WEBVTT - Will the move towards sustainable aviation fuel take flight? 0:00:00.270 --> 0:00:02.569 You're listening to AC N A podcast. 0:00:07.840 --> 0:00:11.180 Hi there. Welcome back to the Climate Conversations. I'm your 0:00:11.189 --> 0:00:14.739 host Julie Yu. And today we're getting you up to 0:00:14.750 --> 0:00:18.139 speed on what's likely to be the future of flying 0:00:18.270 --> 0:00:24.340 sustainable aviation fuel or sa aviation accounts for 2 to 3% 0:00:24.350 --> 0:00:27.819 of global carbon emissions. And it's facing a long and 0:00:27.829 --> 0:00:32.750 arduous journey towards achieving net zero emissions by 2050. Could 0:00:32.759 --> 0:00:36.360 S A be its savior. Singapore is among the leaders 0:00:36.369 --> 0:00:37.139 in this area 0:00:37.459 --> 0:00:40.209 and the topic was a big talking point at the 0:00:40.220 --> 0:00:43.348 recent Singapore Air Show. CN A's Roland Lim led our 0:00:43.360 --> 0:00:45.340 coverage and he joins us now, 0:00:46.459 --> 0:00:49.989 Roland. Welcome to the climate conversations. Thanks for having me, Julie. 0:00:50.069 --> 0:00:52.650 All right. So Roland, the theme of sustainability was at 0:00:52.659 --> 0:00:55.080 the core of this event, talk to us about the 0:00:55.090 --> 0:00:58.220 sentiment around sustainability at the air Show. And to what 0:00:58.229 --> 0:01:01.060 extent did you think the industry players were really feeling 0:01:01.069 --> 0:01:05.849 the pressure? Yes, feeling the pressure sustainability was in Singapore 0:01:05.860 --> 0:01:10.069 announcing a green fuel jet mandate that was actually of 0:01:10.080 --> 0:01:12.199 importance in terms of protecting the environment. 0:01:12.302 --> 0:01:14.762 Because at the end of the day, though, the vibe 0:01:14.772 --> 0:01:17.022 that I was getting was that the industry still remains 0:01:17.031 --> 0:01:22.291 divided over how to achieve net carbon zero emissions by 2050. 0:01:22.522 --> 0:01:26.052 The industry says yes, net 0 2050 but they are 0:01:26.061 --> 0:01:30.332 actually targeting 2030 in terms of their aircraft running on 0:01:30.342 --> 0:01:33.801 a 100% sustainable aviation fuel. And then you have the 0:01:33.811 --> 0:01:38.052 airline bosses, the green fuel producers and the manufacturers 0:01:38.453 --> 0:01:42.183 contradicting each other and pointing fingers over the thorniest issue 0:01:42.194 --> 0:01:45.064 which is who is responsible for the slow take up 0:01:45.072 --> 0:01:48.674 of staff or sustainable aviation fuel. Willie Walsh, he is 0:01:48.683 --> 0:01:52.734 Director general of Iata International Air Transport Association. He said 0:01:52.744 --> 0:01:54.833 that the only way to achieve net zero was really 0:01:54.844 --> 0:01:58.164 with the widespread usage of s and that demand isn't 0:01:58.174 --> 0:02:00.484 an issue because every drop of staff that is being 0:02:00.494 --> 0:02:03.884 produced is used by the airlines. The companies that produce 0:02:04.236 --> 0:02:07.746 tell a different story. Su H who is VP of 0:02:07.755 --> 0:02:11.755 Asia pack fuels at Exxon Mobil said that staff demand 0:02:11.766 --> 0:02:16.166 was very low and that was discouraging producers from producing more. 0:02:16.485 --> 0:02:18.966 And then you have the environmental groups. They say that 0:02:18.975 --> 0:02:24.776 the blame game overs uptake is really exemplifying the industry, 0:02:24.785 --> 0:02:29.416 setting arbitrary targets with actually no agreed upon road map 0:02:29.425 --> 0:02:29.716 on 0:02:30.127 --> 0:02:35.157 their transport and environment. That's a Brussels based NGO is 0:02:35.167 --> 0:02:37.837 actually calling for regulators to take control and to put 0:02:37.848 --> 0:02:41.847 strict mandates into place for self production and for use. 0:02:42.098 --> 0:02:46.188 So that's what Singapore is doing. And remember you hear 0:02:46.197 --> 0:02:50.757 that often bandied around figure which is air travel contributes 0:02:50.768 --> 0:02:55.567 2 to 3% of total carbon dioxide emissions globally. 