Biofuel industry news
New European Union regulations designed to accelerate the adoption of sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) could unintentionally drive the industry toward more expensive and energy-intensive production methods, according to new research from Chalmers University of Technology.
The findings come at a time of renewed scrutiny of Europe’s energy security and aviation decarbonisation strategy following recent geopolitical tensions affecting global oil markets, including the Iran conflict.
The study, conducted by researchers at Chalmers, examined how current EU Renewable Fuels of Non-Biological Origin (RFNBO) regulations influence the production pathways for synthetic aviation fuels and synthetic methanol — a key intermediate for SAF production.
Under EU aviation decarbonisation rules introduced in 2025, fuel suppliers are required to blend a minimum of 2% sustainable aviation fuel at EU airports. The mandate will progressively increase to 70% by 2050.
Critically, half of this SAF volume must come from RFNBO fuels — synthetic fuels produced using renewable hydrogen and captured carbon dioxide.
Researchers warn, however, that the current regulatory structure may favour less resource-efficient technologies while disadvantaging more energy-efficient alternatives.
Henrik Thunman
“Regulations influence not only industry investments in technology, but also which research and development priorities are pursued,” said Henrik Thunman, Professor of Energy Technology at Chalmers University and co-author of the study.
“Instead of driving innovation towards the most efficient solutions, we risk locking ourselves into less resource-efficient production methods.”
The research focused on synthetic methanol production as a representative case for evaluating SAF feedstock pathways.
The team analysed three commercially viable production routes using biogenic carbon sourced from biomass. Two combustion-based pathways capture carbon dioxide from biomass flue gases and combine it with renewable hydrogen, while a third gasification-based pathway converts biomass directly into synthesis gas containing both carbon and hydrogen.
Although all three routes can produce the same end product using similar raw materials, the differences in efficiency and electricity demand were substantial.
According to the study, biomass gasification delivered the strongest performance across key metrics.
Researchers found the gasification route could reduce production costs by up to 46% and lower electricity demand by as much as 30% compared with combustion-based alternatives.
Johanna Beiron
“The difference shows how large the energy losses can be when biomass is first combusted into carbon dioxide, which is then rebuilt into fuel molecules using large amounts of electricity and hydrogen,” said Johanna Beiron, researcher in Physical Resource Theory at Chalmers and lead author of the study.
Despite these advantages, the EU RFNBO framework currently favours combustion-based systems over gasification.
Under existing EU rules, RFNBO fuels cannot be produced using carbon atoms or energy directly derived from biomass — a major characteristic of gasification systems.
As a result, approximately half of the fuel produced through gasification may not qualify as RFNBO-compliant, even though the pathway demonstrates higher overall resource efficiency.
Conversely, combustion-based pathways can qualify if they capture CO₂ generated from biomass used in other energy applications, such as combined heat and power plants using forestry residues.
The researchers argue this creates a regulatory imbalance that may discourage investment in more efficient technologies.
One of the stated objectives of the RFNBO framework is to reduce dependence on biomass while stimulating renewable electricity and green hydrogen production.
However, the study suggests the policy could have the opposite effect.
Because sustainable carbon sources remain essential for synthetic aviation fuel production, the researchers expect strong future demand for biogenic CO₂ captured from biomass combustion.
This could increase pressure on already limited biomass resources while promoting lower-efficiency utilisation pathways.
“The regulatory framework does not account sufficiently for how efficiently different systems use energy and resources,” said Thunman.
“Regulation risks working against its own objectives when definitions of sustainable fuels are not aligned with fundamental energy principles or with the Union’s broader ambitions for resource efficiency.”
The Chalmers team believes adjustments to EU sustainable fuel policy may be necessary to support long-term aviation decarbonisation goals while maintaining industrial competitiveness.
The researchers warn that the current framework could lock Europe into combustion-based energy systems despite the availability of technically mature alternatives such as gasification and district heating electrification.
“The current regulatory framework risks causing lock-in to combustion-based energy systems, even though technically mature processes already exist that would provide both lower energy use and lower cost,” said Beiron.
The study concludes that stronger alignment between climate policy, industrial feasibility and energy efficiency will be essential if Europe is to scale sustainable aviation fuel production economically over the coming decades.
Simon Harvey
PIN 27.2 Apr/May 2026
Product directory
