The blending of Sustainable Aviation Fuels (SAFs) with conventional aviation fuels is a critical strategy for reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the aviation sector. This review explores the significance of blending ratios, the implications of ASTM D7566 standards, and the technical requirements necessary for effective blending.
Blending Ratios and Their Significance
Blending ratios refer to the proportion of SAF mixed with conventional aviation fuels, typically measured by volume. The significance of these ratios lies in their impact on fuel performance, emissions, and regulatory compliance. Current ASTM standards allow for blending ratios of up to 50% for most SAFs, depending on the production pathway (Seber et al., 2022). This blending limit is crucial as it ensures that the resulting fuel maintains the necessary performance characteristics required for safe operation in existing aircraft engines.
The ability to blend SAFs with conventional fuels allows for a gradual transition towards more sustainable aviation practices without necessitating immediate and extensive modifications to aircraft and fueling infrastructure. However, the blending ratios are influenced by various factors, including the chemical composition of the fuels and the specific requirements of the aircraft engines (Ozkan et al., 2024).
Overview of ASTM D7566 Standards
ASTM D7566 is the standard specification for aviation turbine fuels containing synthesized hydrocarbons. This standard outlines the requirements for SAFs to be considered drop-in fuels, meaning they can be used interchangeably with conventional jet fuels without requiring modifications to the aircraft or fueling systems (Dray et al., 2022).
The ASTM D7566 standard includes several key provisions:
- Blending Limits: The standard specifies maximum blending ratios for different SAF pathways, typically allowing up to 50% blending with conventional fuels (Emmanouilidou et al., 2023).
- Performance Criteria: SAFs must meet stringent performance criteria to ensure they are compatible with existing aviation fuel systems. This includes requirements for thermal stability, energy density, and emissions profiles (Goh et al., 2022).
- Safety and Quality Assurance: The standard mandates rigorous testing and certification processes to ensure that blended fuels do not compromise safety or performance (Heyne et al., 2021).
Technical Requirements for Blending SAF with Conventional Fuels
The technical requirements for blending SAF with conventional fuels are multifaceted and include the following considerations:
- Chemical Composition: SAFs must be composed solely of hydrocarbons and should be free of olefinic content, oxygenates, and other heteroatoms that could negatively impact fuel performance and safety (Heyne et al., 2021). The chemical structure of the blended fuel must ensure compatibility with existing aircraft engines.
- Physical Properties: Key physical properties such as density, viscosity, and freezing point must align with those of conventional jet fuels to prevent operational issues. For instance, the density of SAFs must fall within the specified range to ensure proper fuel flow and atomization in engines (Kurzawska-Pietrowicz & Jasiński, 2024).
- Testing and Certification: Blending SAFs requires adherence to the ASTM D4054 evaluation process, which includes a tiered testing approach to assess the fuel’s performance and compatibility (Heyne et al., 2021). This process can be resource-intensive, requiring significant volumes of fuel and extensive testing over several years.
- Environmental Considerations: The blending of SAFs is also influenced by environmental regulations and sustainability criteria set forth by organizations such as the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO). These criteria aim to ensure that the production and use of SAFs contribute to overall reductions in greenhouse gas emissions (Rupcic et al., 2023).
Challenges of Compatibility in Sustainable Aviation Fuels (SAFs)
The integration of Sustainable Aviation Fuels (SAFs) into the existing aviation fuel supply chain presents several challenges related to compatibility with conventional fuels. These challenges encompass chemical properties, engine performance, infrastructure compatibility, and safety concerns.
- Chemical Properties
One of the primary challenges in blending SAFs with conventional aviation fuels lies in the differences in their chemical compositions. SAFs are typically derived from various feedstocks and production pathways, resulting in a diverse range of chemical properties. For instance, SAFs produced through the Hydroprocessed Esters and Fatty Acids (HEFA) pathway contain a higher proportion of n-paraffins and lower levels of aromatic hydrocarbons compared to traditional jet fuels (Emmanouilidou et al., 2023). This difference in composition can affect the fuel’s performance characteristics, such as its energy density, viscosity, and freezing point, which are critical for safe and efficient engine operation (Ozkan et al., 2024). Furthermore, the presence of olefins and other heteroatoms in SAFs can lead to undesirable combustion properties, necessitating stringent quality control measures to ensure compatibility with existing fuel specifications (Heyne et al., 2021).