0:02:55.889 --> 0:02:59.720 However, that really is a well rehearsed figure because yes, 0:02:59.729 --> 0:03:03.419 the key is 3%. But that number is constantly expanding 0:03:03.429 --> 0:03:07.500 because it doesn't take into account economies and the percentage 0:03:07.508 --> 0:03:11.350 growth of air travel that's compounded annually. So really it 0:03:11.360 --> 0:03:15.079 is imperative to decarbonize over the next 26 years or 0:03:15.089 --> 0:03:18.889 so headed towards 2050 going net zero for any industry. 0:03:18.899 --> 0:03:21.690 It's an ambitious target, right? And you were talking about 0:03:21.699 --> 0:03:24.490 the pressure that all these industry players are feeling and 0:03:24.500 --> 0:03:24.660 different 0:03:24.779 --> 0:03:27.910 voices that you've heard. But I'm curious to find out 0:03:27.919 --> 0:03:32.529 some examples of specific sustainability goals or strategies that some 0:03:32.538 --> 0:03:36.110 of the players are implementing from a business aviation standpoint. 0:03:36.119 --> 0:03:40.559 The industry segment is increasingly becoming targets of environmental activism. 0:03:40.570 --> 0:03:44.550 One private jet maker I spoke to Bombardier says that 0:03:44.559 --> 0:03:47.720 they take sustainability very seriously because the current trend right 0:03:47.729 --> 0:03:50.919 now it really is to blame business jets or private 0:03:50.929 --> 0:03:53.520 jets for the carbon dioxide emissions out there. 0:03:53.699 --> 0:03:56.779 Celebrities like Taylor Swift, she's in Singapore. I know she 0:03:56.789 --> 0:03:58.800 has gotten a lot of flag for her use of 0:03:58.809 --> 0:04:03.320 private jets. So Nilesh Paay who is regional VP for 0:04:03.330 --> 0:04:06.449 Asia Pacific and China, he is of course pushing for 0:04:06.460 --> 0:04:10.440 staff usage and recycling as much as possible. This is 0:04:10.449 --> 0:04:11.320 what he had to say. 0:04:11.330 --> 0:04:16.200 We are the market leader in sustainability in business aircraft. 0:04:16.209 --> 0:04:17.729 So we are committed to it. We are looking at 0:04:17.738 --> 0:04:20.160 short term, medium term and long term growth from a 0:04:20.170 --> 0:04:22.519 short term perspective, we are the only oe that 0:04:22.820 --> 0:04:26.959 does all our flight operations 100%. Sa We also publish 0:04:26.970 --> 0:04:31.238 environmental product declarations to track the life cycle of our product. 0:04:31.459 --> 0:04:34.118 And we are also innovating doing a lot of research 0:04:34.350 --> 0:04:37.159 in terms of our Eco jet, which you can look up, 0:04:37.170 --> 0:04:41.200 which basically tries to do a blended wing technology to 0:04:41.209 --> 0:04:43.279 minimize the carbon emissions. 0:04:43.670 --> 0:04:47.049 So the industry really is feeling the headwinds and committed 0:04:47.059 --> 0:04:50.160 to doing something about it, Julie. Yeah, so let's zoom 0:04:50.170 --> 0:04:53.988 into sa right. Sustainable aviation fuel. It's been touted as 0:04:54.000 --> 0:04:57.190 the best way to take the carbon out of flying. 0:04:57.200 --> 0:05:01.019 And you've done a comprehensive explainer on TV. Could you 0:05:01.029 --> 0:05:04.359 tell us what is it exactly? Well, sustainable aviation fuel 0:05:04.369 --> 0:05:06.169 s really, it just is a type 0:05:06.250 --> 0:05:09.989 fuel, it powers commercial jets with all the properties of 0:05:10.000 --> 0:05:13.410 traditional jet fuel or kerosene but with a smaller carbon 0:05:13.420 --> 0:05:17.708 footprint because if done right, studies show that s can 0:05:17.720 --> 0:05:21.519 reduce carbon emissions by up to 80% compared to a 0:05:21.529 --> 0:05:25.488 traditional fossil fuel based jet fuel. For example, a Boeing 0:05:25.500 --> 0:05:28.750 737 max currently flies on a 50 50 million 0:05:29.040 --> 0:05:32.109 of traditional jet fuel and s but the industry really 0:05:32.119 --> 0:05:35.470 is working towards 100% staff usage in the future. It's 0:05:35.480 --> 0:05:39.058 a big game changer. Is it? Yes, there are huge advantages. 