SAF is no ‘silver bullet’, says ex-Productivity Commissioner

“While proponents tout SAF’s renewable origins, large-scale cultivation of feedstocks often leads to deforestation, habitat destruction, and biodiversity loss,” he wrote.

“For example, growing crops such as palm oil or corn for biofuels has historically displaced ecosystems, releasing vast amounts of carbon dioxide. Moreover, the energy-intensive processing and transport of these materials can result in life-cycle emissions that rival those of conventional jet fuel.

“Indeed, SAF’s life-cycle emissions are not universally lower than fossil fuels, and its production could exacerbate environmental harm when land-use changes are accounted for. At large scale, this push for feedstock could also reduce food security, threaten labour and human rights, and promote further deforestation.”

Lindwall’s article comes in the wake of the Federal Government in September investing $1.1 billion over 10 years into the development of low-carbon liquid fuels, including SAF.

According to Lindwall, producing SAF is “more than twice as expensive” as refining traditional jet fuel, prompting government subsidies and tax breaks as well as mandates for SAF blending.

“This creates a perfect storm for corporate rent-seeking, as companies lobby for public funds while delivering negligible climate benefits,” he said.

VIEW ALL

>

“These subsidies risk turning SAF into a boondoggle that enriches a few at the expense of taxpayers, without delivering meaningful environmental returns.

“Far from being a market-driven innovation, SAF is, in essence, an exercise in greenwashing, with airlines overstating its benefits to meet public relations goals.”

Instead of pushing aviation to achieve net-zero individually, he argued, the focus should be on whole-of-economy decarbonisation solutions.

“Aviation, due to the energy density required for jet engines, is inherently harder to decarbonise. Instead of forcing aviation to achieve net zero through costly and inefficient measures such as SAF, we should focus resources on sectors where reductions are more achievable and cheaper,” he said.

“A continued focus on improving aircraft and engine efficiency is a more pragmatic way to reduce aviation’s carbon impact.

“Technological advances in aerodynamics, materials, and engine design are critical to building on previous gains; McKinsey estimated that airlines reduced their fuel consumption per passenger-kilometre by around 39 per cent between 2005 and 2019.”

Government figures show that Australia currently exports around $4 billion of suitable feedstocks like canola and tallow, with the Clean Energy Finance Corporation (CEFC) estimating a domestic low-carbon liquid fuel industry could be worth $36 billion by 2050 and deliver around 230 million tonnes CO2-e in cumulative emissions reduction.

Research conducted by the International Air Transport Association (IATA) and released in September found that there is enough SAF feedstock available to allow the airline industry to hit net zero within the next 25 years, but that the rollout has been hampered by slow technology and infrastructure development.