Below are links to stories about aviation biofuels.
Energy Secretary Amber Rudd admits misleading Parliament about missing 25% green energy undershoot
A letter from Energy Secretary Amber Rudd leaked to The Ecologist shows that she misled Parliament by promising the UK was 'on course' to deliver on its renewable energy targets (15% of final energy consumption from renewables by 2020) - when in fact there is a delivery shortfall in 2020 of almost 25%. Her plan to fill the gap relies on more biofuels, buying in green power and 'credits' from abroad - everything but wind and solar. She says: "The trajectory currently leads to a shortfall against the target in 2020 of around 50 TWh or 3.5% points in our internal central forecasts (which are not public). Publicly we are clear that the UK continues to make progress to meet the target." However, she has told the House of Commons that the UK is still meeting renewables targets. This puts the UK at risk of legal action taken in the UK, and fines imposed by the European Court of Justice. There could be a full Parliamentary investigation. She also has a problem with hoping that by 2020 biofuels will make up 10% of transport fuels, due to conflicts of deforestation and conflict with land for agriculture. [If the UK is not able to meet its carbon targets, in its carbon budgets, it is not possible for aviation to increase its annual CO2 emissions above 37.5MtCO2. Failure of other sectors to make cuts put the weak aviation target in question.]
Solena, the company meant to be producing jet fuel from London waste for BA, goes bankrupt
In February 2010 it was announced that British Airways had teamed up with American bioenergy company Solena Group to establish “Europe's first” sustainable jet fuel plant, which was set to turn London'd domestic waste into aviation fuel. The plan was for BA to provide construction capital for a massive plant somewhere in East London. BA committed to purchasing all the jet fuel produced by the plant, around 16 million gallons a year, for the next 11 years at market competitive prices. BA had hoped that this 2% contribution to its fuel consumption - the equivalent to all its fuel use at London City airport - would give it green credibility, and it would claim it cut its carbon emissions. The timescale for the plant to be built kept slipping. Nothing has been heard of it for a long time. Now it has been announced that Solena has gone into bankruptcy in the USA. It was never clear why, if genuinely low carbon fuels could be produced from London's waste, why these should not be used for essential vehicles in London - and why they would instead become a PR exercise for an airline. British Airways and the company Velocys are listed as creditors of Solena.
Project to grow “Solaris” tobacco in South Africa for bio jet fuel earns RSB certification
Project Solaris is a project in South Africa trying to grow a variety of tobacco, to produce "bio jet fuel". It was announced in December that some 50 hectares were being grown. Oil is derived mainly from the leaves, rather than the seeds. Now the promoters of the technology, Sunchem, says they have earned the Roundtable on Sustainable Biomaterials (RSB) certification, for environmental and social sustainability, for the production of 'Solaris' tobacco in the Limpopo region of South Africa. They hope growing this tobacco will bring economic and rural development to the Limpopo province, as well as being a new regional bio jet fuel supply chain. The MD of Sunchem South Africa says developing a biofuel in South Africa’s ‘breadbasket’ has - inevitably - drawn the company into the food vs fuel debate. They hope they can persuade people that the crop will not affect food security or lead to environmental degradation. However, growing tobacco inevitably completes with food – as the crop needs water and fertiliser to grow economically. If the land is good enough to grow tobacco profitably, it is good enough to grow food. It is therefore diverting land away from food production. It also has the ILUC effect of an ever greater area of land in total to come under cultivation.
Attempts to make “sustainable” jet fuel by using waste bagasse from Brazilian sugarcane
The global aviation industry hopes for over 4% growth per year, but gains in efficiency are around 1% per year. Hence the sector's CO2 emissions will increase. Attempts continue to be made to try and locate some sustainable sources of fuel, which could genuinely cause less carbon to be produced, over its whole life-cycle. This has so far been unsuccessful. For any fuel to be commercially viable, it has to use resources or land, which competes with human food. This is in part accounted for as ILUC (Indirect Land Use Change) effects. There are new claims that jet fuel could be made using sugarcane biomass, waste bagasse, and sugarcane could be grown on "marginal land." However, sugarcane would inevitably grow better on higher quality land, with more fertiliser and more water - and if that was applied, the land could be used for food. Often land termed marginal is, in reality, used by local people. The new enthusiasm for jet fuel involves using bagasse to make oils rather than ethanol. That inevitably means depletion of soil nutrients, as the plant waste is removed and not ploughed back into the soil. The team working on the sugar fuel hope their findings would ultimately be adopted by commercial fuel producers, and they have a patent on the technology.
Lufthansa hope to partly fuel flights from Oslo airport using biokerosene for one year
Starting this year the Lufthansa Group will be partly fuelling their aircraft at Oslo airport with a bio-kerosene mixture. The group recently became the first airline group to sign this kind of contract with the Norwegian oil company, Statoil Aviation. Beginning in March 2015 and lasting for one year, Statoil will feed 2.5 million gallons of [so called] "sustainably" produced, certified biofuel into the tanks at Oslo airport. The approximately 5,000 flights the Lufthansa Group - which includes Lufthansa, Swiss, Austrian Airlines, Germanwings, and Brussels Airlines - operates from the Norwegian capital will then be flying on a biokerosene mixture. Oslo airport claims it is the world’s first large commercial airport to offer continuous provision of biofuel over a long period and to fuel aircraft with bio-kerosene directly from its hydrant system. Lufthansa hope to be able to cut carbon emissions by using a small proportion of biofuel. While the initial bio-fuel deliveries will probably come from used cooking oil, major players in the Norwegian power and forestry industries are now exploring the possibility of forest-based large-scale production of bio-fuel for aviation in a few years. There are considerable environmental problems in using wood for jet fuel.