0:05:39.070 --> 0:05:42.409 One is that, for example, staff can be blended with 0:05:42.420 --> 0:05:44.869 traditional jet fuel and it can also be used with 0:05:44.880 --> 0:05:48.529 existing planes. You don't have to retrofit any planes and 0:05:48.540 --> 0:05:51.290 the infrastructure of airports remain the same. 0:05:51.630 --> 0:05:54.089 But the key difference really is that instead of being 0:05:54.100 --> 0:05:58.089 made from petroleum sa is made from renewable sources, which 0:05:58.100 --> 0:06:01.190 is why it leads to net carbon emissions over the 0:06:01.200 --> 0:06:03.820 entire life cycle of that fuel. That's why s a 0:06:03.920 --> 0:06:08.309 currently costs 3 to 5 times more than traditional jet fuel. 0:06:08.320 --> 0:06:12.049 And not all staff are created equal because that's firstly 0:06:12.059 --> 0:06:17.690 pure biofuels. So that's where you grow something crops, sugarcane, 0:06:17.859 --> 0:06:20.010 palm oil, and you make fuel out of that. And 0:06:20.019 --> 0:06:20.410 then 0:06:20.743 --> 0:06:25.371 that's the waste based fuels, which is from sustainable biomass. 0:06:25.382 --> 0:06:30.381 So your agricultural waste, even your recycling cooking oil, for example, 0:06:30.392 --> 0:06:33.062 that also can be turned into S A right? And 0:06:33.072 --> 0:06:35.782 you've had a chance to talk to industry players that 0:06:35.791 --> 0:06:39.001 have already adopted or have plans to scale up the 0:06:39.013 --> 0:06:43.083 purchase of sa what insights have you gathered from them? Yes, 0:06:43.092 --> 0:06:46.772 I spoke to Finnish Energy Giant Nest. They are the 0:06:46.782 --> 0:06:49.282 biggest producer s in the world and 0:06:49.395 --> 0:06:52.936 heavily investing to push global staff production capacity to around 0:06:53.065 --> 0:06:57.885 2.2 million tons annually. Currently only produces less than half 0:06:57.895 --> 0:07:00.415 of that 1.2 million tons last year and they make 0:07:00.425 --> 0:07:04.325 it from renewable waste and biomass. Sami Yahi Hainan, who 0:07:04.335 --> 0:07:08.135 is the VP of Renewable Aviation Asia Pacific at Nest Day. 0:07:08.145 --> 0:07:12.656 He told me that getting sufficient or certainty of demand 0:07:12.665 --> 0:07:16.096 for staff is really critical in order to unlock the 0:07:16.105 --> 0:07:18.175 investments to scale up production 0:07:18.420 --> 0:07:21.839 of the capacity for sustainable aviation fuel. And remember that 0:07:21.850 --> 0:07:24.619 chicken and egg situation, I mentioned earlier airline saying that 0:07:24.630 --> 0:07:26.920 they're using every drop of it and then producers saying 0:07:26.929 --> 0:07:29.670 that they're not producing enough. And then the energy supply 0:07:29.679 --> 0:07:32.320 is also saying that demand isn't enough to ramp up production. Well, 0:07:32.329 --> 0:07:35.880 getting off the ground really is crucial as semi hein 0:07:36.089 --> 0:07:39.100 and of Nestle told me earlier, have a listen, it 0:07:39.109 --> 0:07:41.380 is the right pathway. Certainly it's not 0:07:41.506 --> 0:07:44.335 only pathway. I think the first thing to highlight is 0:07:44.346 --> 0:07:47.286 that aviation is a so called hard to obey sector. 0:07:47.295 --> 0:07:50.585 We will need all solutions available to get to the 0:07:50.596 --> 0:07:55.105 goal of net zero flying by 2050. So more fuel 0:07:55.115 --> 0:08:00.085 efficient aircraft better air traffic management, maybe even electric or 0:08:00.096 --> 0:08:03.286 hydrogen powered planes need to play a role. But the 0:08:03.295 --> 0:08:04.476 fact remains that 0:08:04.592 --> 0:08:10.332 a large share of aircraft will likely remain dependent on 0:08:10.342 --> 0:08:15.361 liquid fuels. And hence the role of sustainable aviation fuels 0:08:15.372 --> 0:08:22.022 is so large for aviation's climate goals. A estimates that 65% 0:08:22.032 --> 0:08:25.772 of the required emission reductions for the net zero goal 0:08:25.782 --> 0:08:27.131 need to come from the use of. 0:08:28.149 --> 0:08:31.420 So not all regulatory support really is important to create 0:08:31.429 --> 0:08:35.090 that required demand certainty for s but there are other 0:08:35.099 --> 0:08:38.380 