- Engine Performance
The impact of blending SAFs with conventional fuels on engine performance and efficiency is another significant concern. Research indicates that while SAFs can reduce lifecycle carbon emissions by up to 80%, their blending ratios are currently limited to between 5% and 50% due to compatibility issues with engine components(Su-ungkavatin et al., 2023). The blending of SAFs can influence combustion characteristics, ignition delays, and overall engine efficiency. For example, fuels with higher n-paraffin content tend to exhibit improved combustion properties, while those with elevated aromatic content may lead to increased soot formation (Ozkan et al., 2024). The challenge lies in optimizing the blend ratios to achieve the desired performance without compromising engine safety or efficiency.
- Infrastructure Compatibility
Infrastructure compatibility poses another challenge for the widespread adoption of SAFs. The existing fuel storage, transportation, and distribution systems are primarily designed for conventional jet fuels, which may not be fully compatible with SAFs. For instance, the lower volumetric density of SAFs can necessitate modifications to storage tanks and fuel delivery systems to accommodate the different physical properties (Becken et al., 2023). Additionally, the introduction of SAFs may require changes in operational procedures at airports, including fuel handling and quality assurance protocols (Chen et al., 2024). The need for infrastructure upgrades can represent a significant financial burden for airlines and fuel suppliers, potentially hindering the transition to SAFs.
- Safety Concerns
Safety concerns related to the properties of SAFs and their impact on engine operation are paramount. The chemical composition of SAFs can influence their flammability, ignition performance, and overall safety during storage and handling. For example, SAFs with lower aromatic content may not provide the necessary lubrication for certain engine components, leading to increased wear and potential failure (Qasem et al., 2024). Furthermore, the presence of different chemical species in SAFs can affect the formation of soot and other emissions, which have implications for both engine performance and environmental impact (Voigt et al., 2021). Addressing these safety issues requires comprehensive testing and certification processes to ensure that SAFs meet the stringent safety standards established by regulatory bodies such as ASTM (Heyne et al., 2021).
Implications for Aircraft Operations
The integration of Sustainable Aviation Fuels (SAFs) into the aviation sector presents significant implications for aircraft operations, maintenance, and the overall economic landscape of airlines. This literature study explores the effects of blending SAFs with conventional fuels on flight operations and maintenance, potential changes in operational procedures for airlines, and the economic implications regarding fuel costs and operational efficiency.
Effects of Blending on Flight Operations and Maintenance
- Blending SAFs with conventional aviation fuels is primarily aimed at reducing carbon emissions while maintaining compatibility with existing aircraft systems. SAFs, particularly those produced through the Hydroprocessed Esters and Fatty Acids (HEFA) and Fischer-Tropsch (FT) pathways, are designed to meet the stringent performance specifications outlined by ASTM D7566, allowing them to be used as drop-in fuels (Martinez-Valencia et al., 2021).
- The blending of SAFs can influence flight operations in several ways. For instance, while the combustion properties of SAFs are generally comparable to those of conventional fuels, variations in fuel composition can affect engine performance, including changes in fuel flow rates and combustion efficiency (Kohse-Höinghaus, 2023). Additionally, the lower sulfur content in SAFs can lead to reduced particulate matter emissions, which may positively impact engine maintenance by decreasing the frequency of maintenance interventions related to soot buildup (Song et al., 2024).
- However, the introduction of SAFs also necessitates careful monitoring of fuel quality and performance to ensure that operational standards are met. Airlines may need to adapt their maintenance schedules and procedures to account for the different chemical properties of SAFs, which could affect engine wear and tear over time (Undavalli et al., 2023).
