white paper on sustainable jet fuel june 2012 faaij van dijk

8/23/2019 White Paper on Sustainable Jet Fuel June 2012 Faaij Van Dijk

1/18

White Paper on Sustainable Jet Fuel

Prepared by

Prof. Dr. Andr Faaij (Copernicus Institute, Utrecht University)

Maarten van Dijk (SkyNRG)

June 2012


2/18

1

Rationale for sustainable aviation fuel

Abstract

Air travel has become an integral part of everyday life. There will be air travel, now and in the future, asit fulfills an important social function in todays global society. The aviation industry acknowledges the

urgency for emission reduction and knows there is a need to switch to alternative, renewable and stable

priced resources as fossil fuel supply (and related prices) is getting increasingly volatile. In addressing the

challenge to replace fossil kerosene in a sustainable way, aviation has no alternative but liquid

hydrocarbons from bio-based (waste) sources. Renewable fuels for aviation are new for airlines, but can

have profound impact on lowering the carbon footprint of the industry (if produced in a sustainable

way), while reducing the dependency on fossil kerosene.

Current, first generation biofuels can play a role on short to medium term but are constrained in their

potential and outlook. What is essential is to walk down the learning curve to develop competitive

technologies for biomass conversion to high quality fuels and to build production capacity forsustainable biomass. Both will require time, in particular when 2nd

and 3rd

generation biofuels are

concerned. Potentials for those biofuels are large and they can become competitive with fossil fuels on

medium term (2020-2030) under the condition that technologies are scaled-up and optimized and

mature and sustainable markets for biomass supplies are developed.

Essential components to realize such a future vision are:

- Strong investment in Research, Demonstration and deployment of key

conversion technologies

- RDD&D on sustainable biomass production and supply systems for the coming

10-15 years.

- Gradual scale up of conversion capacity and biomass supplies over the coming

decades. Biomass production and supply capacity needs to be developed in

balance with improved agricultural management to avoid conflicts with food

supply and biodiversity.

- Internationally accepted and effective sustainability frameworks that are

enforced by legal requirements and backed by agro-ecological zoning by

governments to secure sustainable land-use.

In total, aviation can be a frontrunner in creating a sustainable demand for advanced biofuels in the

international market that can accelerate the development of sustainable biomass production, required

infrastructure and key technologies. By enforcing a demand for fully certified biofuels, their production

can deliver not only renewable and low GHG emission fuels, but also contribute to rural development

and better management of natural resources.


3/18

2

Fig. 1 - Fossil CO2 emissions and global surface

warming (actual and forecasts)

Introduction

Air travel has become an integral part of

everyday life as an important mode of public

transport for the modern world. It fulfills an

important social function in todays global

society; it brings long-distance mobility to

people, makes remote regions accessible,

increases and connects business and markets

globally. Globally, over 2 billion passengers flew

in the course of 2007. The air transport industry

generates approximately 29 million jobs

worldwide and has an economic impact that is

estimated to be equivalent to 8% of the global

gross domestic product (GDP). Aviation is expected to be one of the strongest growing transport sectors

till 2050, with an estimated CAGR of 3%. (ACARE, 2010)

One of the main challenges for the industry is to preserve its societal benefits and maintaining its growthwhile minimizing the environmental impacts, of which CO2 emissions are likely the biggest. In 2005, 2.5

per cent of man-made CO2 emissions came from aviation. When taking into account non-CO2 effects,

estimates suggest aviation contributed about 3.5 per cent (excluding the effects on increased

cloudiness1) to the total climate warming from human activities in 2005, and this figure is expected to

rise to 4 to 4.7 per cent by 2050 (ATTICA, Lee et al.).

We acknowledge that man made green house gas

emissions are one of the main drivers for global

warming and climate change (Figure 1) and that there

is strong scientific evidence that indicates there is a

need to keep global temperature increase below 2degrees Celsius to avoid irreversible changes in global

ecosystems. To stay below this threshold, most recent

forecasts predict atmospheric greenhouse gas

concentrations should be kept below 450 ppm, which

translates into a reduction of manmade GHG

emissions by at least 80% in 2050, compared to 2005

levels (4th IPCC assessment, 2007).

We accept the fact that fossil (energy) resources are

finite (WEO, 2010; Global Energy Assessment, 2011).

The increasing scarcity of cheap oil resources brings

volatility to the market and is driving up prices. The

sustained high price levels and fluctuations as well as

supply disruptions are an existential risk for the

1Further work is needed to understand and quantify the effects of aviation on clouds, including contrails, increased

cirrus cloud development from spreading contrails and altered properties of clouds from soot emissions, which are

likely to have an overall warming impact on the climate.