aspects as well the greener planes and investing in new 0:08:38.390 --> 0:08:41.520 tech just as important as you earlier mentioned. Currently, global 0:08:41.530 --> 0:08:46.619 supply of staff barely meets what 1% of the aviation industry, 0:08:46.630 --> 0:08:50.619 a total fuel requirement. So what is holding it back 0:08:50.630 --> 0:08:55.130 from wider quicker adoption? What are the biggest dumpling blocks here? Well, 0:08:55.179 --> 0:08:56.320 stepping up staff 0:08:56.768 --> 0:09:00.756 really is a complex and multifaceted endeavor. It requires a 0:09:00.867 --> 0:09:05.708 lot of things considered efforts by government industry, stakeholders, as 0:09:05.718 --> 0:09:09.267 well as the research community and the government and the 0:09:09.278 --> 0:09:13.018 regulatory bodies in respective economies really need to provide incentives 0:09:13.138 --> 0:09:16.937 and subsidies and tax breaks in order to encourage staff production. 0:09:16.947 --> 0:09:20.588 So that's one thing that hasn't been done aggressively yet 0:09:20.598 --> 0:09:23.897 by the government. And according to the trade body, Iata 0:09:23.908 --> 0:09:24.987 S really needs to 0:09:25.356 --> 0:09:27.584 up production in order to achieve net zero. We are 0:09:27.596 --> 0:09:32.726 talking something like 13 million tons needed annually by 2030 0:09:32.736 --> 0:09:36.845 towards that 2050 target. And as I've said earlier, Nest Day, 0:09:36.856 --> 0:09:38.955 the biggest producer of staff is only producing just a 0:09:38.966 --> 0:09:42.726 little bit more than 2 million currently. So 30,000,002 million, 0:09:42.815 --> 0:09:46.645 it's a big gap and also it requires mandates that 0:09:46.655 --> 0:09:50.954 airlines themselves use a certain percentage of staff in their 0:09:50.966 --> 0:09:53.546 fuel mix then currently. So that will 0:09:53.643 --> 0:09:57.424 actually also guarantee a market for separate producers out there. 0:09:57.693 --> 0:09:59.203 But I have to say at the same time, all 0:09:59.213 --> 0:10:03.903 this is making environmentalists nervous. I remember you're using renewable 0:10:03.914 --> 0:10:07.254 waste which is fine, recycled biomass, that's fine. But growing 0:10:07.263 --> 0:10:11.004 crops for the purposes of producing biofuels for that means 0:10:11.013 --> 0:10:14.164 that you need large parcels of land and there are concerns, 0:10:14.174 --> 0:10:17.174 of course that the change of land use and deforestation 0:10:17.184 --> 0:10:21.333 will also worsen as demand of staff catches up worldwide 0:10:21.564 --> 0:10:21.903 and it all 0:10:22.142 --> 0:10:24.280 comes down to money too. Right. It has to make 0:10:24.291 --> 0:10:27.311 business sense. And you did mention that right now sa 0:10:27.421 --> 0:10:30.432 is what three times more expensive than the current jet 0:10:30.442 --> 0:10:33.492 fuel that you're using. So if large scale, let's say 0:10:33.502 --> 0:10:37.461 production kicks in, could the prices come down significantly? Well, 0:10:37.471 --> 0:10:40.262 the main thing about traditional jet fuel is that it 0:10:40.271 --> 0:10:44.161 doesn't price in the externalities and the environmental emissions is 0:10:44.171 --> 0:10:47.710 a cause by digging the oil or fuel out of 0:10:47.721 --> 0:10:50.231 the ground. Well, that is in fact when you talk 0:10:50.242 --> 0:10:50.562 about 0:10:50.640 --> 0:10:54.539 jet fuel prices. So you're not really comparing apple and apples, 0:10:54.549 --> 0:10:58.580 but at the same time, staff won't actually reach parity 0:10:58.590 --> 0:11:01.939 with jet fuel anytime soon. It will come down with 0:11:02.119 --> 0:11:06.099 more investments, economies of scale. But what industry players tell 0:11:06.109 --> 0:11:09.429 me is that regulatory framework is really important in terms 0:11:09.440 --> 0:11:11.929 of supporting the ramp up of production in order to 0:11:11.940 --> 0:11:16.020 get investments to increase capacity. And of course, enabling the 0:11:16.030 --> 0:11:19.020 airlines in a competitive market to use it. 0:11:19.270 --> 0:11:23.559 What I says