1. WHY INTRODUCE ALTERNATIVE FUELS IN AVIATION?
Limiting or reducing aviation greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions is a key objective of ICAO’s environmental
protection activities. In this regard, in 2010, at the 37th Session of the ICAO Assembly, ICAO’s Member
States adopted the global aspirational goal to stabilize the international civil aviation GHG emissions at
their level of 2020.
The trends assessment performed by the ICAO Committee on Aviation Environmental Protection (CAEP)
forecasts that, even with the anticipated gain in efficiency from technological and operational measures,
aviation CO2 emissions will increase in the next decades due to a continuous growth in air traffic (figure
below).
CAEP environmental trends assessment to 2040
Therefore additional measures must be taken into consideration in order to achieve a carbon neutral
growth from 2020, including the use of sustainable alternative fuels that have a reduced carbon foot
print compared to conventional jet fuel.
Emissions reductions accrued from the use of sustainable alternative fuels are not as a result of
decreased fuel consumption, but through a reduction of the emissions generated by the use of the fuel
itself.
2. WHAT ARE SUSTAINABLE ALTERNATIVE JET FUELS ?
Sustainable alternative fuels for aviation are fuels that have a potential to be sustainably produced and
to generate lower carbon emissions than conventional kerosene on a life cycle basis.
Aviation’s focus is on “drop-in” fuels that do not require a change of aircraft and infrastructure, which
would induce major logistical, safety and cost issues.
What is a drop-in fuel?
How can a drop-in fuel reduce GHG emissions?
How can sustainable alternative fuels be produced? From which feedstock?
Could alternative fuels produced from fossil feedstock be used for aviation?
How are we sure that alternative fuels are drop-in and safe?
What is a drop-in fuel?
A drop-in fuel is a substitute for conventional jet fuel, which is fully compatible, mixable and
interchangeable with conventional jet fuel. Such an alternative fuel does not require any adaptation of
the aircraft and or infrastructure, and does not imply any restriction on the domain of use of the aircraft.
It can be used just as conventional jet fuel and does not require any new certification of the system.
Today, drop-in fuels are synthetic fuels that are designed in such a way that their components and
properties are close to those of conventional jet fuels.
Why are drop-in fuels so important?
Being a drop-in fuel is currently seen by the aviation community as a major requirement for any new
fuel in aviation. A "non drop-in" fuel would need to be handled separately from conventional jet fuel.
This would result in safety issues associated to risks of mishandling, and would require a parallel
infrastructure to be built up at all airports. The cost of such large parallel infrastructure networks is
generally considered as prohibitive. From an operational point of view, as no aircraft is dedicated to a
specific route, the new fuel and its distribution network would have to be deployed worldwide and it
would be necessary to maintain different networks until the new fuel’s production covers 100% of the
needs, knowing that average aircraft lifetimes exceed thirty years. In addition, guarantees should be
provided to aircraft manufacturers that the fuel will be deployed before any decision is taken to develop
a dedicated aircraft.
How can a drop-in fuel reduce GHG emissions?
Drop-in fuels are synthetic fuels that are designed in such a way that their components and properties
are close to those of conventional jet fuels. Hence, they are still hydrocarbons and their combustion still
emits CO2 in quantities similar to those emitted by fossil jet fuel.
To understand how such fuels can generate emissions reductions, two different situations should be
considered depending on the type of raw materials that are used.
A first family of alternative fuels consists of biofuels made from various kinds
of biomass (crops, wood, agricultural residues, etc.). In that case, the carbon
contained in the fuel comes from plants and was up-taken from the
atmosphere by plants’ growth through photosynthesis. This carbon is
emitted back into the atmosphere during the combustion and will return to
plants in a close loop. This is not additional carbon injected into the
biosphere as it would be the case for fossil fuels. Thus, in the case of biofuels,
the emitted carbon can be considered as neutral and combustion emissions
can be accounted as zero emissions. This is the source of emissions
reductions with biofuels.
A second family of alternative fuels consists of those fuels produced
from different categories of waste, such as municipal solid waste or
industrial waste gases. These wastes can contain or be made of
fossil carbon. In this case, the mechanism for emissions savings is
not the neutrality of carbon emissions, but the multiple uses of
fossil carbon. Indeed, waste is discarded end-life products from
valuable goods (e.g. municipal solid wastes) or by-products with no
utilization value from the manufacturing of goods (e.g. industrial
waste gas from steel industry). GHG emissions of waste are
primarily associated with the production of these goods. Using
waste does not add emissions to the system and is thus, carbon
neutral. Using a different approach that would consider the value of
the fuel produced from wastes, emissions could be shared between
the manufacturing of the primary goods and the fuel. Then the fuel
would not be zero emissions but, globally, for the same quantity of
goods produced (main goods + fuel), an emissions reduction would
be achieved.
How can alternative fuels be produced? From which feedstock?
Alternative jet fuels can be produced from a variety of feedstock including renewable biomass, waste or
fossil feedstock, such as coal and natural gas. The focus here is on sustainable alternative fuels that have
the potential to reduce GHG emissions. Thus, alternative fuels from fossil feedstock are not included as
