The main problem with e-fuel, a net-zero solution for air travel
A third generation of sustainable aviation fuel (SAF), known as e-fuel or "power to liquid" fuel, has emerged, offering a potential net-zero solution for air travel.
E-fuel is produced by converting carbon dioxide from the atmosphere or industrial emissions into carbon monoxide, which is then combined with hydrogen and later refined to create jet fuel.
While e-fuel offers environmental benefits by avoiding feedstock limits and land-use concerns, its current cost is significantly higher than other SAF types and conventional jet fuel.
The high cost is attributed to expensive e-fuel plants, the scarcity of specific hydrogen types, and the energy-intensive process of capturing CO2.
Scaling e-fuel production to commercial levels at a reasonable cost requires substantial investment and supportive governmental policies to overcome current economic hurdles.
Planes could one day run on thin air — here's how
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Times
14 minutes ago
- Times
Ineos hits out at government ‘madness' after green subsidy is pulled
Sir Jim Ratcliffe's chemicals giant Ineos has accused the government of 'madness' over plans to effectively punish it for making one of its major plants more environmentally friendly. Ineos Acetyls, which makes the acetic acid used in food production, medicines and synthetic fibres, spent more than £30 million switching the fuel source at its factory in Hull from natural gas to low-carbon hydrogen. The move has cut its carbon emissions by 75 per cent. However, the Environment Agency has said that, rather than support the move, it would cut Ineos's carbon subsidies, costing it £23 million over the next three years. Ineos Acetyls chief executive David Brooks said: 'We are being punished for doing the right thing. We've delivered on decarbonisation, exceeding our expectations, and this is the response we get.' He added that he was fighting competition from imports from China, which use cheap, coal-fired energy to produce acetic acid with a carbon footprint eight times greater than his Hull plant. 'It feels like, instead of fighting our competitors, we're fighting our government,' he said. The factory is already lossmaking, he said, and the Environment Agency's decision meant he was having to pause all further investment decisions. The site employs more than 300 workers. The facility was opened by Queen Elizabeth in 1981, but the agency had decided to reclassify it as a 'new-build' factory as a result of the improved process. This means it will not receive its allowances from the UK Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) until 2028. Under the ETS, industrial plants are gifted allowances by the Environment Agency to emit a certain amount of greenhouse gases, beyond which they have to buy credits. The idea is to incentivise polluters to emit less. However, the agency's stance on Ineos Acetyls means that, for the next three years, it will have to buy all of its allowances on the market, which at present prices will be approximately £23 million. Ineos has been appealing to the Environment Agency, which operates the ETS system and is run under the umbrella of the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra). Officials from the Department for Energy Security & Net Zero, the Department for Business & Trade and the Treasury, as well as the devolved governments, are also involved, Brooks said. 'It's a civil service soup of decision-making and it's very difficult to see who is actually making the decisions around this. 'So we're frustrated to get to the right people to talk to, we're frustrated it's taking so long to get what we believe is a slam dunk, and we're frustrated it's such a battle to get people to see common sense.' He described the Environment Agency's reaction as 'computer says no' because the Ineos technology is new. Ineos shut its refinery in Grangemouth after spending three years trying to obtain government subsidies to keep it open. Its decision to halt further investment in the Hull plant comes as Britain's biggest bioethanol plant nearby, owned by Associated British Foods, is threatened with closure after the US-UK trade deal allowed tariff-free US ethanol to enter the UK. The MP in Ineos Acetyls' neighbouring constituency, Kingston upon Hull West & Haltemprice, where many of the plant's workers live, is Emma Hardy, parliamentary under-secretary at Defra. Brooks said he had written to her and been told the decision is 'in the system'. Brooks has a meeting with officials from the Department for Energy Security & Net Zero and the Department for Business & Trade this week, but Defra and the Environment Agency are not due to attend. The Environment Agency said it was the regulator for the UK ETS Scheme and was supporting the Department for Energy Security & Net Zero in its discussions with company representatives about activities at the site. On Saturday afternoon the Environment Agency contacted The Sunday Times again and said Ineos would continue to receive free allowances. It said that Ineos needed to provide 12 months of activity data under the new, cleaner technology for its allowances to reflect the switch.