4/18

3

Fig.6 - World Energy Supply by Source; WWFs Energy Report

aviation industry. Another undesired mechanism of this situation is that fuels that are more difficult to

exploit (i.e. more energy intensive) become economically attractive; a visible trend is the increased

interest in alternative resources like tar sands, shale oil and (gas &) coal-to-liquids (Figure 2). More

energy use thus means more carbon intensive energy carriers (Figure 3) are used and consequently

accelerating GHG emissions of the transport sector (PARNTER, 2010).

The combination of strong growth of energy demand and increased carbon intensity of the transport

sector (Figure 4) conflicts directly to the required GHG emissions reductions in that sector. Most recent

insights (Figure 5) indicate that about a quarter of the global required GHG emission savings need to berealized in the transport sector, to achieve the 450 ppm concentration target (IEA BLUE map scenarios,

2011)

There is thus a strong need to

produce and utilize low carbon

fuels. Although a major challenge,

we believe that there are

possibilities to increase efficiency

and especially switch to alternative,

renewable energy sources during

the next decades to achieve that

(IPCC scenarios SRREN, 2011;

Greenpeace Energy [R]evolution,

2010; WWF Energy report, 2011).

Figure 6 shows a scenario for an

almost 100% transition to

renewable energy sources by 2050.

Fig. 2 - World oil production by type Fig.3 - Well to Wing emissions different (jet)

fuel production pathways (gCO2/MJ)

Fig.4 Baseline CO2 emissions per sector (Gton/year,

2010 & 2050), based on the IPCC 4th assessment report)

Fig.5 - CO2 emission reductions needed per sector (Gton/year)


5/18

4

Fig.7 - Breakdown of CO2 reduction options for aviation till 2050

Carbon emissions and Aviation

More than 99% of airline emissions and approximately 50% of airport emissions (through Landing &

Takeoff Cycles) result from the combustion of kerosene. Increased energy efficiency and energy demand

reduction is an effective way and first priority to reduce fuel consumption and related green house gas

emissions. But efficiency improvements does not offer a sole solution to aviation related emissions and

dependency on oil; only fuels from renewable biomass can also reduce the dependency on fossil

kerosene.

To further reduce green house gas

emissions in aviation, there are

currently three major options;

operational improvements (e.g.

improved routing, gliding), technical

improvements of the planes (e.g. wing

tips, fleet renewal, improved

turbines), and the use of fuels withlower life cycle green house gas

emissions (Figure 7). All three will play

an important role in the years to come

(IATA, 2010). And all three can (and

probably will) be driven by an

overarching reduction option: market

based measures. Technical and operational improvements have resulted in impressive reductions in fuel

consumption in the past and are expected to continue for years to come. Renewable fuels for aviation

are new for airlines, but can have profound impact on lowering the carbon footprint of the industry, if

produced in the right way.

There is not really a trade-off between the possibilities of efficiency improvement (aircraft and engine

design + improved air traffic control) and alternative fuels. Both elements are required. Aircraft

replacements and new aircraft & engine designs, together with operational improvements, are expected

to lead to a gain in fuel efficiency (and a net reduction in related emissions) of 40% by 2050 (SWAFEA,

2011). In addition, such efficiency improvements will, though very important, most likely not lead to an

absolute reduction in demand for fuels because global growth in demand for air transport will more

than compensate efficiency gains.

Currently no manufacturer of aircraft or engines is going to limit the use of their equipment to a

particular fuel or way of operating. In the short to medium term any alternative fuel for aviation must

therefore be a drop in replacement of fossil kerosene, as the development of new engines, aircraft

and infrastructure is incredibly complex and expensive. Although a new type of aircraft (andcorresponding engines) able to use a non drop in fuel, could enter the market in the future, it is not

likely to see this happening (at commercial scale) before 2050, mainly because of the slow rate of

replacement of current aircraft. Renewable aviation fuels must therefore have a similar technical

performance to fossil kerosene if to be used in the current generation of jet engines. This means that

some of the fuel alternatives considered for road transport (e.g. ethanol, hydrogen, electricity) do not

provide a viable alternative (SWAFEA, 2010). See Table 1 for a brief summary.


6/18

5

Table 1 - Com arison on dro in ro erties di erent ener sources or aviation

Fig.8 - Well to Wing emissions different jet fuel production pathways (gCO2/MJ), including renewable options

Besides technical performance, these fuels must have a substantially better GHG balance than their

fossil alternative, whilst not causing other undesired social and ecological impacts. Today, renewable

fuels come from biomass resources. The sustainability of the biomass feedstock largely determines the

overall sustainability of the renewable fuel, including lifecycle GHG, as well as other impacts. A bio-

based fuel does not automatically mean: sustainable fuel with low GHG emissions. Although biofuels

can have a significant reduction in overall life cycle GHG emission, in some cases it can be shown (Figure

8) that the overall life cycle GHG emissions are even higher for biofuels than those of fossil based fuels

(PARNTER, 2010). The ecological and socio-economic impacts of biofuels may be positive or negative

depending on local conditions and the design and implementation of specific projects.