is that sustainable fuel is going to 0:11:23.570 --> 0:11:28.010 stay more expensive than traditional jet fuel even with large 0:11:28.020 --> 0:11:33.559 scale production. Simply because the low availability of sustainable feedstock, 0:11:33.570 --> 0:11:37.429 as well as the continuing development of other new production 0:11:37.440 --> 0:11:42.968 technologies and with more players in the marketplace as the 0:11:43.049 --> 0:11:46.580 staff production matures, the price is expected to come down. 0:11:46.590 --> 0:11:48.369 Although we have yet to see 0:11:48.463 --> 0:11:52.004 how significant that's something that the industry players themselves couldn't 0:11:52.013 --> 0:11:55.083 give me an answer to fuel already is one of 0:11:55.093 --> 0:11:58.013 the biggest costs for our airlines and the industry. So 0:11:58.023 --> 0:12:01.004 I guess the decision to get consumers to chip in 0:12:01.013 --> 0:12:05.132 didn't really come as a huge surprise from 2026 travelers 0:12:05.143 --> 0:12:09.323 will be paying more for flights leaving Singapore to support 0:12:09.333 --> 0:12:13.064 this greener jet fuel. Why is this significant and why 0:12:13.073 --> 0:12:16.323 is Singapore moving so fast on this? Right? I think 0:12:16.333 --> 0:12:17.554 that the news really did make 0:12:17.658 --> 0:12:20.897 headlines, not just Singapore headlines but international headlines. And it 0:12:20.908 --> 0:12:24.348 was very positively received by all the aviation players because 0:12:24.357 --> 0:12:28.377 it sets an early example for other countries to actually 0:12:28.388 --> 0:12:33.158 mandates usage. Remember back in November on staff usage in 0:12:33.168 --> 0:12:37.478 the region, the Association of Asia Pacific Airlines or a 0:12:37.677 --> 0:12:40.637 a they set a target for all its members, the 0:12:40.648 --> 0:12:46.757 Asian Pacific Airlines to adopt five percents usage by 2030. 0:12:46.851 --> 0:12:49.562 And that was a signal of demand for fuel producers 0:12:49.572 --> 0:12:52.392 out there. But that was a target. What the Singapore 0:12:52.401 --> 0:12:55.910 authorities have actually done is to actually crystallize it into 0:12:55.921 --> 0:12:59.511 a green fuel levy. So as you say, air travelers 0:12:59.521 --> 0:13:03.002 now have to bear part of Singapore's green aviation transition. 0:13:03.011 --> 0:13:06.481 All departing flights from Singapore will have to use 1% 0:13:06.660 --> 0:13:11.752 s by 2026 rises up to 5% by 2030. They 0:13:11.761 --> 0:13:15.351 have given examples based on 2026 prices, let's say, for example, 0:13:15.361 --> 0:13:15.952 price of 0:13:16.046 --> 0:13:20.065 economy ticket from Singapore to Thailand, that's going to add 0:13:20.075 --> 0:13:24.625 three Singapore dollars. That's about $2.20 us. Singapore to Tokyo, 0:13:24.635 --> 0:13:27.814 that's going to add an additional $6. Singapore to London 0:13:27.825 --> 0:13:32.205 another $16 or about $12 us. So it's not a 0:13:32.216 --> 0:13:36.245 big sum to pay currently, but of course, that will 0:13:36.255 --> 0:13:40.255 increase with more staff usage being mandated. I know you 0:13:40.265 --> 0:13:42.385 travel a lot as a customer. Do you think this 0:13:42.395 --> 0:13:44.846 is a reasonable price point to start with? I don't 0:13:44.856 --> 0:13:45.135 think I 0:13:45.239 --> 0:13:48.280 to be using myself as an example. But what I 0:13:48.289 --> 0:13:52.099 can say though is that the price rise as described 0:13:52.109 --> 0:13:55.309 by the Singapore Transport Minister Qi Hong Tat, he described 0:13:55.320 --> 0:13:58.459 it as manageable and I would argue that look, you're 0:13:58.469 --> 0:14:00.890 going to be paying more than what the numbers I 0:14:00.900 --> 0:14:05.510 just rattled out for travel insurance. So certainly a small 0:14:05.520 --> 0:14:09.729 price to pay for making sure that your carbon footprint 0:14:09.739 --> 0:14:13.598 is reduced somewhat. And don't forget the Civil Aviation Authority 0:14:13.609 --> 0:14:14.218 of Singapore. 0:14:14.434 --> 0:14:18.804 She developed this plan in consultation with industry and other stakeholders. 