Decarbonizing aviation

MIT ENERGY HACK

11/2/18

CONFIDENTIAL AND PROPRIETARY WORKING DRAFT

Any use of this material without specific permission of McKinsey & Company Last Modified 11/1/2018 3:20 PM Central Standard Time
is strictly prohibited Printed
The need to decarbonize the aviation industry is clear

Last Modified 11/1/2018 3:20 PM Central Standard Time

3.8 billion 40%

3.8 billion passengers 30% By 2040, aviation and

traveled by airplane in shipping will account for
2016 40% of greenhouse gas

Printed
emissions

Demand for jet fuel is

predicted to grow by 30%
by 2030

The aviation industry needs to rapidly reduce its emissions and fully decarbonize toward
the second half of this century

SOURCE: Decarbonizingaviation.com, Climate Action Network McKinsey & Company 2

There are many potential
avenues to reduce carbon
emissions

Last Modified 11/1/2018 3:20 PM Central Standard Time

▪ All key players in the aviation industry—governments,
airports, airlines, fuel producers—need to work together to
create a roadmap to decarbonization
▪ Some example actions include:
– Airlines deploying near-term technology solutions
(efficiency and operational measures) and investing in
clean aviation technologies
– Continued research into alternative fuels with low
lifecycle emissions to reduce the price/barriers to airlines
adopting renewable jet fuel

Printed
– Governments revisiting aviation subsidies
– Creating new business models for the aviation industry
– Developing new transportation methods

SOURCE: Climate Action Network and International

Coalition for Sustainable Aviation McKinsey & Company 3
Sustainable Aviation Fuel is
one of the most promising
solutions

Last Modified 11/1/2018 3:20 PM Central Standard Time

▪ Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF) , otherwise known as
Renewable Jet Fuel (RJF) or Alternative Jet Fuel (AJF), is
made from sustainable renewable raw materials such as
waste and residues
▪ It provides significant and immediate emission reductions—
almost half of all emissions could be eliminated by using
SAF

Printed
SOURCE: Decarbonizingaviation.com McKinsey & Company 4
However, SAF is currently
extremely costly

Last Modified 11/1/2018 3:20 PM Central Standard Time

Printed
▪ In fact, according to a recent Economist article, SAF are 2-
3x more expensive than traditional jet fuel

SOURCE: https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2017/03/f34/alternative_aviation_fuels_report.pdf, https://www.economist.com/the-economist-

explains/2018/03/15/why-arent-all-commercial-flights-powered-by-sustainable-fuel McKinsey & Company 5
Your challenge: design
a plan to reduce carbon
emissions using SAF

Last Modified 11/1/2018 3:20 PM Central Standard Time

▪ Pretend you’ve been hired by a SAF company looking to
expand the adoption of renewable fuel in the aviation
industry
▪ Create a plan/roadmap that answers:
– How can we make a more accessible product?
– Why will airlines adopt SAF?
– What, if any, role will the government play?

Printed
▪ Good roadmaps will include an understanding of how your
recommendation will impact the bottom line profitability for
both SAF manufacturers and airlines

SOURCE: Climate Action Network and International

Coalition for Sustainable Aviation McKinsey & Company 6
Starter resources

Last Modified 11/1/2018 3:20 PM Central Standard Time

https://decarbonizingaviation.com/articles/renewa https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2017/03/f3
ble-jet-fuel-why-does-it-cost-more/ 4/alternative_aviation_fuels_report.pdf

Printed
https://aviationbenefits.org/media/166152/beginn https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy14osti/60254.pdf
ers-guide-to-saf_web.pdf

McKinsey & Company 7

Contact details

Last Modified 11/1/2018 3:20 PM Central Standard Time

If you have any questions throughout the weekend, please
feel free to reach out to:
Amy Enrione – amy_enrione@mckinsey.com
Wenting Gao – wenting_gao@mckinsey.com

Printed
McKinsey & Company 8
 Last Modified 11/1/2018 3:20 PM Central Standard Time Printed
McKinsey & Company 9
Backup data
Companies producing hydro-processed esters and fatty acids (HEFA) fuels
Summary of technologies status and estimated capital costs

Last Modified 11/1/2018 3:20 PM Central Standard Time

Company Location Technology Feedstock Capacity Status
Neste Rotterdam, NEXBTL Vegetable oils, UCO 1.26 bln L/y Operational
Netherlands and animal fats
Neste Singapore NEXBTL Vegetable oils, UCO 1.26 bln L/y Operational
and animal fats
Neste Porvoo, Finland NEXBTL Vegetable oils, UCO 240m L/y Operational
and animal fats
Neste Porvoo 2, Finland NEXBTL Vegetable oils, UCO 240m L/y Operational
and animal fats
ENI Venice, Italy EcofiningTM Vegetable oils 450m L/y Operational
Diamond Norco, Louisiana, Ecofining™ Vegetable oils, UCO 500m L/y Operational
Green Diesel U.S. and animal fats

Printed
UPM Lappeenranta, UPM Bioverno Crude tall oil 120m L/y Operational
Finland
AltAlr Paramount, EcofiningTM Non-edible oils and 150m L/y Operational
California, U.S. waste
Renewable Geismar, Louisiana, Developed by High and low free fatty 315m L/y Operational
Energy U.S. Dynamic Fuels acid feedstocks
Grouo LLC
Emerald Port Arthur, Texas, Ecofining™ Vegetable oils 330m L/y Planned
Biofuels U.S. construction

McKinsey & Company 10

Summary of technologies, status and estimated capital costs
Summary of technologies status and estimated capital costs

Last Modified 11/1/2018 3:20 PM Central Standard Time

Capital cost in million
Conversion Process Status -M EUR2013
HEFA Commercial 200 - 644 (USD 265 - 855)
Gasification - FT Demonstration 327 - 1186 (USD 434 - 1575)
Pyrolysis & upgrading Pilot / demo 156 - 482 (USD 207 - 640)
HTL & upgrading Pilot / demo 273 - 513 (USD 362 - 681)
Alcohol to jet (ATJ) Demo 68 - 72 (USD 90 - 96)
(from ethanol; excludes ethanol production)
Advanced fermentation of sugars Small commercial 292 (USD 388)
to hydrocarbons (farnesene)

Printed
Ethanol production from agricultural residues Commercial 215 - 426 (USD 285 - 566)
(includes pre-treatment. enzymatic hydrolysis &
fermentation)
Sugar extraction f rom agricultural residues Commercial 206 (USD 274)
(includes pre-treatment & enzymatic hydrolysis)
Based on normalised reported values from literature for 500 t of fuel per day, with figures based on
20B values. Tile 2013 exchange rate was used to convert EUR to USD at a ate of EUR 0.753 to USD
1 (de Jong eta!. 2015).
McKinsey & Company 11