It should be noted that direct engine emissions of alternative fuels (other than GHG emissions) are

generally positive compared to the fossil fuel based baseline. The most notable are fine particles (30-

90% reduction) and SOx emissions (>99% reduction). Other important emissions (NOx, CO and UHC) do

not seem to have a direct fuel quality related reduction. Possible fluctuations in emissions are mainly

caused by engine configurations (SWAFEA, 2011)


7/18

6

Fig.9 - Fossil kerosene demand and Biomass resource

potential (EJ/year, 2050)

Biomass resources for renewable aviation fuel

The expected growth aviation fuel demand, from 2010 to 2050, is expected to have a compounded

annual growth rate (CAGR) between 2.2% (IATA, 2010) and 3.0% (ACARE, 2010). This means an increase

from 215 million tonnes in 2010 to between 460 630 million tonnes in 2050 (which equals 20 27 EJ).

Including a conversion for biomass to fuel efficiency of some 60%, the primary biomass demand

amounts about 33-45 EJ.

The raw materials for future renewable aviation fuel can originate from various biomass resource

categories. Recent global assessments (IPCC-SRREN, 2011) suggest an upper-bound technical potential

of biomass resources of around 500 EJ (in 2050), covering the following resource categories:

Residues originating from forestry, agriculture and organic wastes (including the organic fraction

of MSW, dung, process residues etc.) Technical potential: 100 EJ/yr

Surplus forestry other than from forestry residues Technical potential: 60-80 EJ/yr

Biomass produced via cropping systems (for energy crop production) on possible surplus good

quality agricultural and pasture lands Technical potential: 120 EJ/yr

o Assuming strong learning in agricultural technology leading to improvements in

agricultural and livestock management would add an additional 140 EJ/yr Potential contribution of water-scarce, marginal and degraded lands could amount to an

additional 70 EJ/yr

Adding these categories together leads to a technical potential of up to about 500 EJ in 2050, with

temporal data on the development of biomass potential ramping from 290 to 320 EJ/yr in 2020 to 330

to 400 EJ/yr in 2030 (Hoogwijket al., 2005, 2009; Dornburget al., 2008, 2010). From the expert review

of available scientific literature potentialdeploymentlevels of biomass for energy by 2050 could be in

the range of 100 to 300 EJ. This takes into account that only part of the technical potential can be

mobilized due to economic, infrastructural and implementation constraints.

If it is assumed that all this biomass wouldbe converted with an overall efficiency of

60% to biofuels, this could deliver 60 180

EJ of liquid fuel. Logically, there will be

competition between different biomass

applications, which also include delivery of

heat, electricity and feedstock for materials.

However, long term energy scenarios

indicate that other key options (solar and

wind based, CCS with fossil fuels) to supply

low carbon electricity (and heat) may overall

become more effective and competitive over time than biomass. Furthermore, the biomass demand forbiomaterials is expected to be an order of magnitude smaller than for energy applications (just as about

10% of current oil is used for feedstock). In addition, to this, biomaterials will end up as (organic) waste

at some point in time and can than serve as fuel again for waste to energy facilities (including fuel

production). Overall, it is thought that biomass could in principle cover the larger part up to all of the

demand for liquid transport fuels halfway this century. The demand for aviation represents roughly 10-

20% of that total. The potential of biomass is thus in principle sufficient to provide a key alternative for

mineral oil based fuels (Figure 9).


8/18

7

Fig.10 - Energy potential (EJ/year, in 2050) of crop production on better quality land surpluses and of

(perennial) crop production on marginal and degraded lands; low & high scenario

In order to achieve the high biomass potential deployment levels, increases in competing food and fibre

demand must be moderate, land must be properly managed and agricultural and forestry yields must

increase substantially. Expansion of bioenergy in the absence of monitoring and good governance of

land use carries the risk of significant conflicts with respect to food supplies, water resources and

biodiversity, as well as a risk of low GHG benefits. Conversely, implementation that follows effective

sustainability frameworks could mitigate such conflicts and allow realization of positive outcomes. The

impacts and performance of biomass production and use are region- and site-specific. Therefore, as part

of good governance of land use and rural development, bioenergy policies need to consider regional

conditions and priorities along with the agricultural (crops and livestock) and forestry sectors. Securing

sustainable biofuel production and supply therefore generally means that investments in the larger

agricultural sector (of which biomass production is part) are required and combined with good

environmental policies as well as business models that secure a positive socio-economic impact on rural

economies and local producers. Fair trade like principles can play a positive role in securing the latter.