they are not likely to generate emissions reductions.
The figure bellow presents a simplified view of pathways for the production of sustainable alternative
fuels. Only the routes that have already been approved or that are currently being submitted for
approval to ASTM are represented.
Micro-algae
Waste gases
Oleaginous plants
Catalytic hydrothermolysis
Tri-glycerides
Recycled oil
Animal fats
Hydroprocessing (HEFA)
Yeast, malgae
Farnesene
Hydroprocessing
Sugar crops
Sugars
Fermentation
Cereals
Enzymatic Hydrolysis
Alcohol
"Alcohol-to-Jet"
Drop-in Jet Fuel
(& diesel)
Components
Municipal wastes
Catalytic conversion
Cellulosic plants
Fischer-Tropsh
Macro-algae
Lignocellulose
Pyrolysis / catalytic cracking
Residues
Simplified view of pathways to sustainable fuels
There are mainly three families of bio-feedstock that can be used to produce alternative fuel jet fuels:
the family of oils and fats, or triglicerides, the family of sugars, and the family of lignocellulosic feedstock.
Triglicerides currently come largely from oil crops, animals fats and used cooking oil. Production from
micro-algae is an additional promising pathway that is currently in the research and development stage.
Triglicerides contain oxygen that need to be removed to produce jet fuel components which are pure
hydrocarbons. Different processes are proposed for this, in particular hydroprocessing, one of the two
processes already approved.
Sugars come from sugar crops and cereals starch. They are mainly associated to fermentation routes
that generally produce alcohols, which are further upgraded into hydrocarbons. This is the “alcohol-tojet” route. Advanced fermentation has also been developed that directly produces hydrocarbons which
can be upgraded in jet fuel components. It should also be noted that fermentation has been developed
from industrial waste gas as well. In that case, it is carbon monoxide that is used. Cultivation of algae is
also a way to use waste gas to produce feedstock: CO2 is indeed needed to grow algae.
Lignocellulose is found in the wall of plants’ cells and in wood, and come from various energy crops, as
well as from agriculture or forest residues and from macro-algae. Lignocellulose can be directly
converted into hydrocarbons using thermochemical processes such as Fischer-Trospch, pyrolysis or
catalytic cracking. The Fischer-Tropsch process can also be used to convert municipal solid wastes.
But lignocellulose can also be transformed into sugar and can thus be used for the aforementioned
fermentation routes. In a similar way, sugars can be transformed into oil by yeast or micro-algae and
thus further processed into jet fuel through deoxygenation.
Thus, there are a large number of processes under development that allow for processing of almost all
kinds of feedstock into aviation fuel components, which offers flexibility for regional adaptation and
optimization.
Additional routes are also being studied to produce alternative fuels directly from CO2, including CO2
captured from the atmosphere, without using biomass. Conversion then uses renewable energy to
break down CO2 into CO and O2, and water into H2 and O2, and then recombines CO and H2 in liquid
hydrocarbon using the Fischer-Tropsch synthesis. These processes (e.g. solar fuels) are currently in the
research stage.
Most of the various pathways do not directly produce a drop-in jet fuel. They produce components that
need to be blended with Jet A-1 to obtain the final drop-in fuel. It should also be noted that although
they are not the processes currently deployed for road-transportation, these processes co-produce fuels
that can be used for road transportation.
Could alternative fuels produced from fossil feedstock be used for aviation ?
Alternative jet fuels can be produced from fossil feedstock. Examples are the Coal-to-Liquid (CTL) and
Gas-to-Liquid (GTL) made from coal and natural gas using the Fischer-Tropsch pathway.
These fuels are approved for use in aviation as part of the general approval of Fischer-Tropsch fuels
(Fischer-Tropsch process is feedstock agnostic and CTL or GTL are similar to biomass-to-liquid, BTL). In
addition, commercial production already exists. GTL produced by Shell in Qatar is available at Doha
airport and CTL is supplied to Johannesburg airport in South Africa by Sasol.
In this case, the carbon contained in the fuel is fossil carbon and the conversion process adds to the
emissions. As a result, these fuels create larger CO2 emissions than conventional jet made from crudeoil. Carbon sequestration can be used to reduce global emissions but, even with the most aggressive
existing sequestration technologies, there is currently little evidence that emissions reductions could be
achieved as compared to current petroleum-based fuels. As these fuels are also not using renewable
feedstock, they are not considered sustainable alternative fuels.
How are we sure that alternative fuels are drop-in and safe?
Jet fuels must meet specific requirements corresponding to their severe constraints of use in an aircraft.
For example, the fuel should not freeze at temperatures down to -47 C to ensure that it is still liquid at
high altitudes of flight. Its energy content should exceed a minimum value (42.8 MJ/kg) in order for the
aircraft to achieve its operational range with a constrained mass and volume of fuel. There are also
additional constraints associated with safety concerns, such as flammability, or with design features of
aircraft engines (for example, jet fuel is used as a cooling fluid and a lubricant in engines).
The properties that any batch of fuel has to satisfy in order to be accepted on board an aircraft are
defined by specifications, the main ones for conventional jet fuel being the DEF-STAN 91-911 and the
ASTM2 D1655. These fuel specifications do not fix any precise composition for the fuel. They instead
define the nature of the fuel and of the process for its manufacturing, as well as the limit values for a