0:14:18.814 --> 0:14:21.653 So obviously they were supportive of this. What I can 0:14:21.664 --> 0:14:24.934 also say is that Willie Walsh at Iata said that 0:14:24.943 --> 0:14:27.903 he was also very supportive of this, but he also 0:14:27.914 --> 0:14:33.093 cautioned that taxation to pay for aviation sustainability. They might 0:14:33.104 --> 0:14:36.174 not reduce the number of flights, but they could actually 0:14:36.184 --> 0:14:39.193 price some people out of flying further down the road 0:14:39.203 --> 0:14:42.294 and that could lead to empty seats on planes which 0:14:42.304 --> 0:14:43.533 isn't good for the environment. 0:14:43.809 --> 0:14:47.619 And then another person I spoke to Louis Philippe de Oliveira, 0:14:47.630 --> 0:14:51.210 who is Director General of the Airports Council International. They 0:14:51.219 --> 0:14:54.090 represent most of the airports in the world. They said 0:14:54.099 --> 0:14:57.070 that governments really need to invest in new refineries to 0:14:57.080 --> 0:15:00.309 help bring down the cost. And so he's saying that 0:15:00.320 --> 0:15:05.039 the solution isn't about capacity restrictions. The solution isn't about 0:15:05.049 --> 0:15:07.669 taxing the travelers but really the solution is finding ways 0:15:07.679 --> 0:15:10.640 to work together to increase production capacity. 0:15:10.880 --> 0:15:14.799 So beyond sustainable fuel, Roland and what are other green 0:15:14.809 --> 0:15:18.489 measures or solutions that were discussed at the event? We 0:15:18.500 --> 0:15:20.900 talked a lot about S A but there's also notable 0:15:20.909 --> 0:15:26.020 advancements in aircraft design manufacturing to enhance fuel efficiency. And 0:15:26.030 --> 0:15:28.750 one that comes to mind for me was the next 0:15:28.760 --> 0:15:32.030 generation jet planes that will be using half the fuel 0:15:32.039 --> 0:15:34.460 that they're using today for the same range as well 0:15:34.469 --> 0:15:37.849 as the same payload. There was this California base 0:15:37.950 --> 0:15:42.049 company called Jet zero. It's actually coming up with a 0:15:42.059 --> 0:15:45.969 blended wing body plane. Remember the basic design of a 0:15:45.979 --> 0:15:48.510 commercial airplane hasn't changed in the last 60 years, you 0:15:48.520 --> 0:15:50.830 have a long tube and you stick wings on the 0:15:50.840 --> 0:15:53.510 side of it. But the basic idea really with a 0:15:53.619 --> 0:15:56.609 blended wing body is to create a plane with less 0:15:56.619 --> 0:15:59.950 drag and to be more fuel efficient. So they do 0:15:59.960 --> 0:16:03.369 this by making the wing of the plane broader, so 0:16:03.380 --> 0:16:04.690 it becomes more stable 0:16:05.020 --> 0:16:07.229 and then they shorten the tail, it doesn't need a 0:16:07.239 --> 0:16:11.539 tail surface. So the fuselage becomes shorter and then you 0:16:11.549 --> 0:16:13.859 have more volume in the middle of the plane. If 0:16:13.869 --> 0:16:16.429 you can imagine that the closest I can describe it 0:16:16.440 --> 0:16:18.099 really is that it looks a little bit like the 0:16:18.109 --> 0:16:20.820 stealth plane, the B two bomber, if you've ever seen 0:16:20.830 --> 0:16:24.500 one of those. So that is how commercial planes could 0:16:24.510 --> 0:16:27.280 look like in the future. One of the main challenges 0:16:27.289 --> 0:16:31.960 for holding manufacturers back all these years was because of pressurization, 0:16:32.270 --> 0:16:36.169 the irregular shape of this BB plane, it makes it 0:16:36.179 --> 0:16:39.559 more difficult to equalize pressure in the cabin. What's happened 0:16:39.570 --> 0:16:42.729 since then, of course is that NASA, they've made tremendous 0:16:42.739 --> 0:16:45.280 advances in materials. They've come up with a composite material 0:16:45.289 --> 0:16:48.979 that's both strong and light and that's the breakthrough really, 0:16:48.989 --> 0:16:52.489 that's helping jet zero. And with this technology, you're able 0:16:52.500 --> 0:16:55.520 to build passenger planes to be able to build cargo 