EU guidelines designed to speed up the usage of sustainable aviation fuels could unintentionally favour manufacturing pathways which might be extra energy-intensive and costly than mandatory, in keeping with new analysis from Chalmers College of Know-how in Sweden.
The research examined completely different strategies for producing artificial methanol — a gasoline molecule that may be transformed into sustainable aviation gasoline — and located vital variations in electrical energy demand, useful resource effectivity and manufacturing price between different manufacturing pathways utilizing the identical uncooked supplies.
Researchers mentioned the findings elevate broader questions on how EU regulation is shaping funding and know-how improvement within the rising sustainable aviation gasoline sector.
Final 12 months, the EU launched guidelines requiring a minimal 2% mix of sustainable aviation gasoline at EU airports, with the requirement as a result of rise progressively to not less than 70% by 2050.
Underneath the laws, half of the sustainable aviation gasoline utilized by 2050 should come from a class referred to as RFNBOs — Renewable Fuels of Non-Organic Origin — artificial fuels produced utilizing renewable hydrogen and captured carbon dioxide.
However the Chalmers researchers argue that the present RFNBO framework dangers incentivising much less resource-efficient manufacturing strategies.
“Laws affect not solely trade’s investments in know-how, but additionally which analysis and improvement priorities are pursued,” mentioned Henrik Thunman, Professor of Power Know-how at Chalmers and co-author of the research.
“As a substitute of driving innovation in direction of probably the most environment friendly options, we danger locking ourselves into much less resource-efficient manufacturing strategies.”
The researchers in contrast three technically possible manufacturing pathways for artificial methanol utilizing biogenic carbon from biomass.
Two of the pathways depend on biomass combustion, the place carbon dioxide is captured from flue gases and mixed with hydrogen produced individually utilizing electrical energy. The third pathway makes use of biomass gasification, by which heated biomass is transformed instantly into synthesis fuel containing each carbon and hydrogen.
Based on the researchers, the gasification strategy proved considerably extra environment friendly.
“The gasification pathway proved to be probably the most resource-efficient possibility in our evaluation, with as much as 46 % decrease manufacturing price and 30 % decrease electrical energy demand than the 2 combustion-based options,” mentioned Johanna Beiron, researcher in Bodily Useful resource Idea at Chalmers and first writer of the research.
“The distinction exhibits how giant the vitality losses might be when biomass is first combusted into carbon dioxide, which is then rebuilt into gasoline molecules utilizing giant quantities of electrical energy and hydrogen.”
Regardless of this, the research argues that EU regulation strongly favours the combustion-based pathways.
Underneath the present RFNBO framework, fuels produced by way of combustion-based techniques qualify totally below the rules, whereas fuels produced through gasification could solely partially qualify as a result of the method makes use of biomass-derived carbon and vitality extra instantly.
The researchers mentioned this creates a coverage contradiction, since one goal of the RFNBO framework is to cut back reliance on biomass as a restricted useful resource whereas rising renewable electrical energy manufacturing for inexperienced hydrogen.
Based on the research, the present guidelines might as an alternative enhance demand for biomass-derived carbon dioxide from combustion processes, even the place direct gasification would use biomass extra effectively.
“One of many combustion-based options we analysed was the method in mixed warmth and energy crops,” mentioned Beiron.
“It has decrease price and vitality effectivity than gasification, even after we embrace the extra electrical energy wanted to exchange, for instance, the district heating that the combustion course of can contribute.”
The researchers warned that the regulatory framework could finally work towards broader EU targets round vitality effectivity and industrial competitiveness.
“The regulatory framework doesn’t account sufficiently for a way effectively completely different techniques use vitality and sources,” mentioned Thunman.
“The research subsequently highlights a structural subject in EU vitality and industrial coverage: regulation dangers working towards its personal targets when definitions of sustainable fuels usually are not aligned with elementary vitality rules or with the Union’s broader ambitions for useful resource effectivity.”
The researchers mentioned the findings spotlight the necessity for larger coordination between local weather coverage, industrial feasibility and useful resource effectivity as Europe expands sustainable aviation gasoline manufacturing capability over the approaching many years.
“It’s shocking that EU guidelines don’t present clearer incentives for probably the most environment friendly options,” mentioned Beiron.
“The present regulatory framework dangers inflicting lock-in to combustion-based vitality techniques, although technically mature processes exist already that would offer each decrease vitality use and decrease price – comparable to gasification and electrification of district heating.”
Thunman added: “Our research exhibits that some components of the regulatory framework most likely must be adjusted if the EU is to realize its long-term targets.”
“Higher coordination is required between local weather targets, useful resource effectivity and industrial feasibility as a way to handle the uncertainty that at the moment exists. This uncertainty makes it tough to make rational funding selections for the large-scale enlargement of sustainable aviation fuels within the coming years.”