Times
9 hours ago
- Times
‘Tell me what to ask about' — MP faces cash for questions claims
A former Conservative minister allowed a company that paid him £60,000 a year to effectively write several of his parliamentary questions, leaked emails have revealed. George Freeman submitted queries to Labour ministers about the sector the firm operates in, potentially handing the company a commercial advantage. He also asked a director at the environmental monitoring company to tell him 'what to ask about', in exchanges that may have breached ethics rules and are likely to see Freeman accused of taking 'cash for questions'. In one exchange, he asked if they could help him 'get the wording right', which he could then 'convert into parliamentary language'. In some examples, the phrases used by the company's director are copied word for word by Freeman in his submitted questions to ministers. The Mid Norfolk MP is also alleged to have held virtual business meetings using his office in Portcullis House. An email appears to show that in one of these meetings he discussed various business objectives with the firm. Freeman, 57, who was first elected as an MP in 2010, resigned as science minister from Rishi Sunak's government in November 2023. He later complained he could not afford to pay his £2,000 a month mortgage on a ministerial salary of £118,300. In April last year, he began acting as a paid adviser to GHGSat Limited, which uses satellites and aircraft sensors to measure greenhouse gases, including methane, from industrial sites and helps businesses monitor and reduce their emissions. Freeman appears to have broken multiple rules set out in the MPs' code of conduct, including lobbying on behalf of a private company he was paid by and using the parliamentary estate for his private business interests. He also appears to have failed to follow the advice issued to him by the advisory committee on business appointments (Acoba), the watchdog that regulates the private sector roles ex-ministers and civil servants can take up after leaving office. Approached on Saturday, Freeman said that, while he did not believe he had done anything wrong, he was immediately referring himself to the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards, the watchdog responsible for policing MPs' conduct. As science and space minister, Freeman was heavily involved in the sector that GHGSat operates in, although he does not appear to have dealt with the firm while in office or presided over policies, regulation or commercial decisions that would have benefited it. He is now a member of the Commons science and technology committee, as well as a UK trade envoy. The company paid him £5,000 a month for eight hours of work between April last year and March this year. Leaked emails suggest that, while on the payroll, he tabled written parliamentary questions to government departments with the help of the managing director, Dan Wicks. Written parliamentary questions are seen as a vital tool for MPs, allowing them to seek data or information not in the public domain, or press the government to take action. They are only supposed to be tabled as part of their parliamentary duties and not their private business interests. At 11.35am on November 27 last year, Freeman emailed Wicks to notify him that 'following our latest catch up I'm preparing some written parliamentary questions to table on the DSIT [Department for Science and Technology] space data and Desnz [Department for Energy Security and Net Zero] emissions tracking platforms. 'So that I get the wording right can you email me the key technical terms / names of the projects / frameworks and what to ask about & I'll then convert into the right parliamentary language.' At 4.29pm, Wicks replied that Freeman should ask questions of the DSIT to better understand whether it would continue 'investment in national space data activities'. He then listed three specific areas he could ask about. The first was to ask the DSIT whether it would continue to invest in 'the Earth observation Data Pilot run by the Geospatial Commission and whether that will be extended or grown into a pan-government purchasing mechanism'. This was a government-run pilot launched in 2023, when Freeman was still science minister, which was testing ways public bodies could access satellite data to better inform 'analysis in key policy areas, including land use, environmental monitoring and emergency response'. Wicks's second proposal was for Freeman to ask the DSIT whether it planned to 'continue funding the Earth observation data hub as a tool for public sector to access and make use of different Earth observation data'. This was another programme funded by the DSIT, and uses a mix of public and paid-for commercial space data to inform decision making within government, businesses and academia. On GHGSat's website, it stated it supplies data to the hub. Outlining his third proposed question, Wicks added: 'And of course, the Methane programme run by UK Space Agency that makes use of GHGSat data.' Freeman was responsible for the UK Space Agency when he was a minister. He also suggested Freeman ask the agency's chief executive about his recent commitment to 'prioritise 'supporting development of methane emissions measurement best-practices'.' Wicks then suggested Freeman submit a separate question to Ed Miliband's Desnz department to work out whether it would 'start integrating more GHG [greenhouse gas] measurement data' into its methodology for calculating emissions which he