number of its properties. The experience with the fuel ensures that checking this limited set of
properties is sufficient to guarantee suitability and safety.
To allow their use in aviation, specifications had to be created for alternative fuels. Prior to this, the
fuels had to undergo an approval process that achieved a detailed assessment of a large number of their
physical and chemical properties, as well as an in depth testing of the fuels behaviour in aircraft and
engines systems, in order to demonstrate that there was no harm to use them. This approval process
was developed for the approval by ASTM of Fischer-Tropsch fuels, the first alternative fuels for aviation.
ASTM has now defined a standard, ASTM D4054, that frames this process.
D4054 is an iterative process that involves many experts in the ASTM’s aviation fuels subcommittee, in
particular, the Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEM). The OEM review the research report produced
by the candidate fuel producer with testing results covering basic specification properties, additional
properties referred to as “fit-for-purpose properties”, components testing and, if deemed necessary,
full-scale engine testing. Approval of the fuel requires formal ballots and results in a fuel specification.
For the specification of synthetic fuels, ASTM has created a specific standard, D7566, which includes a
dedicated annex for each newly approved fuel. This annex defines the final list of properties that need
to be checked for the acceptance of the fuel batches. As the approval process ensures that the fuel is
drop-in, any fuel qualified under D7566 is automatically qualified under D1655 and can be considered as
Jet A-1. Accordingly, it can be used without any recertification of aircraft.
1
DefStan is the standardization system of the UK Ministry of Defence.
ASTM International is an organization devoted to the development and management of standards for a wide range of
industrial products and processes.
2
3. WHAT ARE THE POTENTIAL BENEFITS OF ALTERNATIVE FUELS ?
The major potential benefit of introducing sustainable alternative fuels in aviation is to reduce the
contribution of aviation to climate change through the reduction of aviation greenhouse gas emissions.
Alternative fuels may also have additional environmental benefits for local air quality.
How sustainable alternative fuels reduce aviation GHG emissions?
What are the other potential environmental benefits?
How sustainable alternative fuels reduce aviation GHG emissions?
The main benefit expected from the use of alternative fuels in aviation is the reduction of GHG
emissions.
If, for sustainable alternative fuels, combustion emissions are neutral and can be accounted as zero
emission (include link to previous question), this does not mean that there is no GHG emissions
associated to the use of sustainable alternative fuels. The full life cycle (link to the box related to LCA) of
the fuel needs to be considered as the production of the fuel itself is likely to produce GHG emissions,
including CO2 and other types of gases such as NOx or methane.
The figure below provides some indicative values of the potential for emissions reductions of some
biofuels compared to the case of conventional jet fuel. For conventional jet fuel, emissions associated to
combustion appear in red. They are not accounted for in the case of biofuels. The indicative mean
values for the different biofuels show that they have a real potential for emissions reductions, in
particular for those using cellulosic feedstock.
Example of biofuels potential greenhouse gas savings
Fuel life cycle and GHG emissions
From the feedstock extraction or production to the final use in an engine, the fuel goes through multiple
steps constituting its life cycle. At each of these steps, GHG emissions are likely to be produced. The
total carbon foot print of the fuel is obtained by adding all these emissions together in a life cycle
assessment (LCA) approach.
For fossil fuels, emissions are associated to crude oil extraction and refining, as well as final fuel
transport and distribution. In the case of biofuels, a significant part of the emissions can be associated to
the cultivation and the transportation of the feedstock.
Fuel life cycle emissions
Thus, to assess the emissions reductions from using alternative fuels, a comprehensive accounting must
be done of all emissions across all steps of the fuel’s life cycle, from the field to the tank of the aircraft.
There is an environmental benefit for climate change if these emissions are lower than the emissions on
the full life cycle of fossil fuels, including the combustion.
(this would be included in a box that is open when clicking on life cycle)
The variation ranges (black lines on the graph) illustrate possible variations of the life cycle emissions
depending on the actual conditions for the production of the fuel (e.g. agriculture practices, fertilizers
use, co-products use). It clearly illustrates the importance of carefully controlling and optimizing these
conditions to achieve the minimum emissions.
In addition, the results presented are for the case where no land use change (LUC) is induced by the
cultivation of the feedstock. LUC has emerged as a critical parameter in the life cycle assessment of GHG
emissions for the production of biofuels, as significant amounts of carbon may be stored in a given tract
of land, both above and underground3. A change in land use will affect carbon storage not only through
the removal of the vegetation, but also through the oxidation of the soil organic carbon induced by
agricultural practices such as tillage. Yet, the change may have either a positive or negative impact:
converting a forest into crop land will result in carbon release, while replacing annual crops by perennial
crops may result in increased carbon storage in the land. Depending on local conditions, LUC emissions
can dominate all other emissions associated with biofuels; a typical example is the clear cutting of a
tropical forest to grow annual crops.
References:
3

