ICAO ICAO Colloquium Colloquium on Aviation Aviation and and Climate Climate Change Change Aviation alternative fuels Paul Steele Executive Director, Air Transport Action Group
Why turn to alternative fuels? CO 2 emissions Business as usual emissions Aircraft technology (known), operations and infrastructure measures Biofuels and additional technology Carbon neutral growth 2020 Gross emissions trajectory Economic measures Tech Ops Infra Biofuels + add. Tech No action CNG 2020 (schematic) 50% by 2050 2005 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050
Stringent performance specifications Safe Drop in High energy density High flash point / low freeze point Ntb Net benefit on full carbon lifecycle l basis The above excludes many first generation fuels e.g.biodiesel, Ethanol made from food crops
Alternative fuel types Fuels from Fossil Sources Energy Source Process Benefits /Issues Jet Kerosene Oil Refining Compact/High Energy Fuel Coal to Liquid (CTL) Coal/Shale Fischer Tropsch Gas to Liquid (GTL) Gas/Coal/Shale Fischer Tropsch Reduces oil dependency Needs CCS* to reduce CO 2 Reduces oil dependency Needs CCS* to reduce CO 2 *Carbon Capture & Storage
Alternative fuel types Fuels from Renewable Sources ICAO Colloquium on Aviation and Climate Change Energy Source Process Benefits /Issues Biomass to Liquid Camelina/Jatropha Gasification/ CO 2 Lifecycle benefits/ (BTL) Fischer Tropsch Sustainability Halophytes/Algae/ Urban Waste Hydrotreated d Camelina/Jatropha Hydrogen CO 2 Lifecycle benefits/ Halophytes/Algae/ Renewable Jet (HRJ) treatment Sustainability Fermented Renewable Jet (FRJ) Sugars Fermentation CO 2 Lifecycle benefits/ Sustainability
Sustainability requirements Aviation determined not to repeat the experience with first generation biofuels CO2 Has a net reduction in carbon emissions over its full lifecycle Land use Do not use land previously used for food Do not cause deforestation Food Water and Soiland Society security air quality biodiversity Do not impact food supplies Do not compete with food crops for water supplies Do not negatively Provide benefits to impact water and communities air quality growing gfeed sources Do not negatively impact soil quality or introduce invasive species The industry is working with the Sustainable Biofuels Roundtable on sustainability criteria
We ve come a long way 2006: biofuels foraviation thought unlikely 2010: 5 x biofuels test flights have taken place, 2 x gas to liquid flights The industry has driven development of this exciting ii initiativei i i ASTM certification for biofuels within a year Commercial flights on biofuels 3 5 years away
Alternative fuels test flight programme Carrier Aircraft Partners Date Alternative fuel Blend B747 400 Boeing, GE Aviation 23 Feb 2008 Coconut & 20% one engine Babassu B747 400 Boeing, Rolls Royce 30 Dec 2008 Jatropha 50% one engine B737 800 Boeing, 7 Jan2009 Algaeand and 50% one engine GE Aviation, Jatropha CFM, Honeywell UOP B747 300 Boeing, Pratt & Whitney, Honeywell UOP 30 Jan 2009 Camelina, Jatropha, Algae blend A340 600 Airbus, Shell 12 Oct 2009 Gas to liquid (not biofuel) 50% one engine 50% four engines B747 400 GE, Honeywell UOP 23 Nov 2009 Camelina 50% one engine A319 Rentech 30 April 2010 Gas to liquid (not biofuel) 40% two engines
Test flight programme, scheduled flights Carrier Aircraft Partners Date Alternative fuel Blend A320 Airbus, CFM 2H 2010 Jatropha TBC A320 Airbus, IAE, Honeywell 2010 TBC TBC A320 CFM, Safran, EADS, Airbus, Honeywell 2011 Salicornia TBC E190 Embraer, Amyris, GE 1H 2012 Sugars TBC
Key findings from test flight programme Efficiency Energy density up to 48 MJ/kg (more than JetA1 average of around 43 MJ/kg)(Continental) Saving of 1.4 tonnes fuel on a 12 hour 747 400 flight (Air New Zealand) CO 2 gas savings Camelina, up to 85% (Michigan Technological University)
Need to support several types of biofuel 2 1.5 Near term supply costs of aviation biofuels vs jet kerosene Feedstock costs Capital costs Co-product benefits Other input costs US$ $/liter 1 0.5 0-0.5 HRJ Algae HRJ BTL WoodSH Sugars Jet kerosene Jatropha waste + carbon Source: IATA, IEA, various biofuel studies
Scaling up could reduce costs substantially 0 GTCC power (1991-97) Gas turbines (1958-63) Solar PV Ethanol Coal Wind (1968-98) 98) (1979-95) 95) (1975-93) 93) turbine (1990-98) Nuclear power (1975-93) cost red duction % -5-10 -15-20 -25-30 Impact on production costs of each doubling of capacity Source: IEA
Biofuels could completely replace Jet A 1 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% f jet demand 30% 20% 10% High Central (high) Central (low) Low Very low 0% 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 Source: E4tech
The way forward ICAO Colloquium on Aviation and Climate Change Consolidate aviation business case Agree common sustainability standards Agree standard methodology for carbon lifecycle calculations Support development of diversity of biofuel feedstock Improve biomass productivity more R&D Scale up capacity Demonstration plants World Bank Commercialisation / implementation support from governments