0:16:55.530 --> 0:16:55.929 planes 0:16:56.034 --> 0:16:58.734 as well as a fuel tank if you want. And 0:16:58.744 --> 0:17:01.015 the best part about this is that actually will fit 0:17:01.025 --> 0:17:04.604 into existing airport infrastructure. So you don't have to change 0:17:04.614 --> 0:17:07.454 the configuration of an airport. Jet zero really has an 0:17:07.464 --> 0:17:09.635 ambitious target of putting one into service. One of these 0:17:09.645 --> 0:17:14.135 blended wing aircraft as soon as 2030 they are being 0:17:14.145 --> 0:17:18.224 supported by the US Air Force. They got a $235 0:17:18.234 --> 0:17:19.694 million contract recently 0:17:19.958 --> 0:17:24.417 to develop a full scale demonstrator. That's a working model 0:17:24.428 --> 0:17:29.338 to test flight test flights happening in 2027. So they 0:17:29.348 --> 0:17:33.269 are expecting big things. Here's what Tom o'leary ceo of 0:17:33.279 --> 0:17:36.999 Jet Zero had to say about sustainable aviation. We've been 0:17:37.009 --> 0:17:38.898 solving problems of sustainability 0:17:38.979 --> 0:17:42.670 in aviation for so long based almost entirely on propulsion. 0:17:43.140 --> 0:17:47.359 When we move to a new airframe that is more efficient. 0:17:47.729 --> 0:17:51.869 We enable virtually all the other forms. We make sa 0:17:52.170 --> 0:17:57.438 more affordable. We make electric, more workable along with hydrogen, right? 0:17:57.449 --> 0:17:57.920 Because 0:17:58.449 --> 0:18:01.369 electric requires batteries which weigh a lot. So you need 0:18:01.380 --> 0:18:05.339 a more efficient airframe, right? Hydrogen requires a lot of volume. 0:18:05.349 --> 0:18:08.609 So you need a volumetrically efficient airframe. We provide all 0:18:08.619 --> 0:18:13.780 those things uh with this one airframe advancement, he's essentially 0:18:13.790 --> 0:18:17.000 saying that they are blended wing body planes will be 0:18:17.010 --> 0:18:19.229 future proofed to work with either elect 0:18:19.464 --> 0:18:23.454 batteries or hydrogen fuel in the distant future. Ok. Hydrogen, 0:18:23.464 --> 0:18:26.535 let's talk about that. Hydrogen powered planes. We've heard a 0:18:26.545 --> 0:18:30.354 lot about it. What is it? And how far has 0:18:30.364 --> 0:18:35.224 it developed? Yes, hydrogen powered airplanes uses, of course, hydrogen 0:18:35.234 --> 0:18:39.165 gas as the power source and the gas is burned 0:18:39.175 --> 0:18:40.084 in a jet engine. 0:18:40.400 --> 0:18:43.709 Now, here's how the system works. Typically, the wings of 0:18:43.719 --> 0:18:46.709 a plane stores the jet fuel and that drives the engines. 0:18:46.939 --> 0:18:49.979 But in this case, hydrogen gas that's stored in the 0:18:49.989 --> 0:18:52.750 fuselage at the back of the plane in the tanks 0:18:52.880 --> 0:18:55.349 and then it gets fed into the jet engines at 0:18:55.359 --> 0:18:57.469 the wings of the plane because this is due to 0:18:57.479 --> 0:19:00.489 the highly volatile nature of hydrogen gas. And that's why 0:19:00.500 --> 0:19:04.889 you need a cylindrical shaped storage tanks for thermal efficiency. 0:19:04.900 --> 0:19:06.010 So the hydrogen gets 0:19:06.134 --> 0:19:08.963 into the engines at the wings and this is where 0:19:08.973 --> 0:19:12.562 the magic really happens because hydrogen is mixed with oxygen 0:19:12.573 --> 0:19:16.513 or air and then it goes through fuel cells or 0:19:16.523 --> 0:19:20.033 battery cells and that creates electricity that runs the motors. 0:19:20.042 --> 0:19:24.394 The only by product of that is water totally green. 0:19:24.404 --> 0:19:26.923 But the problem is of course that the aircraft stores 0:19:26.933 --> 0:19:29.984 this hydrogen in gaseous forms at the back of the plane. 