Sustainable aviation fuel (SAF)
Sustainable aviation fuel is often discussed as a production problem. The industry needs more feedstock, more refineries, more investment and more supply.
But for process monitoring and fuel analysis professionals, there is another issue sitting just behind the headline numbers. However much SAF is available, it still has to be analysed, blended, verified, documented and released safely into one of the most tightly controlled fuel supply chains in the world.
That makes SAF a measurement story as much as a fuel story.
Global SAF production is still far below where the aviation sector needs it to be. IATA expects production to reach around 2.4 million tonnes in 2026, equal to less than 1% of total jet fuel consumption.
At the same time, policy pressure is increasing. The UK SAF Mandate began in 2025 at 2% of total jet fuel demand, rising to 10% in 2030 and 22% in 2040. In the EU, ReFuelEU Aviation also started with a 2% SAF requirement in 2025, with much higher targets set for the decades ahead.
This creates a difficult operating environment. SAF is scarce, expensive and politically important, but it still has to meet exacting aviation fuel standards before it can be used.
For producers and fuel suppliers, a failed batch is not a minor inconvenience. It can mean delayed delivery, reprocessing costs, lost product value, supply chain disruption and compliance pressure.
For laboratories and process monitoring teams, that raises the stakes around analytical confidence.
SAF is designed to be used safely within existing aviation systems, usually as a blend with conventional jet fuel. But that does not mean every SAF batch is chemically identical, or that every production pathway creates the same analytical risks.
Different approved pathways can produce different fuel characteristics. HEFA fuels, alcohol-to-jet fuels, Fischer-Tropsch synthetic paraffinic kerosene and future power-to-liquid fuels all have different process histories, feedstocks and potential impurity profiles.
A fuel made from used cooking oil does not begin its life in the same way as a synthetic fuel produced from captured carbon and green hydrogen. The final product may be intended for the same aviation market, but the analytical journey can be very different.
That is why quality control matters at every stage. Operators need to understand not only whether the finished fuel meets specification, but whether the process is stable enough to keep producing compliant fuel consistently.
Aviation fuel testing already covers a wide range of parameters, including density, freezing point, flash point, distillation behaviour, sulphur content, aromatics, thermal stability, water content and trace contaminants.
SAF adds further complexity because blending performance matters. Even where the SAF component is compliant, the finished blend still needs to behave correctly in storage, transfer, aircraft fuel systems and combustion.
This is where process monitoring becomes commercially important. Laboratory testing remains essential for certification and release, but it is not always enough on its own.
If operators only discover a problem after a blend has already been produced, the cost of correction can be high. At-line and online analysis can give teams earlier warning, allowing them to adjust blending ratios, identify contamination, detect feedstock-related variation and avoid producing off-spec material.
The goal is not to replace the laboratory. It is to make the laboratory part of a wider measurement system, where real-time data and certified testing support each other.
Blending is one of the most important pressure points in the SAF supply chain.
Operators need to bring together conventional jet fuel and SAF in the correct proportions, while ensuring the final product meets fuel standards and mandate requirements. That requires accurate measurement of composition, volume, density and quality across the blending process.
Small deviations can matter. Too little SAF may create a compliance issue. Too much may create cost inefficiency or specification risk. Contamination, water ingress or unexpected variation in a component stream can affect the finished blend.
For process engineers, this creates a need for tighter control loops. Inline spectroscopy, process gas chromatography, density measurement, viscosity monitoring, moisture analysis and automated sampling systems can all support better decision-making.
The value is practical. Faster measurement can reduce rework, protect high-value SAF stocks and give operators more confidence when releasing product into the aviation supply chain.
SAF is also different because it carries an environmental claim.
The value of the fuel is not only based on whether it performs in an aircraft engine. It is also based on what it is made from, how it was produced and how much lifecycle carbon reduction it can legitimately claim.
That puts pressure on data systems as well as analytical instruments. Fuel suppliers need to connect physical fuel quality with documentation, sustainability certification, chain-of-custody records and carbon reporting.
For monitoring professionals, this means data integrity becomes part of the product. A measurement that cannot be traced, validated or defended may be of limited use in a regulated SAF market.
This is likely to increase demand for integrated systems that combine analysers, sampling hardware, calibration routines, laboratory information management systems and auditable digital records.
In practical terms, fuel quality data needs to move from the instrument to the operator, the laboratory, the compliance team and the customer without losing reliability.
SAF creates new responsibilities across several parts of the energy sector.
Refineries and fuel producers need to manage variable feedstocks and new production routes. Blending facilities need to handle high-value SAF components without losing product quality. Storage terminals need to prevent contamination and maintain clear segregation between fuel grades. Airports and distributors need evidence that the product they receive meets specification.
Each stage creates measurement points.
That could include feedstock characterisation before processing, process monitoring during hydroprocessing or synthesis, product testing after refining, blend verification at terminals and final quality checks before airport distribution.
For instrumentation suppliers, this widens the opportunity. SAF is not only a laboratory testing market. It is a process control, storage, transfer, certification and compliance market.
Why this matters now
The timing is important because SAF mandates are increasing before supply has become abundant.
When a fuel is cheap and plentiful, operators may be able to absorb some inefficiency. When a fuel is scarce, expensive and linked to regulatory targets, every quality failure becomes more visible.
That makes measurement a bottleneck risk. If analytical capacity, sampling systems or data infrastructure cannot keep pace, SAF deployment may be slowed not only by production limits, but by the industry’s ability to verify and manage the fuel reliably.
This is where process monitoring professionals have a direct role to play. They are not peripheral to the SAF transition. They are part of the infrastructure that allows it to function.
The instrumentation opportunity
The strongest demand is likely to be for complete measurement solutions rather than standalone instruments.
Operators will need robust sampling systems that can handle new fuel streams, analysers capable of producing fast and reliable compositional data, calibration and validation methods that satisfy quality requirements, and software systems that make data usable for both process control and compliance.
There is also likely to be growing interest in hybrid models, where online analysers provide continuous or frequent process insight while laboratory testing provides formal certification.
That model gives operators speed without sacrificing defensibility.
For fuel analysis teams, this may mean working more closely with process engineers, sustainability teams and commercial departments. The same data may be used to optimise a blend, release a batch, prove mandate compliance and support a customer’s carbon reporting.
Measurement will decide how smoothly SAF scales
The SAF debate often focuses on whether the aviation sector can produce enough lower-carbon fuel. That remains the central challenge.
But supply alone is not enough. SAF must also be measured, controlled and documented with enough confidence to move through real fuel systems at scale.
For process monitoring and fuel analysis professionals, this creates a clear opportunity. As SAF mandates tighten and fuel pathways diversify, the sector will need faster analysis, stronger traceability and more integrated quality control.
The energy transition will not be delivered by production capacity alone. It will also depend on whether every litre of new fuel can be trusted.
PIN 27.2 Apr/May 2026
Product directory