Potential Changes in Operational Procedures for Airlines
The adoption of SAFs may require airlines to implement changes in their operational procedures. For example, airlines may need to establish new protocols for fuel handling and storage to accommodate the unique characteristics of SAFs, such as their different viscosity and density compared to conventional fuels (Lau et al., 2024).
Furthermore, the logistics of fuel supply chains may need to be re-evaluated to ensure a consistent and reliable supply of SAFs at airports. This could involve partnerships with fuel suppliers and investments in infrastructure to facilitate the blending and distribution of SAFs (Martinez-Valencia et al., 2021).
Airlines may also need to enhance their training programs for ground crew and flight personnel to ensure that they are familiar with the operational implications of using SAFs, including any adjustments needed in fuel management practices (Kohse-Höinghaus, 2023).
Economic Implications for Airlines Regarding Fuel Costs and Operational Efficiency
The economic implications of integrating SAFs into airline operations are multifaceted. While SAFs can significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions, they are often more expensive than conventional jet fuels, which can impact airlines’ operational costs (Chen et al., 2024). The current production costs of SAFs can be two to eight times higher than traditional aviation kerosene, which poses a challenge for airlines operating on thin profit margins (Cui & Chen, 2024).
However, the long-term economic benefits of SAF adoption may outweigh the initial costs. By investing in SAFs, airlines can potentially reduce their carbon offsetting obligations under regulatory frameworks such as CORSIA, leading to cost savings in the long run (Kurzawska-Pietrowicz & Jasiński, 2024). Additionally, as the production of SAFs scales up and technology advances, the costs are expected to decrease, making SAFs more economically viable (Detsios et al., 2023).
Moreover, airlines that adopt SAFs may enhance their brand image and appeal to environmentally conscious consumers, potentially leading to increased passenger demand and loyalty (Hopkins et al., 2023). This shift in consumer preference could provide airlines with a competitive advantage in a market that is increasingly focused on sustainability.
Case Studies on the Implementation of Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF) Blends
The adoption of Sustainable Aviation Fuels (SAFs) is critical for the aviation industry’s efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and achieve carbon neutrality. This literature review examines case studies of airlines that have successfully implemented SAF blends in their operations, highlighting specific incidents and test flights that illustrate the challenges and solutions associated with blending SAF with conventional fuels.
Successful Implementation of SAF Blends
- United Airlines
United Airlines has been a pioneer in the use of SAF, conducting the world’s first passenger flight using 100% SAF in one of its engines in 2021. This flight utilized a Boeing 737 MAX equipped with LEAP-1B engines developed by CFM International (Kramer et al., 2022). The airline has committed to purchasing up to 10 million gallons of SAF produced by Prometheus Fuels by 2023, aiming to significantly reduce its carbon footprint (Bhatt et al., 2023).
- Cathay Pacific
Cathay Pacific has actively engaged in SAF initiatives, committing to using SAF for 10% of its total fuel consumption by 2030. The airline has partnered with Fulcrum BioEnergy to utilize SAF produced from municipal solid waste, demonstrating a successful blend of SAF with conventional jet fuel at Los Angeles International Airport (Ng et al., 2021). This partnership highlights the airline’s commitment to sustainability while addressing the challenges of fuel availability and cost.
- Ryanair
Ryanair has blended 40% SAF at Amsterdam Schiphol Airport, showcasing its commitment to sustainability in the low-cost carrier segment. The airline has called on policymakers to support SAF initiatives, emphasizing the need for greater availability of raw materials and production capacity to meet blending mandates (Hopkins et al., 2023). This case illustrates the potential for low-cost carriers to adopt SAF while navigating the complexities of cost and supply.
Analysis of Specific Incidents and Test Flights
- KLM Royal Dutch Airlines
KLM was the first airline to operate a commercial flight using a 50% SAF blend in 2011, flying from Amsterdam to Paris. This flight demonstrated the feasibility of blending SAF with conventional fuels and set a precedent for future operations (Shahriar & Khanal, 2022). However, the airline faced challenges related to the high cost of SAF and limited production capacity, which have continued to impact the broader adoption of SAF in the industry.