“Sustainable Aviation” produce its “road-map” for unduly ambitious levels of jet biofuels in future
In December the UK aviation group Sustainable Aviation produced a road-map which outlines the industry’s perspective of the future potential of alternative fuels in the UK aviation sector. It has very ambitious (unrealistic?) goals for the amount of biofuels it will manage to use in coming decades, with estimates of 25 - 40% of fuel used by global aviation by 2050, but the UK government expects only 2.5%. Sustainable Aviation hopes alternative fuels will cause cuts in carbon emissions of around 15 - 24% by 2050, but other more moderate estimates expect cuts of perhaps 5% by 2050. "Sustainable Aviation" wants taxpayers' money, through the (taxpayer-owned) Green Investment bank, to fund development of low carbon fuels, so the industry can carry on growing its emissions. Huge problems remain about alternative, or biofuels. The AEF (Aviation Environment Federation) believes biofuels could only be used if they can meet these criteria: (1). Emissions must be accurately accounted for using Life Cycle Analysis, and are not zero-rated. (2). Full life-cycle analysis must demonstrate that net emissions are lower than conventional fuels. (3). Susstainability appraisals must include direct and indirect land-use change.
South African project to produce biojet fuel from “Solaris” tobacco – competing with food for land
Boeing and South African Airways plan to collaborate with SkyNRG and Sunchem SA to produce fuel from the nicotine-free Solaris variety of tobacco plant which South African Airways will test in flight. They are calling this "Project Solaris" and the first 50 hectares of Solaris have been planted in Limpopo province. The test crop will be harvested for the first time in December 2014, and the first test flights could begin next year. The aim is to provide new economic opportunities for small farmers, and fuel security, and much is being made of jobs created with new skills. Though some oil is found in tobacco seeds, the plants few, so oil is derived from the leaves. South African Airways hopes to use 20 million litres of biofuel in 2017, before reaching 400 million litres by 2023. SkyNRG hope to have 250,000 hectares planted with Solaris by 2025. When the oil price was high, there were hopes the tobacco-derived jet fuel would save money, but now the price of oil has tumbled, the scheme finances may be different. If the test farming in Limpopo is successful, the project will be expanded in South Africa and potentially to other countries. However, growing tobacco completes with food - as the crop needs water and fertiliser to grow economically. It is therefore diverting land away from food production
Oslo airport, Statoil and SkyNRG attempting to promote “sustainable” jet fuels from wood residues & wastes
Oslo airport is hoping to get regular deliveries of biofuel, so it becomes available much of the time. Avinor, which owns the airport, has signed an agreement with Statoil Aviation. The plan is for Statoil to start delivering biofuel in March 2015, with 2,5 million liters in the first year. Biofuel is only ever used as 50% of the fuel mix in any flight. Currently the only biofuel available comes from used cooking oil. However there are plans to explore the possibility of forest-based large-scale production of aviation bio-fuel. But that is still a long way off, especially for biofuel comparable in price to conventional jet kerosene, the price of which has fallen recently. Aviation biofuel proponents are keen to get both production and use up, to get the price down. Whether biomass comes from forestry work, or wood waste, it is very far from sustainable. The nutrients in wood products need to be returned to the soils in which they grew, to maintain fertility. Biofuels are not carbon neutral, as the presumption that all the carbon emitted on burning is rapidly reabsorbed by vegetation is wrong. Regrowing an equivalent sized tree, and sequestering the carbon, in reality could take decades.
US research says claims airports are a city’s “economic engine” are overstated, especially compared to other local infrastructure
An Associate Professor at the University of Illinois, Julie Cidell, has investigated some of the claims made by airports, in the US in particular, that they are important drivers of the economy. And she is not persuaded that any better than other major bits of infrastructure. Julie has looked at the 25 largest US airports, and their benefits, compared to the costs - the latter being very high for airports. Often economic benefits accrue to areas distant from the airport, so those suffering the noise, pollution and traffic congestion get little advantage, but huge disadvantage. She also finds that airports tend to have other economic activity around them, but that is not necessarily connected directly to the airport. Correlation and causation are different. Often the jobs in the vicinity of an airport are due to nearby industry, and good transport links - not due to air travel. Jobs could just as easily be created by these other sectors, causing far less negative local impact, let alone carbon emissions. While for some regional airports, an air link may bring economic growth - for major cities, it is the other way round.
Study finds a carbon gap of 220 million tonnes in 2023 will require offsetting by the airline industry
A very readable, short, paper by ICF sets out the extent to which global aviation will not be able to make the carbon reductions it claims will be possible. ICF looked at the global commitment by the industry to make fuel efficiency gains of 1.5% annually to 2020, and then "carbon neutral growth" from 2020 onwards - despite annual growth in passengers of about 4-5% per year. ICF concludes that even with improvements in aircraft technology, airline efficiencies and operational improvements, together with the introduction of 6% biofuels, there will be a sizeable 23% carbon gap between commercial aviation forecasts and industry targets by 2023. Without that much biofuel (which ICF considers unlikely) the gap would be 27%. Without industry efficiencies and biofuels, global aviation would be emitting about 53% more carbon in 2023 than now. ICF believes carbon offsetting to be the most cost-effective way to close the carbon gap - but that only means aviation buying carbon credits from other sectors which are actually reducing their emissions, while aviation can then continue to increase theirs.