At conference after conference held by the aviation industry from Paris to Phnom Penh and all points in between, the topic of “sustainability” is high on the agenda. The industry wants to be net-zero in carbon emissions by 2050, according to IATA, and has big dreams to fly electric planes or hydrogen-powered planes. But in the vernacular of such great films as Goodfellas and Donnie Brasco, “fuhgeddaboudit”.
For those not familiar with the lingua franca of such places as Brooklyn, New York or Hoboken, New Jersey, fuhgeddaboudit means, according to the Oxford Dictionary, a term that is “used to indicate that a suggested scenario is unlikely”.
Hydrogen, fuhgeddaboudit. Electric planes for anything other than a flying eVTOL on short hops, fuhgeddaboudit. Net zero by 2050, fuhgeddaboudit. Why? As I’ve said before, it comes down to money. Simple as that. Hydrogen is, currently, simply too expensive a project for the industry to support it. It would literally cost billions of dollars to first develop a plane with engines powered by hydrogen, and billions more to develop and implement the airport infrastructure necessary to support a hydrogen-based aviation ecosystem. It won’t happen in my lifetime so fuhgeddaboudit.
But don’t take my word for it. Airbus, despite several years ago very loudly proclaiming it would develop a hydrogen-powered plane by 2035, has now gone back on that promise and very quietly said it was pushing back on the 2035 date and gave no indication of when, if ever, it might be flying with hydrogen.
An Airbus official told me: “We are committed to our goal of bringing a commercially viable, hydrogen-powered aircraft to market. This commitment aligns with our ambition to lead aviation decarbonisation and to support the industry’s long-term sustainability goals, which remains unchanged. Hydrogen has the potential to be a transformative energy source for aviation. However, we recognise that developing a hydrogen ecosystem — including infrastructure, production, distribution and regulatory frameworks — is a huge challenge requiring global collaboration and investment. Recent developments indicate that progress on key enablers, particularly the availability of hydrogen produced from renewable energy sources at scale and the maturity of certain aircraft technologies, is slower than previously anticipated.
“While hydrogen is anticipated to play a growing role in the second half of this century, its contribution to 2050 decarbonisation targets will complement other solutions, particularly SAF, which remains critical for medium- and long-range flights. We are continuously assessing technological, regulatory and ecosystem developments to ensure our plans remain ambitious and achievable. We now expect the entry-into-service of a hydrogen-powered aircraft to happen later than 2035,” Airbus said.
But the pullback by Airbus is not stopping companies from dreaming of hydrogen. New Zealand-based Fabrum has unveiled a hydrogen testing facility in partnership with Christchurch Airport to support the development of green hydrogen-powered technologies. But as we say when it comes to hydrogen, green or otherwise, fuhgeddaboudit.
Hydrogen is not the only challenge. Companies around the globe are trying to develop — the key word being trying — planes that are powered by electricity/batteries or hybrid engines. Again, fuhgeddaboudit.
Companies like Volocopter (now in bankruptcy), Eviation, and others working on electric vehicles like eVTOLs, are either calling it quits completely or, as Airbus said, “pausing” development. Regional turboprop mainstay ATR has pushed back its service entry target for its low-emission aircraft, the ATR Evo. Originally slated for a 2030 launch, the Evo’s debut has been pushed back to around 2035 due to challenges in achieving the necessary technology maturity, particularly the development of clean-sheet engines. Eviation Aircraft recently laid off most of its employees and paused work on its electric- powered Alice airplane.,
For aviation to come anywhere near achieving net zero by 2050, using SAF is, as of now, the only real option. IATA says a combination of approaches can be used, but SAF is at the top with IATA saying it should make up 65 percent of fuel to achieve net zero by 2050. Coming in at 13 percent is “new technology” like electric and hydrogen (fuhgeddaboudit) and 19 percent from offsets (fuhgeddaboudit) and carbon capture.
But given the world is ruled by money and SAF is more expensive than regular jet fuel, and given that countries around the world are abandoning or “pausing” their alternative fuel efforts, achieving net zero by 2050 — fuhgeddaboudit.
For Editorial Inquiries Contact:
Editor Matt Driskill at matt.driskill@asianaviation.com
For Advertising Inquiries Contact:
Head of Sales Kay Rolland at kay.rolland@asianaviation.com