- Delta Airlines
Delta Airlines has signed a memorandum of understanding with Chevron to replace 10% of its aviation fuel with SAF by 2030. The airline’s commitment to SAF is part of its broader strategy to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050 (Bhatt et al., 2023). This partnership highlights the importance of collaboration between airlines and fuel suppliers to address the challenges of SAF availability and cost.
Test Flights and Research Initiatives
Numerous test flights have been conducted to evaluate the performance of SAF blends. For instance, the U.S. Air Force has committed to replacing 50% of its domestic aviation fuel with alternative fuel blends, showcasing the military’s role in advancing SAF technology (Bhatt et al., 2023). These test flights provide valuable data on the performance and emissions characteristics of SAF blends, informing future operational decisions.
Challenges and Solutions in Blending SAF
Cost Competitiveness: SAF is generally more expensive than conventional jet fuel, which can deter airlines from adopting it. For example, SAF production costs can be 2 to 8 times higher than traditional fuels (Cui & Chen, 2024). Airlines must navigate these cost disparities while maintaining competitive pricing for consumers.
Supply Chain Limitations: The limited availability of SAF production facilities and feedstocks poses a significant barrier to widespread adoption. Airlines like Ryanair have emphasized the need for government support to increase production capacity and ensure a stable supply of SAF (Hopkins et al., 2023).
Regulatory and Certification Hurdles: The certification of new SAF production pathways under ASTM D7566 is crucial for ensuring safety and compatibility with existing aircraft. Ongoing updates to these standards are necessary to facilitate the integration of new SAF technologies (Kurzawska-Pietrowicz & Jasiński, 2024).
Future Outlook for Sustainable Aviation Fuels (SAFs)
The future of Sustainable Aviation Fuels (SAFs) is poised for significant evolution, driven by advancements in technology, ongoing research and development, and potential regulatory changes. This literature study examines predictions for the evolution of SAF technology and blending practices, the role of research and development in addressing compatibility challenges, and the anticipated regulatory changes that could facilitate greater SAF adoption.
Predictions for the Evolution of SAF Technology and Blending Practices
The evolution of SAF technology is expected to be marked by increased efficiency and cost-effectiveness. Current projections suggest that the global production of SAF could reach approximately 62 million tons by 2030, significantly up from the less than 0.1% of total aviation fuel consumption recorded in 2021 (Song et al., 2024). The development of new production pathways, such as Alcohol-to-Jet (ATJ) and Fischer-Tropsch (FT) processes, is anticipated to enhance the diversity of feedstocks and improve the overall sustainability of SAF production (Detsios et al., 2023).
Blending practices are also expected to evolve, with higher blending ratios becoming more common as SAF production scales up. The current maximum blending ratio for SAF with conventional jet fuel is 50%, but advancements in technology may allow for higher ratios without compromising engine performance (Martinez-Valencia et al., 2021). The integration of SAF into existing fuel supply chains will require careful management of blending practices to ensure compliance with safety and performance standards, as outlined by ASTM D7566 (Song et al., 2024).
The Role of Ongoing Research and Development in Addressing Compatibility Challenges
Ongoing research and development (R&D) are critical for addressing the compatibility challenges associated with SAF. As highlighted in various studies, the successful integration of SAF into the aviation sector hinges on the ability to ensure that these fuels meet the stringent performance and safety requirements of existing aircraft engines. Research efforts are focused on optimizing fuel properties, such as oxidation stability and thermal stability, to enhance the performance of SAF (Qasem et al., 2024).
Moreover, R&D initiatives are exploring innovative feedstock options and conversion technologies that can improve the economic viability of SAF production. For instance, advancements in the production of SAF from waste materials and non-food feedstocks are being prioritized to minimize competition with food production and reduce environmental impacts (Martinez-Valencia et al., 2021). The development of specialized attributes of biofuels tailored to specific feedstock characteristics is also essential for meeting environmental standards and enhancing compatibility with existing aviation infrastructure (Blakey et al., 2011).
