Are ‘sustainable’ aviation fuels aspirational and speculative?

At the centre of Qantas’ sustainability strategy – and as with many airlines – is the rapid adoption of ‘sustainable aviation fuels’ (SAFs), or their more accurate names, alternative fuels or biofuels. 

What are biofuels?

There are two types of non-fossil aviation fuels: synthetic fuels and biofuels. Synthetic fuels, also known as e-fuels, can be produced using electricity and CO2, which still involves burning fossil fuels. Biofuels are derived from organic materials such as waste, surplus crops and used cooking oil. Crop-based biofuels are generally not considered sustainable due to the significant environmental impacts, such as biodiversity loss and deforestation.(1) Waste-based biofuels may be a cleaner alternative to traditional fossil fuels. 

What’s the problem?

Qantas’ net zero strategy relies heavily on biofuels/SAFs, on its ‘Sustainable Aviation Fuel’ webpage, Qantas describes the technology as ‘central to achieving our interim targets and net zero by 2050 goal’ and ‘the only viable technology/decarbonisation option available’ for reducing emissions from long-haul routes, which constitute the majority of Qantas’ carbon footprint.(2)  

However, there are currently many limitations that prevent biofuels from being implemented at a commercial scale or a feasible net-zero measure. In its 2019 update on Global Environmental Trends, the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) concluded that ‘significant uncertainties exist in predicting the contribution of sustainable aviation fuels in the future’. (3)

The key limitations of SAFs are:

1. Limited emissions reduction potential: While SAFs can reduce greenhouse gas emissions compared to traditional fossil fuels, they may not be able to fully decarbonise the aviation sector. Notably, SAFs do not eliminate the non-CO2 aviation byproducts (such as NOx and contrail cirrus) which contribute to approximately two thirds of the aviation industries global warming yield.(4) The decarbonisation potential of SAFs is further limited by the fact they cannot be used ‘neat’, but only in a blend with existing jet diesel.

2. Limited availability: Currently, SAFs are not widely available, making it difficult for airlines to incorporate them into their operations on a large scale. This limitation can be observed in Qantas' disclosure that ‘current SAF use represents approximately 0.2 per cent of our total fuel consumption’ and its concession that carbon offsets will be relied upon until SAF becomes more readily available.(5) 
   For example, while Qantas claims it will secure access to up to 500 million litres of SAF annually from 2028 through deals with Airbus and Boeing, this is contingent on partnerships with those companies on SAF projects.(6) In addition, the production of second-generation biofuel from used cooking oil and other waste is severely constrained by the availability of waste which will likely be needed for other competing purposes, such as decarbonising the power, heating, agriculture and road transport sectors.(7)

3. High cost: SAFs are often more expensive than traditional fossil fuels, with ICAO stating they are typically 3-5x more expensive than traditional jet fuel.(8) Which can be a barrier for airlines looking to switch to more sustainable options.

4. Infrastructure challenges: The infrastructure needed to produce, distribute, and use SAFs is not yet fully developed, which can make it difficult for airlines to access these fuels at a commercial scale. Due to these limitations, Qantas only purchases SAF for delivery to London Heathrow Airport and California (Los Angeles and San Francisco).(9)

5. Compatibility issues: Some types of SAFs may not be compatible with existing aircraft or airport infrastructure, which can limit their use.

In best case scenario modelling, whereby 100% of international aviation jet fuel demand was met with SAFs in 2050, ICAO determined that only a corresponding 56% reduction in CO2 emissions would be achieved.(10) In order to achieve this modelled scenario, the ICAO reasoned that ‘extremely large capital investments’ and ‘substantial policy support’ would be required to an extent ‘significantly exceed[ing] historical precedent for other fuels, such as ethanol and biodiesel for road transportation’. 

Qantas' SAF webpage highlights collaboration on various initiatives to accelerate the development of a SAF industry in Australia, including a $400 million Climate Fund and SAF Coalition Program.(11) However, the ICAO modelling shows that Qantas can only expect modest emissions reductions from its target of 60% SAF in its fuel mix by 2050. Qantas’ heavy reliance on SAFs to achieve its emissions reduction targets has a significant likelihood of misleading consumers given the current aspirational state of SAF development and viability, which Qantas does not draw sufficient attention to. 

The District Court Amsterdam found in the KLM decision that while the emissions reduction potential of SAF and other measures may improve in the future, 'given all the uncertain factors in that area, it [did] not befit KLM to paint the rosy picture it did' about achieving net zero.(12)

—————————————————————

Recently, we requested the ACCC to investigate Qantas’ potentially misleading and deceptive net zero and sustainability claims - including the company’s marketing of SAFs.

References:

1. Stay Grounded, ‘Biofuels Factsheet’ (accessed 16 September 2024)

2. Qantas, ‘Sustainable Aviation Fuel’ (accessed 16 September 2024)

3. ICAO, ‘Trends in Emissions that Affect Climate Change’ (accessed 16 September 2024)

4. D.S. Lee et al, ‘The contribution of global aviation to anthropogenic climate forcing for 2000 to 2018’ (2021) 244 Atmospheric Environment 2

5. Qantas, ‘Carbon offsets’ (accessed 16 September 2024)

6. Qantas, ‘Sustainable Aviation Fuel’ (accessed 16 September 2024)

7. Stay Grounded, ‘Biofuels Factsheet’ (accessed 16 September 2024)

8. IATA, ‘Net Zero 2050: Sustainable Aviation Fuels Factsheet’ (accessed 16 September 2024)

9. Qantas, ‘Sustainable Aviation Fuel’ (accessed 16 September 2024)

10. ICAO, ‘Trends in Emissions that Affect Climate Change’ (accessed 16 September 2024)

11. Qantas, ‘Sustainable Aviation Fuel’ (accessed 16 September 2024).

12. Client Earth, ‘Judgment in greenwashing lawsuit against KLM (unofficial English translation)’ (20 March 2024)