Proposed European Union aviation regulations could see greenhouse gas emissions from flying increase, even while they are claimed to be sustainable, if some nations get their way.
The ReFuelEU regulations now being negotiated would require commercial flights in the EU to start using 鈥渟ustainable aviation fuels鈥�, with the proportion added gradually rising from 2 per cent in 2025 to 63 per cent by 2050. But the definition of 鈥渟ustainable aviation fuels鈥� is currently up for discussion 鈥� and may end up including fuels that lead to an increase in emissions.
Under the original proposal put forward by the European Commission, sustainable aviation fuels would consist mainly of advanced biofuels derived from waste as well as synthetic fuels created using renewable energy. Biofuels made from food and animal feed wouldn鈥檛 count.
Advertisement
Overall, this is good, says at the International Council on Clean Transportation, a non-profit research organisation. But several suggested amendments to the legislation widen the definition of sustainable aviation fuels to include food-based biofuels, she says.
That is a problem because such biofuels use land that is needed to grow food for people or farm animals to eat. To maintain food supplies, more land would have to be cleared for agriculture around the world. If the emissions from these indirect effects on land use are counted, they 鈥渃ould negate some or all of the [greenhouse gas] emission savings of individual biofuels鈥�, a states.
And it isn鈥檛 just about the climate. The loss of habitat is the main driver of biodiversity loss around the world. 鈥淭he main message is that there should not be any food and feedstock biofuels,鈥� says Baldino.
Food-based biofuels also push up food prices, hitting the poorest people hardest. 鈥淭here is competition between land for fuel and land for food,鈥� says , a member of the European Parliament, who is part of the Green group. 鈥淧articularly in light of the war in Ukraine, we must prioritise land for food.鈥�
Another proposed amendment is that only biofuels that reduce emissions by at least 55 per cent should be eligible. While that sounds good, the proposed method for calculating emission reductions excludes indirect land-use effects, says Baldino.
鈥淭he devil is in the details when it comes to biofuels. Some do more harm than good,鈥� says at Transport & Environment, which campaigns for cleaner transport. 鈥淚t鈥檚 very important that ReFuelEU gives the right signal and supports only the most sustainable biofuels.鈥�
While biofuels made from waste such as used cooking oil can provide genuine reductions in greenhouse emissions, there are limits to the amount of waste available.
鈥淲e simply don鈥檛 have the resources to create the quantity of biofuel needed to keep up with the rocketing demand,鈥� says Cuffe.
This can lead to fraud. For instance, Cuffe says it appears that some biofuels sold as being made from used cooking oil .听
For these reasons, Cuffe, Baldino and Mirolo would all like to see caps imposed on the quantities of biofuels allowed.
Instead of biofuels, Cuffe thinks ReFuelEU should prioritise the use of e-kerosene made using renewable energy, electrolysis and direct air capture聽of carbon dioxide. Companies are poised to ramp up production if policy-makers send a clear signal to investors, he says.
ReFuelEU should also apply to private jets, not just commercial flights, says Cuffe. Negotiations on the wording will continue until the autumn, he says, and the final outcome is hard to predict.
鈥淭he definition of sustainable aviation remains a hugely divisive topic and positions among member states vary greatly,鈥� an EU official told New 杏吧原创. Discussions are still ongoing, the official said, and the European Council hasn鈥檛 yet reached a common position.
Sign up to our free Fix the Planet newsletter to get a dose of climate optimism delivered straight to your inbox, every Thursday