Potential Regulatory Changes That Could Facilitate Greater SAF Adoption
Regulatory frameworks play a pivotal role in facilitating the adoption of SAF. The ReFuelEU Aviation initiative, for example, aims to establish mandatory SAF blending requirements at European airports, which could serve as a model for similar regulations globally (Chen et al., 2024). Such policies are expected to create a stable market for SAF, encouraging investment and innovation in production technologies.
Additionally, the implementation of carbon pricing mechanisms and incentives for SAF production could further stimulate market growth. As noted in the literature, the introduction of carbon taxes and subsidies for SAF could help bridge the cost gap between SAF and conventional jet fuels, making SAF more economically attractive for airlines (Ahmad & Xu, 2021). Furthermore, aligning national policies with international agreements, such as CORSIA, will be crucial for creating a cohesive regulatory environment that supports the widespread adoption of SAF.
Ahmad, S., & Xu, B. (2021). A cognitive mapping approach to analyse stakeholders’ perspectives on sustainable aviation fuels. Transportation research. Part D, Transport and environment, 100, 103076. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2021.103076
Becken, S., Mackey, B., & Lee, D. S. (2023). Implications of preferential access to land and clean energy for Sustainable Aviation Fuels. The Science of the total environment, 886, 163883-163883. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.163883
Bhatt, A. H., Zhang, Y., Milbrandt, A., Newes, E., Moriarty, K., Klein, B., & Tao, L. (2023). Evaluation of performance variables to accelerate the deployment of sustainable aviation fuels at a regional scale. Energy conversion and management, 275, 116441. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2022.116441
Blakey, S., Rye, L., & Wilson, C. W. (2011). Aviation gas turbine alternative fuels: A review. Proceedings of the Combustion Institute, 33(2), 2863-2885. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proci.2010.09.011
Chen, R., Yang, H., Wang, K., & Jiang, C. (2024). Impacts of a sustainable aviation fuel mandate on airline competition — Full-service carrier vs. low-cost carrier. Transportation research. Part B: methodological, 190, 103098. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trb.2024.103098
Cui, Q., & Chen, B. (2024). Cost-benefit analysis of using sustainable aviation fuels in South America. Journal of Cleaner Production, 435, 140556. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2024.140556
Detsios, N., Theodoraki, S., Maragoudaki, L., Atsonios, K., Grammelis, P., & Orfanoudakis, N. G. (2023). Recent Advances on Alternative Aviation Fuels/Pathways: A Critical Review. Energies (Basel), 16(4), 1904. https://doi.org/10.3390/en16041904
Dray, L., Schäfer, A. W., Grobler, C., Falter, C., Allroggen, F., Stettler, M. E. J., & Barrett, S. R. H. (2022). Cost and emissions pathways towards net-zero climate impacts in aviation. Nature climate change, 12(10), 956-962. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-022-01485-4
Emmanouilidou, E., Mitkidou, S., Agapiou, A., & Kokkinos, N. C. (2023). Solid waste biomass as a potential feedstock for producing sustainable aviation fuel: A systematic review. Renewable energy, 206, 897-907. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2023.02.113
Goh, B. H. H., Chong, C. T., Ong, H. C., Seljak, T., Katrašnik, T., Józsa, V., Ng, J.-H., Tian, B., Karmarkar, S., & Ashokkumar, V. (2022). Recent advancements in catalytic conversion pathways for synthetic jet fuel produced from bioresources. Energy conversion and management, 251, 114974. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2021.114974
Heyne, J., Rauch, B., Le Clercq, P., & Colket, M. (2021). Sustainable aviation fuel prescreening tools and procedures. Fuel (Guildford), 290, 120004. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2020.120004
Hopkins, D., Gössling, S., Cohen, S., Hanna, P., & Higham, J. E. S. (2023). Aeromasculinities and the fallacy of sustainable aviation. Energy research & social science, 106, 103319. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2023.103319