said would build on 'investments such as Greenhouse Gas Emissions Measurement and Modelling Advancement (Gemma) to explore the added value of satellite data.' All of the proposals set out in Wicks's email appear to be aimed at obtaining information from ministers that would be beneficial to GHGSat: The following day, at 12.51pm, Freeman emailed a member of his parliamentary staff and asked them to submit questions to ministers via the clerks who formally process written questions on behalf of MPs. He asked his staffer to tick 'any 'interest declaration' box if there is one' — a process which flags that an MP has asked a question that relates to one of their publicly registered interests. While this was done, it was not disclosed that the company had shaped his questions. Freeman then listed five questions for DSIT, all of which draw on the proposals Wicks had made the day before: Freeman also requested three questions be submitted to Desnz and a final question be tabled to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs: A search of the parliament's website shows eight of these questions were formally tabled by Freeman over several days in December last year, with ministers responding several weeks later to each of them. The MPs' code of conduct makes clear that 'taking payment in return for advocating a particular matter in the House is strictly forbidden'. It adds that they may not speak in the Commons, vote or initiate parliamentary proceedings, or make approaches to ministers in return for payment — and must not initiate proceedings which would provide financial or material benefit to an organisation or individual from whom they have received financial reward. It also prohibits MPs from pursuing interests which are 'wholly personal', 'such as may arise from a profession or occupation outside the House'. Hannah White, director of the Institute for Government think tank, who previously served as secretary to the Committee on Standards in Public Life, said: 'Commons rules are intended to prevent any public perception that 'outside individuals or organisations' might pay an MP in order to benefit from their actions in Parliament. The evidence suggests there are clear questions to answer about whether these rules have been breached.' The Sunday Times has also seen extracts from Freeman's online work calendar showing he had regular meetings with GHGSat and Wicks via Zoom calls from at least July last year until March this year. One, on October 22 between 4.45pm and 5.45pm, listed Freeman as the organiser and the location as 'PCH', short for parliament's Portcullis House, where Freeman's parliamentary office is based. It is alleged by a source that he held several meetings with businesses that are listed on his register of interests using his parliamentary computer. In an email attached to this meeting, Wicks asked Freeman whether he would be able to meet with him and GHGSat's president, Stéphane Germain, 'in person next week' and that they should schedule 'regular' 30-minute catch-ups twice a week. Wicks then outlined priorities they had 'discussed on the call', one of which was 'UK Gov engagement', and another 'engagement strategies with senior officials'. The MPs' code of conduct states that 'excepting modest and reasonable personal use, members must ensure that the use of facilities and services provided to them by parliament, including an office, is in support of their parliamentary activities, and is in accordance with all relevant rules'. When Freeman took up his adviser role with GHGSat, he also received advice from Acoba, the appointments watchdog. It noted that 'there are risks associated with your influence and network of contacts gained whilst in ministerial office', adding: 'In particular, this is a company that is interested in government policy and decisions relating to the civil space sector and emissions.' According to Acoba, Freeman had assured the watchdog that he had 'made it clear to the company that you will not lobby government on its behalf, and this will not form part of your role.' It imposed conditions on the appointment, including a two-year ban on him being 'personally involved in lobbying the UK government or any of its arm's length bodies on behalf of GHGSat Ltd'. Freeman said: 'As a longstanding advocate of important new technologies, companies and industries, working cross-party through APPGs [All-Party Parliamentary Groups] and the select committee, I regularly ask experts for clarification on technical points and terminology, and deeply respect and try to assiduously follow the code of conduct for MPs and the need to act always in the public interest. 'Throughout my 15 years in parliament (and government) I have always understood the need to be transparent in the work I have done for and with commercial clients and charities and am always willing to answer any criticism. I don't believe I have done anything wrong but I am immediately referring myself to the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards and will accept his judgment in due course.' A spokesman for GHGSat said: 'GHGSat retained George Freeman MP for a brief period to help GHGSat understand and navigate the geopolitical environment in the UK and Europe. GHGSat signed a services agreement with Mr Freeman that did not include any lobbying activities and was concluded on the basis of the terms laid out by the Advisory Committee on Business Appointments. GHGSat takes all applicable laws and regulations concerning lobbying extremely seriously.'
