to Olefins and Chemicals covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP

Let an AI agent run this analysis on your own technology

Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.

10,000 free credits to start
The numbers

Filing trend and technology composition

Two views of the same 15,742-record corpus: how filing activity has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses carry the claim density.

Filings peaked in 2017, then eased

Annual filings ran as high as 572 in 2017, the peak year in the dataset. Between 2021 and 2024 — the most recent span with reliable, largely-published figures — filings dropped 26%, from 307 to 226. Counts for 2025 and 2026 are shown but should be read as partial: publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, so recent-year totals will rise as more records surface.

Filings peaked in 2017, then eased0150300450600572201720182019202020212022202320242025212026Most recent year is partial — publication lag means later filings are not yet visible.

Claim density sits in three subclasses

C07C (acyclic and carbocyclic compounds) appears on 54.6% of records and B01J (catalytic processes) on 50.7%, with C10G (hydrocarbon oil refining) close behind at 45.9% — the three subclasses a filer must search first. Everything else, including separation processes (B01D, 3.6%) and coke/destructive distillation (C10B, 3.0%), is comparatively thin, which is where narrower claims are more likely to clear.

Claim density sits in three subclassesC07C · Acyclic & carbocyclic compounds8,60154.6%B01J · Chemical/physical processes & …7,97450.7%C10G · Hydrocarbon oils & refining7,23245.9%C07B · General organic chemistry meth…1,5399.8%C01B · Non-metallic elements & inorga…1,2548.0%C10L · Fuels & firelighters7734.9%B01D · Separation processes (filtrati…5743.6%C10B · Coke & destructive distillation4733.0%Other2,75617.5%

Shares are the percentage of the 15,742 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.

Source: Patsnap Eureka. Filing trend and technology composition. Derived from a Patsnap search on Methanol to Olefins and Chemicals covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.

Go deeper on Methanol to Olefins and Chemicals with Eureka

This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about methanol to olefins and chemicals and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.

Try Eureka
Key Patents

The documents shaping this space

Representative recent filing
US12157710B22024-12-03

US12157710B2 — Process of converting methanol in a fluidized bed reactor

CHINA PETROLEUM & CHEMICAL CORPORATION

Filed by China Petroleum & Chemical Corporation and published December 2024, this patent claims a fluidized-bed methanol-to-olefins process that controls temperature differences within specific concentration bands across separate dilute-phase and dense-phase zones of the reactor, targeting tighter heat management during methanol conversion to ethylene and propylene.Reactor-zone temperature control, not catalyst composition, is the claim's core limitation.

View full record
Most-cited records in scope
#Publication no.Patent titleCitations
1US6166282AFast-fluidized bed reactor for MTO process1,013
2US4556477AHighly siliceous porous crystalline material ZSM-22 and its use in catalytic dewaxing of petroleum stocks549
3US20100030002A1Ethylene production from acetic acid utilizing dual reaction zone process432
4US3751504AVapor-phase alkylation in presence of crystalline aluminosilicate catalyst with separate transalkylation427
5US20100197485A1Catalysts for making ethanol from acetic acid379
6US5053373AZeolite SSZ-32374
7US6538169B1FCC process with improved yield of light olefins350
8US5510306AProcess for isomerizing linear olefins to isoolefins330
9US4300009AConversion of biological material to liquid fuels309
10US6162415ASynthesis of SAPO-44287

Citation counts accumulate over time, so older filings such as the 1985 ZSM-22 patent naturally lead — treat this as a map of influence, not of current commercial relevance.

Each row carries its publication number; clicking a row searches Eureka by that number.

Source: Patsnap Eureka. Citation counts and representative records. Derived from a Patsnap search on Methanol to Olefins and Chemicals covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Run it yourself

Put your own technology through the same analysis


  
Where to run it
Fastest

Eureka on the web

When you want the answer in the next five minutes.

The agent works the prompt against patents and technical literature, citing every source.

Run your analysis now →
For builders

MCP server & REST API

When it has to run inside your own pipeline.

Patent search, landscape analysis and assignee resolution as MCP tools. Drop them into any agent framework, or call REST directly.

Browse MCP servers →
Insights

What the data tells a filer

Three read-outs from the numbers above, framed for a filing or freedom-to-operate decision rather than as trivia.

Concentration
35.1% of 15,742 records
held by the top five assignees

The top of the field is dense

With the top five assignees combined controlling over a third of all records, and the top ten reaching 46.5%, new entrants working on core zeolite-catalyst or fluidized-bed claims are filing into occupied territory rather than open ground.

Source: assignee ranking, 100 companies
Trend
-26%, 2021 to 2024
filings across the most recent complete years

Momentum has cooled from the 2017 peak

Filing volume peaked at 572 records in 2017 and has since declined through the most recent complete filing years. That decline should not be read as the field closing — it more likely reflects a maturing set of core claims rather than falling commercial interest in MTO/MTG routes.