Kohse-Höinghaus, K. (2023). Combustion, Chemistry, and Carbon Neutrality. Chemical reviews, 123(8), 5139-5219. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.chemrev.2c00828
Kramer, S., Andac, G., Heyne, J., Ellsworth, J., Herzig, P., & Lewis, K. C. (2022). Perspectives on Fully Synthesized Sustainable Aviation Fuels: Direction and Opportunities. Frontiers in energy research, 9. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenrg.2021.782823
Kurzawska-Pietrowicz, P., & Jasiński, R. (2024). A Review of Alternative Aviation Fuels. Energies (Basel), 17(16), 3890. https://doi.org/10.3390/en17163890
Lau, J. I. C., Wang, Y. S., Ang, T., Seo, J. C. F., Khadaroo, S. N. B. A., Chew, J. J., Ng Kay Lup, A., & Sunarso, J. (2024). Emerging technologies, policies and challenges toward implementing sustainable aviation fuel (SAF). Biomass & bioenergy, 186, 107277. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2024.107277
Martinez-Valencia, L., Garcia-Perez, M., & Wolcott, M. P. (2021). Supply chain configuration of sustainable aviation fuel: Review, challenges, and pathways for including environmental and social benefits. Renewable & sustainable energy reviews, 152, 111680. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2021.111680
Ng, K. S., Farooq, D., & Yang, A. (2021). Global biorenewable development strategies for sustainable aviation fuel production. Renewable & sustainable energy reviews, 150, 111502. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2021.111502
Ozkan, M., Narappa, A. B., Namboodiri, T., Chai, Y., Babu, M., Jennings, J. S. E., Gao, Y., Tasneem, S., Lam, J., Talluri, K. R., Shang, R., Ozkan, C. S., & Watkins, J. M. (2024). Forging a sustainable sky: Unveiling the pillars of aviation e-fuel production for carbon emission circularity. iScience, 27(3), 109154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isci.2024.109154
Qasem, N. A. A., Mourad, A., Abderrahmane, A., Said, Z., Younis, O., Guedri, K., & Kolsi, L. (2024). A recent review of aviation fuels and sustainable aviation fuels. Journal of thermal analysis and calorimetry, 149(10), 4287-4312. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10973-024-13027-5
Rupcic, L., Pierrat, E., Saavedra-Rubio, K., Thonemann, N., Ogugua, C., & Laurent, A. (2023). Environmental impacts in the civil aviation sector: Current state and guidance. Transportation research. Part D, Transport and environment, 119, 103717. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2023.103717
Seber, G., Escobar, N., Valin, H., & Malina, R. (2022). Uncertainty in life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of sustainable aviation fuels from vegetable oils. Renewable & sustainable energy reviews, 170, 112945. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2022.112945
Shahriar, M. F., & Khanal, A. (2022). The current techno-economic, environmental, policy status and perspectives of sustainable aviation fuel (SAF). Fuel (Guildford), 325, 124905. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2022.124905
Song, Z., Li, Z., & Liu, Z. (2024). Comparison of Emission Properties of Sustainable Aviation Fuels and Conventional Aviation Fuels: A Review. Applied sciences, 14(13), 5484. https://doi.org/10.3390/app14135484
Su-ungkavatin, P., Tiruta-Barna, L., & Hamelin, L. (2023). Biofuels, electrofuels, electric or hydrogen?: A review of current and emerging sustainable aviation systems. Progress in energy and combustion science, 96, 101073. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecs.2023.101073
Undavalli, V., Gbadamosi Olatunde, O. B., Boylu, R., Wei, C., Haeker, J., Hamilton, J., & Khandelwal, B. (2023). Recent advancements in sustainable aviation fuels. Progress in aerospace sciences, 136, 100876. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paerosci.2022.100876
Voigt, C., Kleine, J., Sauer, D., Moore, R. H., Bräuer, T., Le Clercq, P., Kaufmann, S., Scheibe, M., Jurkat-Witschas, T., Aigner, M., Bauder, U., Boose, Y., Borrmann, S., Crosbie, E., Diskin, G. S., DiGangi, J., Hahn, V., Heckl, C., Huber, F., . . . Anderson, B. E. (2021). Cleaner burning aviation fuels can reduce contrail cloudiness. Communications earth & environment, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.1038/s43247-021-00174-y