The Sun
11 hours ago
- The Sun
UK may ban airlines from charging for hand luggage – but it could hike your flight price, experts warn
AIRLINES could be banned from charging British passengers bringing hand luggage on flights, it is claimed. Transport Secretary Heidi Alexander is understood to be considering proposals to change the rules after the EU Parliament transport and tourism committee put forward a new law to allow two carry-on items free as standard. 5 5 5 If the new law is approved, passengers flying on any EU airline will be allowed a free cabin bag to put in the overhead locker - as long as it weighs no more than 7kg and measures up to 100cm. Ryanair and Wizz Air introduced fees for large cabin bags in 2018, and easyJet followed suit in 2021. However, the likes of British Airways and already include two pieces of cabin baggage as standard in their base fairs. But there are fears some airlines will put up ticket prices to claw back revenue losses - with some claiming the proposals are unworkable due to lack of space and warn flights maybe delayed. A transport source spoke to the i newspaper after the EU committee voted to introduce the standardised allowance. Due to varying rules across airlines, the European Parliament hopes to create a common standard across the board for carry-on luggage. The proposals are still under discussion by member states and a time frame for implementation are unclear, though a meeting is scheduled for July. The UK source told the i the Government was also looking at changing the law in the coming months, although policy development is at an early stage. A Department for Transport spokeswoman said: 'We do not comment on speculation but continue to closely monitor the EU's proposals on air passenger rights reforms. 'We want to make sure passengers can travel with ease, which is why we landed a deal with the EU to allow millions more British nationals to use e-gates at airports in time for the summer holidays.' Airlines have warned they may need to increase ticket prices which would impact all passengers, including those travelling with smaller bags. Airlines for Europe Managing Director Ourania Georgoutsakou told Politico: 'The European Parliament should let travellers decide what services they want, what services they pay for and, importantly, what services they don't.' Airlines for Europe also warned that its members won't be able to comply with the new rule due to lack of space. A typical cabin seats 180 passengers but has room for only 90 trolley bags in the overhead lockers. Airlines for Europe also warned that its members won't be able to comply with the new rule due to lack of space. A typical cabin seats 180 passengers but has room for only 90 trolley bags in the overhead lockers. Last year, there were reports that there were going to be changes to the hand luggage rules - but these did not change. Speaking to The Independent at the time, Michael O'Leary, chief executive of Europe's biggest budget carrier, Ryanair said: "We do think there should be a standardised agreement on what can be brought on board. "We're working with the other airlines in A4E to try to agree standardised sizes, but we haven't reached an agreement with them yet." While the rules continue to be discussed, check out this popular travel bag that's allowed on Ryanair flights for free. Plus the travel bags, plane outfits and accessories we can't live without – and they start from just 99p. Head of Travel Lisa Minot weighs in. EUROPEAN plans to force all airlines to allow passengers to bring a bag weighing less than 7kg into the cabin as well as an under-seat bag seem on the face of it to be a good outcome for travellers. But there could be a sting in the tail for flyers going forward. Low cost airlines have for years been keeping the price of base fares low by adding on an ever more dizzying array of extra charges. And these ancillary charges now make up an increasing percentage of their profits. These extra charges now make up more than 30per cent of Ryanair's revenue. Between October and December last year, Ryanair's ancillary revenues were worth £884million. Airlines argue that if they are forced to comply with the new laws, the base fares will have to rise for every passenger across the board, including those flying smaller bags. They also point out many airlines won't be able to comply with the new rules as typically planes that carry 180 passengers only have room for 90 trolley bags. But on the plus side, forcing all airlines to adhere to the same rules can only be a good thing. Right now, the disparity between the size and weight of bags and the prices airlines charge is hideously complicated and can often lead to passengers being caught out. 5 5