Biomass resource potentials are influenced by and interact with climate change impacts but the specific

impacts are still poorly understood; there will be strong regional differences in this respect. The current

debate on indirect land use change (iLUC), and the measures being implemented to account for some of

these iLUC effects is a recent example of the ongoing dynamics of concept of sustainability of bio-energy

resources. But, bio-energy and new (perennial) cropping systems also offer opportunities to combineadaptation measures (e.g., soil protection, water retention and modernization of agriculture) with

production of biomass resources.

Biomass feedstocks

Different regions have different opportunities for biomass production and supply. Future estimates

depend, as argued, on development of the agricultural system and governance of land use. Figure 10

gives an indicative breakdown of the future (technical) energy potential for biomass over different world

regions, divided over two (grouped) land categories. Regions that stand out for good production

potentials are Latin America, Sub Saharan Africa and Eastern Europe (including Russia). In addition to

possibilities for crop production, it is especially forest rich countries and key agricultural production

areas that can contribute supplies of forest and agricultural residues.


9/18

8

A distinction can be made between so-called 1st

, 2nd

and 3rd

generation biofuels and related feedstocks

(see table 2). The performance and environmental impacts of feedstock production cover a wide range

for both annual and perennial crops (such as trees and grasses). For example sugar cane and palm oil

can be very productive crops that are commercial today. Overall though, lignocellulosic biomass

resources offer better environmental performance and the possibility to use lower quality lands for crop

production.

Biofuels and biomass feedstocks

1st

generation 2nd

generation 3rd

generation

Biomass type Annual crops = food crops.

Typical examples are corn,

rapeseed, cereals

Lignocellulosic materials,

including agricultural and

forestry residues, cultivated

trees and grasses

Micro & macro algae

produced in ponds and

bioreactors (in wastewater

or seawater)

Land type Production is limited to

arable land and competitionwith food markets direct

Arable, pasture as well as

marginal and degraded lands

Can be produced with

limited land use; does notrequire fertile land

Potential Constrained Large Very large (in principle)

Economics

(outlook)

Relatively high feedstock

costs, largely determined by

food markets

Currently more expensive

than 1st

generation, but robust

outlook for more competitive

production costs on medium

term (>2020)

Expectedly long

development time is needed;

uncertain outlook

Sustainability Modest GHG and

environmental

performance. Food versus

fuel conflict

Generally (very) good

environmental performance

and net GHG emission

reduction

In principle very sounds, but

Certain sustainability aspects

less understood

State of the art Relatively simple and

proven conversion

technologies

Range of technologies in

demonstration phase but not

commercial yet

Unproven technology;

competitive production is

uncertain and requires

fundamental breakthroughs

Lignocellulosic feedstocks can come from available residues and organic wastes and already utilized for

production of power and heat today. For example, wood pellets are increasingly used as a biomass fuel

to replace coal. In addition, trees and grasses can be grown on marginal and degraded lands and can

deliver additional ecosystem services, such as soil improvement and protection and when produced in

agroforestry systems lead to good biodiversity impacts. Large scale commercial production requiresmore investment and market development though, as well as effective sustainability frameworks to

secure responsible production.

Currently available, biomass residues and waste streams only, can be pinpointed now in specific regions.

Furthermore, often infrastructure around processing facilities and waste treatment is already available.

However, the supplies of such streams are often limited and demand is increasing in many regions.

Cultivated biomass (both food crops and perennial crops) is therefore becoming increasingly important

Table 2 - Com arison o di erent eneration bio uels and biomass eedstocks


10/18

9

Fig.11 - Key (potential) biomass resources and regions for energy use in relation to key settings and preconditions

already today to meet growing demand for biofuels and power and heat generation from biomass. This

is evident in the first generation biofuel markets (production of corn, sugar cane, rapeseed, soy beans

and palm oil) but this is also occurring in production of wood for energy. Figure 11 lists a number of key

biomass resources in relation to key settings and preconditions.


11/18

10

Table 3 - Different production pathways for fossil jet fuel alternatives

Technology

Drop-in aviation fuels

Stringent fuel specifications apply to the aviation fuel infrastructure. To enable the use of any new

alternative aviation fuel in this infrastructure, a new specification needs to be developed or an existing

specification needs to be revised. If the alternative fuel is found to have essentially the same

performance properties as conventional jet fuel then there is no need to change ground and supply

infrastructure, airframe or engines (i.e. a drop-in fuel). The specifications of the new fuel may be

incorporated into the existing jet fuel specifications, and will therefore meet the established operating

limitations for the existing fleet of turbine engine powered aircraft.

