The industry association of the aviation industry promises climate-neutral flying by 2050. The aviation fuel SAF is presented as a solution. But experts are skeptical.
According to estimates, aviation accounts for around 2.5 percent of global CO2 emissions each year. How can climate-neutral flying succeed? Thomas Barwick/Getty Images
Summer time, travel time: If it is financially possible, a vacation to soak up the sun on distant beaches or a city trip is tempting. However, travelers are increasingly plagued by shame about flying – the guilty conscience of causing climate-damaging greenhouse gases. Others are looked at askance by children, friends and co-workers.
Doesn’t have to be, says the Airline Association (Iata). You can fly climate-neutral, more every year, and by 2050 at the latest completely. But is that realistic? Experts are skeptical. Commenting on the sustainable aviation fuel SAF, which Iata is hailing as a core element of its plan for climate neutrality, the strategy director of the British aviation environmental association AEF, Cait Hewitt, says: “Burning SAF produces just as much CO2 as burning kerosene.”
SAF is derived from vegetable oils or fish waste
The industry is under pressure. According to estimates, aviation accounts for around 2.5 percent of global CO2 emissions per year, more than Germany, which is among the ten largest CO2 emitters in the world. In addition to more efficient engines and compensatory measures, Iata therefore relies on SAF (Sustainable Aviation Fuel). This means everything that is not produced from fossil raw materials and is sustainable. E-fuels, i.e. completely synthetic kerosene with wind or solar power as the starting energy, have so far only been produced on a laboratory scale.
read too
Startups like Lilium and Volocopter want to shape the future of flying – who’s ahead?
Chip fat, slaughterhouse and fish waste, vegetable oils and their residues: This is what the Finnish company Neste SAF uses to make them. According to its own statements, it is the market leader and has a production capacity of around one million tons of SAF per year and is still expanding. Pulp and household waste are also possible sources for SAF. According to Neste, its SAF could save up to 80 percent of emissions compared to kerosene when flying with 100 percent SAF. However, this is not possible to this day.
Iata claims that plants, for example, absorb CO2 from the atmosphere as a starting material when growing. Only this is released back into the atmosphere when it is burned in the aircraft – SAF is therefore climate-neutral over its entire life cycle.
The alternative: synthetic kerosene
If SAF is obtained from waste instead of plants, the calculation is more complicated because it contains a lot of climate-damaging material such as plastic, says Hewitt. “If you left the material in landfills, there would be fewer emissions.” Of course, recycling waste makes sense and is necessary. But the industry needs to do much more. The best would be synthetic kerosene, derived from atmospheric CO2 and green hydrogen, says Hewitt. However, it remains to be seen whether there are enough renewable energies available for this and whether this can be produced at a price that is less than exorbitant. “We need more honesty and the will of the industry to accept that, in addition to technical innovations, demand in air traffic must also be reduced,” says Hewitt.
read too
E-fuels or fuel cells: who will win the race for environmentally friendly aircraft propulsion?
In the Iata plan for climate neutrality, around 24 million tons of SAF would be needed by 2030 – and more than 400 million tons by 2050. Last year, only a hundredth of the quantity announced by 2030 was produced, she admits: 240,000 tons. Measured against the total aviation fuel, that was 0.1 percent.
EU relies on quota
Governments should use production incentives to ensure that more is produced, says Iata boss Willie Walsh. The EU relies on a quota: From 2025, kerosene suppliers will have to add more and more sustainable aviation fuel. The proportion is set to rise from two to 70 percent by 2050.
The Lufthansa Group sees itself as a SAF pioneer with operational experience since 2011. According to its own statements, the airline flew around 13,000 tons of mixed SAF last year. That was 0.2 percent of their needs. The company warns that alternative fuels from biomass or electricity are extremely scarce and currently five to ten times more expensive than fossil kerosene. Lufthansa doubts that sufficient biogenic SAF will be available in 2025 for the start of the EU admixture and also does not believe in sufficient synthetic kerosene, which should be added to the tanks from 2030. Instead of unilaterally burdening the European companies with costs, the EU should provide better incentives for the construction of the corresponding plants, agree the industry associations BDL and A4E.
Efficient engines save more CO2 than sustainable fuels
The consulting firm Bain strongly doubts that climate neutrality of global air traffic can be achieved by 2050, especially with an annual increase in traffic of three percent. It expects to produce just 135 million tons of SAF by 2050 – and only if priority is given to aviation for raw materials and green hydrogen. The airlines could at best avoid 70 percent of their emissions by 2050, the experts wrote in a study. And the effect of more efficient engines would be greater than that of sustainable fuels.
It is certain that flying with more sustainability will become more expensive. According to a study by the management consultancy PwC, the costs of adding 16 percent SAF to a long-haul flight from Frankfurt to Singapore or from Munich to New York would be around 36 euros per passenger. “Flying less far and less often are powerful actions anyone can take to slow the build-up of CO2 in the atmosphere,” says Hewitt.
kit
read too
Lilium raises another 192 million dollars – also from a well-known German investor