0:19:30.114 --> 0:19:31.754 There are also alternatives to store 0:19:32.098 --> 0:19:36.557 hydrogen as liquid form which occupies less space, less heavy, 0:19:36.657 --> 0:19:39.887 but the tanks themselves has to be kept very cold 0:19:39.897 --> 0:19:41.807 and the liquid of course, needs to be converted back 0:19:41.817 --> 0:19:45.868 into gas before it's used. What the developers are hoping 0:19:45.878 --> 0:19:48.608 for is that maybe hydrogen gas can be used for 0:19:48.618 --> 0:19:52.868 short haul flights. Liquid hydrogen can be used for longer 0:19:52.878 --> 0:19:55.848 haul flights and turned into gas use for as and 0:19:55.858 --> 0:19:57.477 when needed. It's still very far 0:19:57.692 --> 0:20:01.832 off. They could start maybe coming into the scene by 0:20:01.842 --> 0:20:06.261 late 20 thirties and then scaling up through 20 fifties. 0:20:06.271 --> 0:20:10.911 But don't expect hydrogen planes to be commercialized until way 0:20:10.921 --> 0:20:14.462 past 2050 where up to maybe a third of the 0:20:14.472 --> 0:20:18.102 aviation fleet could be hydrogen by then. So still quite 0:20:18.112 --> 0:20:22.802 a way off. President of Airbus Asia Pacific Anan Stanley, 0:20:22.852 --> 0:20:23.222 he 0:20:23.336 --> 0:20:27.336 of course, is very supportive of the technology as Airbus 0:20:27.345 --> 0:20:29.906 has always been because they have been doing research and 0:20:29.916 --> 0:20:32.635 development on it. And he's saying that it really ticks 0:20:32.645 --> 0:20:35.895 all the boxes, it's safe, it's versatile, it's lightweight in 0:20:35.906 --> 0:20:38.235 terms of storage. This is what he had to say. 0:20:38.385 --> 0:20:43.234 We are fully committed to bringing a hydrogen fueled aircraft 0:20:43.244 --> 0:20:46.566 by 2035. It's coming along very well. I mean, we 0:20:46.576 --> 0:20:48.505 are doing a lot of work on it year over 0:20:48.515 --> 0:20:48.985 year 0:20:49.280 --> 0:20:53.599 and we're looking at multiple different prototypes and vectors for 0:20:53.609 --> 0:20:57.379 that aircraft, whether it is combustion, which means we burn 0:20:57.390 --> 0:21:01.079 the hydrogen or it's fuel cell based. But we're very 0:21:01.089 --> 0:21:02.899 excited and working a lot on that. 0:21:03.439 --> 0:21:08.660 So Airbus believes that hydrogen can potentially cut aircraft emissions 0:21:08.670 --> 0:21:12.599 by half and while hydrogen is a clean fuel and 0:21:12.609 --> 0:21:16.250 it's green really depends on the carbon footprint that is 0:21:16.260 --> 0:21:21.359 used to actually produce it. So unlike s existing planes 0:21:21.369 --> 0:21:24.540 cannot be retrofitted. So using hydrogen as a source, you 0:21:24.550 --> 0:21:27.079 need a new plane and the infrastructure at the airports 0:21:27.089 --> 0:21:30.150 that also needs to change in order to receive as 0:21:30.160 --> 0:21:31.209 well as to store, 0:21:31.302 --> 0:21:34.192 to deliver hydrogen either in liquid or gas forms to 0:21:34.203 --> 0:21:38.262 the planes themselves. Based on all the experts and industry 0:21:38.272 --> 0:21:43.123 players that you've spoken to can sustainable aviation truly take off. 0:21:43.133 --> 0:21:47.922 I wouldn't say can sustainable aviation take off. It has to, 0:21:47.932 --> 0:21:50.292 it will, you know the saying that it takes an 0:21:50.302 --> 0:21:54.062 entire village to enable a plane to take off. What 0:21:54.071 --> 0:21:56.282 sustainable aviation means is that it's going to take an 0:21:56.292 --> 0:21:59.083 even bigger village. Essentially 0:21:59.166 --> 0:22:01.025 the best analogy I can give you really is that 0:22:01.036 --> 0:22:05.875 it's several bridges all leading to the same destination. And 0:22:05.885 --> 0:22:08.725 as time goes by, you're going to find that certain 0:22:08.734 --> 0:22:11.826 bridges are going to be preferred to others. So that's 0:22:11.836 --> 0:22:16.036 the pathway to sustainable aviation. Look, 20 years ago, you 0:22:16.046 --> 0:22:20.906 barely saw any electric cars on the roads today. They 0:22:20.916 --> 0:22:23.395 are the number one best seller. I mean, even in China, 0:22:23.566 --> 0:22:26.225 you can only buy an electric car. It is the 0:22:26.234 --> 0:22:26.946 only option. 0:22:27.270 --> 0:22:32.310 So sustainable aviation usage of s hydrogen planes. When they 0:22:32.319 --> 0:22:35.829 come into existence, all these things are certainty. It's only 0:22:35.839 --> 0:22:36.770