There are four main conversion pathways that have the potential to produce a drop in alternative for

fossil kerosene; Fischer-Tropsch, Hydro-processed Esters and Fatty Acids, Sugar Conversions, Direct

Liquefaction (table 3)

Technology Feedstock Products CertificationFischer-Tropsch

(also known as CtL, GtL,

BtL, WtL)

Any material containing

carbon (coal, gas,

biomass, waste)

Straight alkanes ASTM (2009)

DEFSTAN (2009)

NB: Max. 50% blend with fossil jet

HEFA

(also known as HRJ, HVO)

Vegetable (waste) oils

and animal fats

Straight alkanes ASTM (2011)

DEFSTAN (2011)

NB: Max. 50% blend with fossil jet

Sugar Conversion

(e.g. fermentation,

thermochemical)

C6 sugars (from starch or

cellulose)

Alcohols, alkanes

and other

hydrocarbons (e.g.

terpenes)

None

(Note: The Alcohol to Jet

pathway is currently in the

process of ASTM certification)

Direct Liquefaction

(of which pyrolysis ismost referred to)

Any solid material

containing carbon (coal,biomass, -plastic-waste)

Mainly naphtenic

compounds

None

(Note: Regarded as a blend stockfuel at best as upgrading poses

serious -cost- constraints )

Next to that there are several other production pathways that yield liquid fuels, although it is uncertain

to which extent these fuels can be used as drop in alternative to fossil jet fuel. These are:

- Fatty Acid Esters (of which FAME is best known)

- Alcohols (of which ethanol is best known)

- Furane derivatives

- Succinic acids derivatives

- Cryogenic fuels (LNG & liquid Hydrogen)


12/18

11

Technical certification

To be acceptable to Civil Aviation Authorities, aviation

turbine fuel must meet strict physical criteria. There exist

several specifications around the world that authorities

refer to when describing acceptable conventional jet fuel.

The ASTM D1655 and Def Stan 91-91 are recognized

globally. Other commonly used specifications are the Joint

Check List (AFQRJOS) and GOST 10227 TS-1.

Bio jet fuel produced through either the Fischer-Tropsch

or the HEFA production routes are currently accepted for

commercial use under the ASTM and Def Stan

specifications, but only in a blend with fossil jet fuel (with

a maximum bio-component of 50%)

Once the bio-component has been blended and complies

with the relevant ASTM product specifications, it isregarded as identical to conventional jet fuel (under both

ASTM and Def Stan). In this case no special handling

requirements apply and the fuel can be mixed with

conventional jet fuel along the supply chain; including

refineries, fuel storage depots, and at airports*.

*Note: Although most regional jet fuel specification follow the

ASTM standard, Europe follows the AFQRJOS (also known as JIG)

- a petroleum industry standard incorporating the strictest

specifications from ASTM D1655 and Def Stan 91-91

Current production options

The first hurdle for an alternative jet fuel

is to be accepted as a technically safe fuel

(regardless of the sustainability). In

general the American Society for Testing

and Materials (ASTM) is the official body

to give off technical certification for new

(production routes for) jet fuels.

Up to now ASTM and DEF-STAN only

approved the use of fuel (in a 50% blend

with fossil kerosene) produced by either

the FT or the HEFA production routes.

Fischer-Tropsch conversion (FT)

This technology makes use of gasification

and subsequent catalytic processing of

syngas and can use any type of organicmaterial as feedstock (coal, gas, and

biomass, waste). Depending on the

feedstock, FT is known as Coal-to-Liquid

(CtL), Gas-to-Liquid (CtL), Biomass-to-

Liquid (BtL) or Waste-to-Liquid (WtL).

Product of the process is FT wax

(regardless of the feedstock), that can be

converted into desired fractions of

straight hydrocarbons, kerosene being

one of them. To produce sustainable jet

fuel through the FT process, BtL and WtLare the only options.

Hydro-processed Esters and Fatty Acids (HEFA; also known as HRJ and Bio-SPK)

In this process, vegetable oils, organic greases and fats can be converted to hydrocarbons through

treatment with hydrogen and catalysis (i.e. isomerization). The product is a mix of so-called renewable

diesel (i.e. green diesel) and renewable kerosene (and a small amount of light hydrocarbons). It is

important to note that this is a completely different process than biodiesel (i.e. FAME) production. It is

technically impossible to get FAME production during the process.

Current market situation

Availability of production capacity makes the HEFA technology the only realistic option today to produce

significant volumes of sustainable jet fuel on commercial scale, although prices are still substantially

higher than fossil kerosene.