Stratton & al. - Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Alternative Jet Fuels – PARTNER,
Project 28 report, 2010.

Prieur & al. – Life Cycle Analysis Report – SWAFEA European Study, 2011.
Carbon that may be stored in a land includes above ground carbon contained in the vegetation and underground carbon
contained in the vegetation roots, as well as well as soil organic carbon consisting of humus, and charcoal comprising
decomposed plant and animals residues, substances synthesised from the decomposition and living micro-organism and small
animals.
What are the other potential environmental benefits?
The alternative fuels approved to date (Fischer-Tropsch fuels and Hydroprocessed Esters and Fatty Acids
– HEFA) are purely paraffinic fuels, meaning that they consist of alkane molecules only. A conventional
jet fuel also contains aromatics molecules, which is the reason why current alternative fuels need to be
blended with conventional fuel to obtain a drop-in fuel. This ensures that the final fuel contains the
minimum required level of aromatics.
However this final blend tends to have a lower content in aromatics than the average of conventional
fuels. This turns out to have beneficial impacts on engine emissions with regard to local air quality.
Indeed, aromatics play a major role in the formation of particulate matters (PM) and thus some
alternative fuels have the potential to reduce PM emissions from engines.
4. WHICH ALTERNATIVE FUELS CAN CURRENTLY BE USED ?
Any fuel used in aviation must previously be approved against international standards. Two alternative
fuel pathways have already been approved for blending with conventional jet fuel and six additional
pathways are currently under review.
A significant experience has been acquired with alternative fuels through experimental flights during the
approval of the fuels and through numerous commercial flight since July 2011.
However, industrial production is in an early stage and the commercial availability of the fuels is
currently limited.
Which fuels are approved today ?
Why is there a maximum blending ratio for currently approved alternative fuels?
What is the current experience with flying on alternative fuels ?
What is the current commercial availability of alternative fuels?
Which fuels are approved today ?
Currently, there are two approved pathways to produce drop-in fuels for aviation:

The Fischer Tropsch (FT) process that can convert coal, natural gas or biomass into liquid
hydrocarbons through a first gasification step, followed by the Fischer-Tropsch synthesis; and

The Hydroprocessed Esters and Fatty Acids (HEFA) process, which converts vegetal oils and
animal fats into hydrocarbons by deoxygenation and hydroprocessing.
Both processes produces Synthetic Paraffinic Kerosene (SPK), consisting of linear or branched alkane,
that can be blended at up to 50% in volume with petroleum-derived jet fuel to obtain a drop-in fuel.
FT-SPK were approved as Annex A1 to ASTM D7566 in September 2009, and HEFA-SPK as Annex A2
to ASTM D7566 in July 2011. A number of companies across the world have developed or are
developing such processes.
Six additional pathways are currently under review by ASTM:

Synthetic Iso-paraffin from Fermented Hydroprocessed Sugar ((SIP), formerly referred to as
Direct-sugar-to-Hydrocarbon (DSHC)), converts sugars to a pure paraffin molecule using an
advanced fermentation – the process is currently company specific and delivers a C15 molecule
for which an approval is targeted for blending ratio up to 10% with conventional jet fuel;

The Alcohol to Jet SPK (ATJ-SPK), starts from an alcohol to produce a SPK (through dehydration
of the alcohol to an olefinic gas, followed by oligomerization to obtain longer chain length liquid
olefins, hydrogenation and fractionation); this pathway is currently developed by a number of
companies;

Catalytic hydrothermolysis (CH) combined with hydroprocessing, has the potential to convert
vegetable oils and animal fats directly into a drop-in jet fuel without blending with conventional
fuel (the final product contains both paraffins and aromatics); this pathway is currently company
specific;

Hydroprocessed Depolymerized Cellulosic Jet (HDCJ), covers two types of processes, pyrolysis
and catalytic cracking, which convert lignocellulosic feedstock into a bio-crude that is upgraded
into fungible hydrocarbons; a blending ratio of 30% with conventional jet fuel is targeted;

Hydro-Deoxygenated Synthesized Kerosene (HDO-SK), can convert starch, sugar and
lignocellulose into a hydrocarbon fuel, consisting of cycloparaffins and paraffins, through
aqueous phase reforming, condensation and hydrotreating; the process is currently company
specific and a 50% blending ratio with conventional jet fuel is targeted for approval;

Synthetic Kerosene with Aromatics (FT-SKA), adds some alkylated benzenes from the processing
of coal tar to SPK obtained from FT coal-to-liquid.
Reference: CAAFI General Meeting, January 2014, Certification-Qualification Breakout Session.
Why is there a maximum blending ratio for currently approved alternative fuels?
To produce “drop-in” jet fuels, fuel producers have developed synthetic fuels in such a way that their
components and properties are close to those of conventional jet fuels.
However processes such as Fischer-Tropsch (FT) or hydroprocessing of oils and fats (HEFA) do not
produce the complete range of molecules of conventional jet fuel. FT and HEFA fuels are Synthetic
Paraffinic Kerosene (SPK) and do not contain aromatics. These aromatics are nevertheless required to
ensure the compatibility of the fuel with current aircraft and infrastructure. In particular, some variety
of seals need a minimum amount of aromatics to operate properly and avoid leakage. Thus, blending
SPK with conventional jet fuel is required to ensure a minimum content of aromatics in the fuel.
In the future, some additional approved pathways will contain aromatics and may have the potential to
be drop-in without blending. In some cases, such as for pyrolysis fuel, the content in aromatics may be
higher than the limit of the jet fuel specification and blending will be required to remain below this limit.
Include this box to illustrate the two previous questions.
Components of conventional jet fuel
From a technical point of view, a conventional jet fuel is a mix of hydrocarbons including mostly normal
and iso-paraffins (CnH2n+2), cycloparaffins and aromatics.
Normal Paraffin
Iso-paraffin
Cyclo-paraffin
Aromatics
(saturated linear chain)
(saturated branch chain)
(saturated cyclic chain)
(unsaturated cyclic chain)
What is the current experience with flying on alternative fuels ?
Before the approval of the first alternative jet fuels, demonstration flights had already been performed
by a number of airlines. The first flight took place in February 2008 when a Boeing 747 from Virgin
Atlantic flew from London to Amsterdam using a 20% blend of biofuel, made of coconut and babassu oil,
to supply one of its engines. A total of nine demonstration flights using biofuels made from various
vegetable oils was performed by July 2011 (three flights were also performed with Fischer-Tropsch Gasto-Liquid, GTL, as a surrogate of Biomass-to-Liquid, BTL, as the Fischer-Tropsch process was still under
development for biomass). They demonstrated the performance and the safety of the fuels. In addition,
numerous military aircraft flights were performed by the U.S. Air Force that contributed to the
validation of alternative jet fuels.
Following the approval of HEFA in July 2011, commercial flights developed, proving the safety and
innocuousness of regular use of alternative fuels and demonstrating the interest and engagement of
airlines. A number of airlines achieved a series of scheduled flights over a period of time, such as
Thomson Airways (daily flight over six weeks in 2012), Alaska Airlines (75 scheduled flights) or Lufthansa
that achieved 1,200 flights from Hamburg to Frankfurt, over a six months period, with a regular
monitoring of the aircraft engines in order to evaluate the potential long term effects of using
alternative fuels. As of June 2012, more than 1,500 flights had been performed on biojet fuels. More
recently, KLM performed weekly intercontinental flights on biofuels from New York to Amsterdam over
26 weeks.
What is the current commercial availability of alternative fuels?
If numerous demonstration and commercial flights have shown the technical suitability of alternative jet
fuels, their commercial production is still in infancy. By December 2013, no routine production of
sustainable alternative jet fuels had started and, to date, commercial flights have operated with
specially produced batches of fuels (existing hydroprocessing plants for vegetable oils and animal fats
are mostly dedicated to diesel fuel).
The situation is expected to change in 2014, as commercial biofuel plants have been announced to begin
commercial production of alternative jet fuels. This includes:

