Figure shows the cost breakdowns of non-flexible and flexible systems. We can see that the electricity cost contributes 60% of the TAC in the non-flexible case. On the other hand, the electricity cost almost collapses to zero when the system is flexible; specifically, the flexible electrolyzer takes advantage of low or negative electricity prices and produces excess hydrogen to be used at peak hours. Using electricity with negative prices creates a revenue stream that nearly offsets electricity costs. Negative prices are associated with excess power supply in the grid (e.g., common in markets with high wind penetration); the flexible methanol process helps absorb this excess power and this service is remunerated by the grid. Our results also revealed interesting trade-offs between capital investment and operational flexibility. The annualized investment cost of the flexible unit (34 million USD) is twice that of the non-flexible unit (17 million USD); however, 66 million USD of electricity costs per year can be saved via flexibility. Similar patterns are observed in the other scenarios.