Part of the feedstock will come from waste streams (i.e. waste greases and fats). Other part will come

from oilseed crops (i.e. rapeseed, camelina, jatropha). Feedstock for the HEFA route should be selected

carefully to minimize negative ecological and social effects as much as possible.


13/18

12

Fig.12 Projected production cost biofuels in 2030 ($/gallon)

Fig.13 IEA Advance biofuel roadmap, including schematic projections of

the bio jet cost curve

Economics

Production of 1st

as well as 2nd

generation biofuels is technically possible today and the future economic

performance of several different key biofuels production routes is promising. But for large scale use,

production costs must be reduced, especially for the so-called 2nd generation options. There is a need to

walk down the learning curve of different technologies to reduce costs. This will take investment, time

and development of the markets (key improvements include infrastructure, demand, scale, new

technologies, integrated production concepts, etc.).

There is solid evidence of substantial cost reductions in the past of currently commercial biomass and

biofuel technologies due to technological learning. Strong cost reductions have been achieved in the

past for supply of forest biomass supplies (factor 3 cost reduction in Scandinavia in the 80 - 90-ies),

combined heat and power production from biomass (factor of 4 cost reduction in Sweden in the 90-ies),

corn ethanol production in the United States and sugar cane based ethanol production in Brazil. These

experiences give confidence that similar cost reductions can be achieved in the future for new (and now

expensive) technologies and biomass supplies as well.

The combination of advanced,larger scale conversion and

optimized biomass supplies can

push down the costs of bio jet

fuel to fossil fuel levels over the

next 20 years. Figure 12 provides

cost projections for different

biofuel routes (based on

extensive literature review in the

IPCC-SRREN report, 2011).

Figure 13 is a simplified version of

the IEA advanced biofuels

roadmap which incorporates

comparable improvements in

(economic) performance. If such

improved performance would be

achieved, biofuel demand would

increasingly be driven by market

demand and no longer by

mandates or financial support.

The implications of such asituation on the future energy

market are profound; such

biofuels will most likely have a

moderating effect on oil prices as

well, therefore contributing to

lower costs and a more

diversified energy supply.


14/18

13

Securing sustainability; governance and certification

Sustainable biomass feedstock is the key to sustainable biofuels. The potential for biomass production

on a global scale and the preconditions that must be fulfilled to reach the higher end of those estimates

in a sustainable way were discussed. Also, potential conflicts of uncontrolled expansion of biomass

production were highlighted. The challenge is to gracefully reconcile all legitimate claims on resource

usage (e.g. energy, land, water, raw materials). Biomass for material and fuel use will always displace

some other use. This should only be admissible if higher value applications (e.g. living, food/feed

production, high conservation areas, leisure) are not displaced, if the side effects are far less negative

than usage of fossil fuel and if food security and biodiversity are not sacrificed. We subscribe the

statement that sustainable biomass should primarily be used for those activities and sectors that have

no alternative for liquid fuels (WWF Energy Report, 2011) We believe in the notion that the impact of

bioenergy on social and environmental issues may be positive or negative depending on local conditions

and the design and implementation of specific projects (SRREN, 2011). That means we cannot say a

specific feedstock is always sustainable, or unsustainable, but that it depends on how and where the

feedstock is produced. Figure 14 (developed for IPCC-SRREN) illustrates the balance that needs to be

found between different objectives, scale levels and impacts.

Fig. 14 - Bioenergys complex, dynamic interactions

among society, energy and the environment include

climate change feedbacks, biomass production and land

use with direct and indirect impacts at various spatial and

temporal scales on all resource uses for food, fodder, fiber

and energy (Dale et al., 2011). Biomass resources must be

produced in a sustainable way as their impacts can be felt

from micro to macro scales. Risks are maintenance of

business-as-usual approaches with uncoordinated

production of food and fuel. Opportunities are many and

include good governance and sustainability frameworks

that generate strong policies that also lead to sustainable

ecosystem services (van Dam et al., 2010).

Sustainability certification

Especially since 2008, global action has been taken to develop and deploy sustainability frameworks and

certification initiatives (see van Dam et al., RSER, 2010; IEA Task 40). Today, there are many

governmental, non-governmental (NGO) and 3rd

party initiatives on all levels (international, national and

regional) supporting or actively working towards sustainability criteria, methodological frameworks,

requirements and standards for the assessment and development of bioenergy resources. These

initiatives include (but are not limited to) Global Bioenergy Partnership, OECD Roundtable on

Sustainable Development, European Committee for Standardization, International Organization for

Standardization, Renewable Energy Directive (EU), Renewable Fuel Standard (US), Renewable TransportFuel Obligation (UK), Biofuel Sustainability Ordinance (De), Cramer Criteria and NEN (NL), ISCC

(Germany), REDCert, Council for Sustainable Biomass Production, Sustainable Biomass Consortium,

Roundtable for Responsible Soy, Roundtable for Sustainable Palm Oil, Better Sugarcane Initiative,

Roundtable for Sustainable Biofuels (RSB). Table 4 summarizes the main principles that are the basis for

the certification system of the RSB (RSB, 2009). There is strong convergence between different systems

on the type of principles that are the basis for sustainable biomass production.


