________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Europe’ s recent sustainable aviation fuel( SAF) rules risk undermining one of the most promising technologies for reducing flight emissions. By requiring that, from 2041, power-to-liquids( PtL) fuels must source their carbon only from biogenic sources or direct air capture( DAC), the policy could push PtL development into the very land use debates it was designed to avoid.
Aviation will continue to rely on liquid hydrocarbon fuels for decades. The question is how to reduce its carbon impact. Biofuels offer one route, capturing carbon from the air through plant growth, then releasing it back to the atmosphere on combustion. But biofuels bring complex trade-offs. To protect the climate, we need not only to cut emissions, but also to preserve natural carbon sinks and biodiversity. Expanding biofuels can undermine this goal.
Waste biomass is a better feedstock than purpose-grown oils or starches. Using residues from agriculture and forestry is more land-efficient and avoids direct competition with food. Yet even waste biomass can have hidden impacts. It may come from( and therefore encourage) plantations that have displaced rainforests, or lock in land use that should otherwise be returned to nature. The complexities are endless.
Carbon source controversy
The promise of PtL fuels was to offer an alternative without the biofuel land use issues. They combine captured CO 2 with green hydrogen to create synthetic hydrocarbons compatible with today’ s aircraft. Critically, PtL fuels shift the demand from land to green electricity. Solar and wind power also need land, but it is less, and energy can be generated in places where crops do not grow, relieving pressure on ecosystems.
The EU recognized this by setting a sub-target for PtL within its broader SAF mandate. This was in recognition that biofuels alone cannot meet demand
24