2025-26 figures are still filling in due to publication lag
Composition
3.0% of records
carry C10B coke/destructive-distillation classification

Coke handling is comparatively under-claimed

Despite coke deposition being a named search term, only 473 records — 3.0% of the corpus — sit in the C10B subclass, versus over half the corpus in core conversion-chemistry classes. That gap is a candidate area for narrower process claims.

IPC class shares overlap; a record can carry several
Eureka AI Agent
Looking for what nobody has claimed yet?

Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to methanol to olefins and chemicals, with the prior art for and against each one.

Find the white space →
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Co-assignee relationships and derived observations. Derived from a Patsnap search on Methanol to Olefins and Chemicals covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Players

Who holds the claim space

The ranked leaders account for a large share of filings, but momentum in the most recent year has slowed even among the largest historical filers — a signal that the core claim territory is largely staked out.

Leader
1,753 records
held by the top-ranked assignee

One filer sits well ahead of the field

The leading assignee's count is roughly three times the fifth-place total of 585, and more than five times tenth place at 292 — a steep drop-off rather than a gradual one.

Source: assignee ranking, 100 companies
Momentum
-67% to -75% YoY
recent-year filing change among legacy leaders

Historical leaders are filing less, not more

Assignees with large historical portfolios show sharply reduced or zero filings in the latest year — a pattern consistent with a field where core process claims were staked years ago and current activity is incremental.

Recent-year counts are partial due to publication lag
Collaboration
98 co-filings
strongest documented co-assignee pair

Some portfolios were built through joint filing

The strongest co-assignee pair in the dataset spans dozens of shared filings, pointing to sustained joint development programmes rather than one-off collaborations, particularly around catalyst and reactor engineering claims.

Source: co-assignee pair analysis, 10 pairs
🔍
Under-claimed branches worth checking first
Sub-areas where filing density is comparatively thin relative to the core conversion-chemistry classes.
Dense-phase/dilute-phase temperature zoningCoke-selective regeneration cyclesFluidized-bed heat-removal geometryPropylene:ethylene ratio tuning via catalyst shape selectivityPost-reaction separation train integration
Rank all filers by momentum →
Recent-year filing momentum
AssigneeRecent yearYoY
ExxonMobil Technology and Engineering Company2-67%
UOP LLC1-75%
Mobil Oil Corporation0—
ExxonMobil Chemical Patents Inc.0—
Celanese International Corporation0—
Shell Internationale Research Maatschappij B.V.0—
Chevron U.S.A. Inc.0-100%
Fina Technology, Inc.0—
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee-level momentum. Derived from a Patsnap search on Methanol to Olefins and Chemicals covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
What's next

Where to take this analysis

The landscape numbers point to where claim density sits and where it doesn't; the next step is testing a specific claim or design-around against the underlying records.

Check freedom-to-operate on a specific reactor design

Run a targeted search against the fluidized-bed and heat-removal claims held by the leading assignees before committing engineering resources to a reactor configuration.

Explore in Eureka

Track the under-claimed branches over time

Coke-handling and separation-process claims are comparatively thin today; monitoring filing activity there over the next few publication cycles will show whether that gap is closing.

Set up monitoring in Eureka
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Forward-looking reading of the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Methanol to Olefins and Chemicals covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
FAQ

Common questions about methanol-to-olefins patents

Answers are grounded in the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Methanol to Olefins and Chemicals covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP

Research Methanol to Olefins and Chemicals in depth with Eureka

Go past this page: query the whole methanol to olefins and chemicals corpus yourself, in your own scope.
Every answer comes back with patent numbers you can open.

Try Eureka

Disclaimer. This page is generated from Patsnap Eureka data drawn from a limited snapshot of global patent and scientific-literature records, and is provided for general information and reference only.

Patent data carries inherent limitations: recent filings (typically the most recent 18–24 months) are under-counted due to standard publication lag; counts may be reported at either a patent-family or a patent-record basis and are not always directly comparable; classification, applicant-name, and citation data may contain errors, duplicates, or omissions; and the underlying search query defines and constrains the scope shown. As a result, the analysis may be incomplete or inaccurate and may not reflect the full technology landscape.

Nothing on this page constitutes an exhaustive prior-art, novelty, freedom-to-operate, or validity search, nor does it constitute legal, financial, investment, or professional advice, and it should not be relied upon as such. Any patent, commercial, or strategic decision should be verified independently and reviewed with qualified patent, legal, and domain professionals. Patsnap makes no warranties, express or implied, as to the accuracy, completeness, or fitness for any particular purpose of the information presented.

Machine translation. Assignee and organisation names originally recorded in Chinese, Japanese or Korean have been rendered into English by an AI translation step so that the tables stay readable. These renderings are best-effort and may not match a company's registered English name; the original name is what the underlying patent record carries, and it is what any Eureka query launched from this page uses.

Help us improve

Something wrong, out of date, or missing on this page? Tell us and it goes straight to the team that maintains it.