15/18

14

Table 4 - RSB Principles & Criteria for Sustainable Biofuel Production

These initiatives are not an end stadium; they are constantly evolving due to increased insights on both

production and demand side. The development and deployment of comprehensive sustainability

frameworks, certification and verification will thus take more time. The discussion on securing

sustainable biomass resources for energy is spilling over to agriculture and land-use at large. All if this,

we see them as very important steps in the right direction. What is also important in the coming years is

a gradual harmonization of standards and frameworks and incorporation of indicators that cover

sustainable land-use, food security and other main themes that relate to land use in general. Aviation

should therefore work with state-of-the-art certification systems and frameworks and remain open for

further sharpening and deepening of the requirements and guidelines. Also strong verification in the

field is needed to give teeth to the certification process.

Certification has the potential to influence direct, local impacts related to environmental and social

effects of direct bioenergy production. Considering the multiple spatial scales, certification should be

combined with additional measurements and tools on a regional, national and international level. The

role of bioenergy production on indirect land use change (iLUC) is still uncertain and current initiatives

have not fully captured impacts from iLUC in their standards. There are clear indications that with the

right strategies, undesired land use change can be avoided. Integrating iLUC in current discussions and

certification efforts can be an effective way to flush out specific issues and to come up with solutions

that can work in a broader context.

Principle 1 - Legality

Biofuel operations shall follow all applicable laws and

regulations.

Principle 2 Planning, Monitoring and Continuous improvement

Sustainable biofuel operations shall be planned, implemented,

and continuously improved through an open, transparent, and

consultative impact assessment and management process and

an economic viability analysis.

Principle 3 Greenhouse Gas Emissions

Biofuels shall contribute to climate change mitigation by

significantly reducing lifecycle GHG emissions as compared to

fossil fuels.

Principle 4 Human and Labor rights

Biofuel operations shall not violate human rights or labor rights,and shall promote decent work and the well-being of workers.

Principle 5 Rural ad Social Development

In regions of poverty, biofuel operations shall contribute to the

social and economic development of local, rural and indigenous

people and communities.

Principle 6 Local food security

Biofuel operations shall ensure the human right to adequate

food and improve food security in food insecure regions.

Principle 7 - Conservation

Biofuel operations shall avoid negative impacts on biodiversity,

ecosystems, and conservation values.

Principle 8 - Soil

Biofuel operations shall implement practices that seek to revers

soil degradation and/or maintain soil health.

Principle 9 Water

Biofuel operations shall maintain or enhance the quality and

quantity of surface and ground water resources, and respect

prior formal or customary water rights.

Principle 10 - Air

Air pollution from biofuel operations shall be minimized along

the supply chain.

Principle 11 - Use of technology, Inputs, and Management of

waste

The use of technologies in biofuel operations shall seek to

maximize production efficiency and social and environmental

performance, and minimize the risk of damages to the

environment and people.

Principle 12 Land rights

Biofuel operations shall respect land rights and land use rights.


16/18

15

Outlook

Creating a long term and sustainable future for aviation during the first half of this century requires

major transitions. Increased efficiency in aircraft performance and responsible growth are key

components of such a transition. Nevertheless, even when all possibilities to reduce energy use, global

growth in demand is expected to lead to substantial increases in fuel demand. For aviation, liquid fuels

remain the energy carrier of choice and therefore sustainable (renewable) fuels from biomass are at the

heart of a transition strategy. Hydrogen (e.g. produced via renewable electricity or by conversion of

fossil fuels with carbon capture and storage) still meets fundamental technical difficulties.

Biofuels produced from sustainable feedstocks are essential. Current, first generation biofuels can

play a role on short to medium term but are constrained in their potential and outlook. What is essential

is to walk down the learning curve to develop competitive technologies for biomass conversion to

high quality fuels and to build production capacity for sustainable biomass. Both will require time, in

particular when 2nd

and 3rd

generation biofuels are concerned.

Potentials for those biofuels are large and they can become competitive with fossil fuels on medium

term (2020-2030) under the condition that technologies are scaled-up and optimized and mature and

sustainable markets for biomass supplies are developed. Proper governance of land use and effectivesustainability frameworks are an essential prerequisite to achieve that.