The Alt-Air hydroprocessing plant in Bakersfield, CA (USA) that has a production capability of 90
kt/y (diesel and jet fuel); and

The Amyris plant of Brota (Brazil), with a production capacity of sugar-based biofuel of 40 kt/y
(Amyris announced the possible delivery of its sugar based biojet fuel to GOL Airlines from 2014,
after the approval of the fuel).
5. WHAT ARE THE CHALLENGES FOR THE DEVELOPMENT AND DEPLOYMENT OF ALTERNATIVE FUELS ?
Economics
In the short term economics is the major hurdle to overcome for the deployment of alternative fuels in
aviation.
Current assessments converge on an lack of competitiveness of alternative fuels compared to
conventional jet fuel in the initial development phase before best practices, progress in production
technology and economies of scale can bring about meaningful cost reductions.
Incentives, or compensation mechanisms for the environmental benefits of using these fuels, are
required to bridge the price gap in order for airlines to buy the fuels and to create a market perspective
that will attract investors and reduce the perceived risk of this emerging industry.
Renewable energy policies, which exist in most countries, support the deployment of biofuels for road
transport through mandatory production quotas and fiscal incentives. A level playing field needs to be
created for aviation in order for fuel producers to also consider this market, where technical
requirements for fuels are also more stringent.
Beyond supporting measures, a key to the deployment of alternative fuels in aviation is to bring costs on
par with fossil fuels. This requires improving efficiency and reducing the costs of both transformation
processes and feedstock production, which will necessitate further support and investments in research
and development, as well as the demonstration and scale-up of technologies.
Feedstock availability
Over the longer term, the availability of sustainable feedstock in the required quantities is a significant
challenge for the commercial-scale deployment of alternative jet fuels as a means to achieving aviation
environmental objectives. In addition, feedstock is a major contributor to the cost of alternative fuels.
Development of feedstock production needs to be included in supporting policies, as well as in research
and development efforts. Innovation in feedstock and technologies which require minimum resources in
terms of land and water quality and nutrients, is key for the large scale deployment of alternative fuels.
Feedstock are also at the core of the sustainability of alternative fuels.
Sustainability
If the use of alternative fuels has the potential to significantly reduce GHG emissions, their deployment
at commercial scale is likely to have a broad scope of environmental, societal and economic
consequences, in particular because of the large amount of biomass that could be needed. Depending
on the solutions adopted, producing large volumes of biomass may have a high impact on land and
water use, as well as biodiversity, generate soil degradation and pollution from fertilizers and chemicals
use, and induce important changes in rural society and local communities.
The aviation sector recognizes the need for the sustainable development of alternative jet fuels, in
accordance with the three pillars of sustainability - environment, society and economics.
This management requires developing policies for the deployment of alternative fuels that include
sustainability targets and associated dedicated measures to ensure sustainability. Such measures should
build on a combination of the approaches that have already been developed in the field of bioenergy.
The voluntary certification of alternative fuel production chains is a way to ensure sustainable practices
at value-chain level, while implementing a monitoring system at a national level, based on a sound set of
indicators, allows for better control of the global and cumulative impacts, and to inform decision-making.
Informed decision-making in the development and implementation of biofuels policies and strategies is
key to minimizing risks and ensuring sustainability. An assessment of the sustainable bioenergy potential
of the country is essential in this process.
A significant challenge today regarding sustainability is the assessment of the indirect impacts of a large
scale deployment of alternative fuels. Indirect land use change (ILUC) and impacts on food security are
particularly debated. ILUC is the land-use change induced in a different geographic area by the
deployment of energy crops in one locale which leads to the displacement of previously existing crops. It
is not directly observable and is recognized to potentially create GHG emissions. Food security is also
indirectly affected by the effect on prices and agricultural commodity markets of an increased demand
for biomass. The assessment and management of these impacts is currently not fully mature and require
additional research and methodological work.
Reference: ICAO SUSTAF experts group report, “The Challenges for the Development and Deployment of
Sustainable Alternative Fuels in Aviation”, May 2013.
6. WHAT ARE THE INITIATIVES WORLDWIDE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF ALTERNATIVE FUELS ?
A remarkable tendency over the past years has been the increasing number of States’ and stakeholders’
initiatives and of cooperation agreements worldwide. In addition to direct agreements between airlines
and fuel producers, 19 new initiatives and States’ R&D supports were identified in ICAO’s Global
Framework for Aviation Alternative Fuels (GFAAF) as of the end of 2012, with 15 more being added in
2013. Stakeholders’ initiatives are being undertaken across all regions for the promotion and
development of sustainable alternative fuels for aviation.
The spectrum of objectives covered by these initiatives includes:






Networking and coordination of stakeholders for promotion, information exchange and roadmapping for the development of alternative fuels;
International cooperation, such as the agreement signed between the United States and Spain and
Germany, respectively (U.S.A. signed similar agreement with Brazil and Australia in 2011);
Assessment of regional potential and solutions for alternative jet fuel production;
Research and development;
Setting of production value-chains; and
Other activities, such as coordination amongst stakeholders’ for the purchase of fuel (e.g.
agreement between DEC and A4A in the U.S.A.).
Currently, a majority of initiatives aim to coordinate stakeholders for the promotion and development of
alternative fuels, and/or to assess the feasibility and the most suitable solutions for national deployment.
To date, 12 initiatives directly targeting the development and establishment of a production chain have
been identified.
Moreover, a significant number of initiatives from the private sector have been launched in addition to
the initiatives from governments or those carried out through public-private partnerships. In particular,
major aircraft manufacturers have been very active in developing regional partnerships.
Regarding States’ initiatives in 2013, the Indonesian Green Aviation Initiative was notable. Indonesia is
indeed the first country that has set legally binding provisions for the use of biofuels in aviation, with the
target to include 2% of biofuels in the aviation mix by 2016.
See Fact & Figures for more insight on worldwide initiatives or click on the map to see initiatives and
activities per country.
7. WHAT IS ICAO DOING IN THE FIELD OF ALTERNATIVE FUELS?
The recognition of alternative fuels as a key part of the basket of measures under consideration by ICAO
Member States to stabilize emissions from international aviation at their 2020 levels is reflected in ICAO
policies and practices related to environmental protection.
ICAO is actively engaged in activities to promote and facilitate the emergence of sustainable alternative
fuels in aviation by exchanging and disseminating of information, fostering dialogue among States and
stakeholders, and carrying out dedicated work as requested by ICAO Member States to inform decision
making.
What is the ICAO policy related to alternative fuels ?
What is the role of ICAO in the development and deployment of alternative fuels?
What are the past and current achievements of ICAO in the field of alternative fuels ?
What is the ICAO policy related to alternative fuels ?
The 38th Session of the ICAO Assembly, held from 24 September to 4 October 2013, adopted Resolution
A38-18: Consolidated Statement of continuing ICAO policies and practices related to environmental
protection – Climate change.
Regarding alternative fuels, the Resolution requests States to:

Set a coordinated approach in their national administrations in order to develop coordinated
national policy actions to accelerate the appropriate development, deployment and use of
sustainable alternative fuels for aviation, in accordance with their national circumstances;

Consider measures to support research and development as well as processing technology and
feedstock production in order to decrease costs and support scale-up of sustainable production
pathways up to commercial scale, taking into account the sustainable development of States;

Recognize existing approaches to assess the sustainability of all alternative fuels in general,
including those for use in aviation which should:

Achieve net GHG emissions reductions on a life cycle basis;

Respect areas of high importance for biodiversity, conservation and benefits from
ecosystems;

Contribute to local social and economic development, and avoid competition with food
and water;

Adopt measures to ensure the sustainability of alternative fuels for aviation, building on existing
approaches or combination of approaches, and monitor, at a national level, the sustainability of
the production of alternative fuels for aviation;

Work together through ICAO and other relevant international bodies, to exchange information
and best practices, including on the sustainability of alternative fuels for aviation.
What is the role of ICAO in the development and deployment of alternative fuels?
Resolution A38-18 includes a strong mandate for ICAO in the area of alternative fuels. It requests the
Council to:

Encourage member States and invite industry, financial institutions and other international
organizations to actively participate in exchange of information and best practices and in further
work under ICAO on sustainable alternative fuels for aviation;

Continue to maintain the ICAO Global Framework for Aviation Alternative Fuels (GFAAF);

Collect information on progress of alternative fuels in aviation, including through States’ action
plans, to give a global view of the future use of alternative jet fuels and to account for changes
in life cycle GHG emissions in order to assess progress toward achieving global aspirational
goals;

Work with financial institutions to facilitate access to financing infrastructure development
projects dedicated to sustainable aviation alternative fuels and incentives to overcome initial
market hurdles.
What are the past and current achievements of ICAO in the field of alternative fuels ?
February 2009: ICAO Aviation and Sustainable Alternative Workshop (Montreal)
The workshop concluded that, while not the sole means to reduce aviation’s GHG emissions,
alternative fuels are a valuable part of a comprehensive long-term energy strategy to reduce
emissions, and that the decision to develop their use in aviation should be an informed and
responsible one based on total life cycle costs and carbon footprints. The need for cooperation
and harmonization, in particular in the quantification of the life-cycle footprint, was identified.
November 2009: ICAO Conference on Aviation and Alternative Fuels (Rio de Janeiro)
ICAO and its Member States endorsed the use of sustainable alternative fuels for aviation as an
important means of reducing aviation emissions.
The Conference also approved ICAO as a facilitator for the development and deployment of
alternative fuels through education, information sharing and the development of standardized
definitions, methodologies and processes to support the development of sustainable alternative
fuels.
The establishment of the Global Framework on Aviation Alternative Fuels (GFAAF) was agreed
to consolidate and communicate information on existing activities in the area of alternative
fuels for aviation.
2010: Creation of the Global Framework on Aviation Alternative Fuels (GFAAF)
To fulfill the remit from the Conference on Aviation Alternative Fuels (CAAF) organised in Rio de
Janeiro in November 2009, the GFAAF was created as a public website, accessible through ICAO
portal, where news and materials related to aviation alternative fuels are collected.
The GFAAF provides a continuously updated database about activities and developments in the
field of alternatives for aviation, as well as useful documentation and links, to support
information sharing and dissemination for the benefit of aviation fuels community.
http://www.icao.int/environmental-protection/GFAAF/Pages/default.aspx
October 2011: ICAO Workshop on Sustainable Alternative Fuels (Montreal)
ICAO organized this second workshop to promote the dialogue between States, financial
institutions, fuel producers and operators. The workshop showed wide agreement between
participants on expectations and challenges related to alternatives fuels deployment in aviation.
Views were also expressed on the need for global policies and measures to facilitate
deployment and also for increased harmonization, in particular, regarding sustainability.
June 2012: Rio+20 Flightpath Initiative
The ICAO “Flightpath to a Sustainable Future” initiative was launched on the occasion of the
Rio+20 conference in June 2012, in cooperation with aviation industry partners. As part of the
initiative, the ICAO Secretary General travelled from Montreal, Canada to the Rio+20 Summit in
Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, on four connecting flights, all using alternative fuels. As the first ever flight
operation connecting passenger flights using alternative fuels, it set a record for the greatest
number of passengers carried on commercial biofuel flights within 24 hours, and it was also the
longest international itinerary using biofuels (11,525 km).
July 2012: Sustainable Aviation Fuels Expert Group (SUSTAF)
In preparation of the 38th ICAO Assembly, in June 2012, ICAO created the Sustainable
Alternative Fuels experts group (SUSTAF) with the mandate to analyze the challenges for the
development and deployment of alternative fuels in aviation and to issue recommendations to
support industry and States. This group consisted of 45 experts from various geographic areas
and stakeholders, including States’ representatives, NGO, industry and other United Nation
entities such as FAO and UNEP. The group focused its works on the possible options to
overcome the near-term challenges for the deployment of alternative fuels, and in particular on
the way to address sustainability.
Read about the outcomes of the group.
November 2013: Creation of CAEP Alternative Fuels Task Force (AFTF)
To respond to the remit from the 38th ICAO Assembly, the Alternative Fuels Task Force (AFTF)
was created within the Committee for Aviation Environmental Protection (CAEP). The mandate
is to assess the range of potential emissions reductions from the use of alternative fuels to 2050.
The task force gathers 63 experts from 15 States and 7 organizations. It will work on the
development of a methodology to assess fuel life cycle emissions for the purpose of ICAO’s
environmental trends assessment, and will apply this methodology to estimate the emissions
associated to a projected scenario for the future production of alternative jet fuels.