Assuming that such a pathway will be pursued by key sectors (such as aviation) energy companies, the

agricultural sector and governments, it is feasible to achieve large scale deployment of 2nd generation

capacity between 2020 and 2030 (e.g. covering 10-20% of fuel demand in aviation). When such a phase

is reached, market demand and improved capabilities in the agricultural and biofuel sector can turn such

fuels into sustainable commodities. Than the market can mature and between 2040 and 2050 the larger

share of fuel demand could be covered by sustainable biofuels. It is possible that sustained Research and

Development efforts result in successful large scale production of algae at attractive cost levels by that

time as well and thus 3rd

generation biofuels may contribute in addition to that.

Essential components to realize such a future vision are:

- Efficiency in aircraft, engines and flight planning should always be a priority; its potential is

however limited and to a large extent dependent and aircraft and engine manufacturers.

Sustained interest in and demand for high efficiency designs by airlines can support R&D and

market introduction.

- Strong investment in Research, Demonstration and deployment of key conversion technologies

- RDD&D on sustainable biomass production and supply systems for the coming 10-15 years. Set-

up full Field-to-Flight chains that have sound outlook for economic, sustainable production and

with significant potential for scale-up. This could include a limited number of distinctive andexemplary pilot chains that can dominate on shorter, medium and longer term with growing

level of sophistication in terms of technology and resource mobilization, but also with improved

perspectives in terms of volume and economics..

- Gradual scale up of conversion capacity and biomass supplies over the coming decades. Biomass

production and supply capacity needs to be developed in balance with improved agricultural


17/18

16

management to avoid conflicts with food supply and biodiversity. Pooling demand of different

airlines are at specific airports make an important contribution to achieving this.

- Internationally accepted and effective sustainability frameworks that are enforced by legal

requirements and backed by agro-ecological zoning by governments to secure sustainable land-

use.

In total, aviation can be a frontrunner in creating a sustainable demand for advanced biofuels in the

international market that can accelerate the development of sustainable biomass production, required

infrastructure and key technologies. By enforcing a demand for fully certified biofuels, their production

can deliver not only renewable and low GHG emission fuels, but also contribute to rural development

and better management of natural resources. Airlines and airports should get involved in upstream

activities for sustainable biofuel production. Airport could be a driving actor in themselves in the biofuel

market by pooling both supply of biofuel producers and the demand of different airlines. Long term

partnerships between airports and airlines on the one and frontrunner biomass and biofuel producers

on the other can be a key way to achieve that.


18/18

17

On the authors

Andr Faaij

Andr P.C. Faaij is Professor Energy System Analysis and Head of

Department at the Copernicus Institute of Utrecht University. He has a

background in chemistry and environmental sciences and holds a Ph.D. on

energy production from biomass and wastes. He worked as visiting

researcher at Princeton University and Kings College - London University.

He is a member of a variety of expert groups in bio-energy and energy policy,

research and strategic planning. He works as an advisor for governments, the

EC, IEA, the UN system, GEF, OECD, WEF, the energy sector & industry,

strategic consultancy, NGOs, etc. He is appointed Young Global Leader at the

World Economic Forum.

Since 2004 he is Task Leader of Task 40 under the Bio-energy Agreement of the International Energy

Agency on Sustainable International Bio-energy Trade securing supply & demand, a global network

with 14 countries.

In 2008, he joined the IPCC team as Convening Lead Author to draft the Special Report on Renewable

Energy as well as the new Global Energy Assessment (GEA). Currently, he is Lead Author on Energy

Systems for the IPCC 5th assessment report. He published over 600 titles in scientific journals, reports,

books and proceedings, qualifies as highly cited scientist (top 1%) of his field, is frequently visible in

media and lecturing across the globe.

Maarten van Dijk

Maarten van Dijk works for SkyNRG, the KLM Joint venture that has as

mission to make the market for sustainable jet fuel. At SkyNRG he isresponsible for Business Development and Sustainability. He focuses on

feedstock and technology development, upstream investments and

sustainability. He is SkyNRGs representative in their Independent

Sustainability Board, is in the Steering Board of the Roundtable on

Sustainable Biofuels and holds a seat in the Advisory Board for the

Renewable Jet Fuel Initiative of the Carbon War Room.

Maarten studied Chemistry at Utrecht University, focusing his second Master on Renewable Energy

Technologies. Before joining SkyNRG he worked for Spring Associates, dedicated to business

development, modeling and due diligence in the clean tech sector. In this function he was involved in

the development of the biofuel strategy for KLM Royal Dutch Airlines.

white paper on sustainable jet fuel june 2012 faaij van dijk

Documents