Sustainable Aviation Fuel: How Minnesota can get it right

Aviation accounts for nearly 10% of greenhouse gas emissions from the transportation sector in the United States. With emissions from aircrafts on the rise, federal and state governments are urgently seeking ways to reduce aviation industry emissions through low-carbon fuel pathways that can benefit communities, mitigate climate impacts, and drive business development. But what is sustainable aviation fuel and the possibilities (and perils) it can present?

Minnesota is at an inflection point. The choices made now about our state’s approach to sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) will have an impact for decades to come.

Fresh Energy, The Nature Conservancy, and Friends of the Mississippi River partnered to present a webinar for anyone interested in learning more about the possibilities and perils of SAF, especially those working within state agencies, agriculture, economic development, advocacy, and academia.

During the discussion, we unpacked what SAF is and how it fits into decarbonizing emissions from aviation, discussed the Minnesota Sustainable Aviation Fuels Guiding Principles created by partner organizations Fresh Energy, Friends of the Mississippi River, and The Nature Conservancy, and explained what could be next for SAF in Minnesota and beyond.

View the video recording of the presentation at minnesotasaf.com.

Fresh Energy’s mission is to shape and drive bold policy solutions to achieve equitable carbon-neutral economies. Together we are working toward a vision of a just, prosperous, and resilient future powered by a shared commitment to a carbon-neutral economy. Learn about Fresh Energy's work and our bold "Vision 2030: Fresh Energy's Strategic Framework" at our website fresh-energy.org.


Follow us on Social Media!
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/freshenergytoday/
Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/freshenergy.bsky.social
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/freshenergytoday
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/fresh-energy/

Transcript

Jo Olson: [00:00:11] Hello and welcome to Decarbonize the Clean Energy Podcast from Fresh Energy. Fresh energy is a Minnesota nonprofit working to speed our state's transition to a clean energy economy. My name is Jo Olson. I'm the lead director of communications and engagement at Fresh Energy. And today, I want to share with you a conversation that Fresh Energy and partners at The Nature Conservancy and Friends of the Mississippi River had about sustainable aviation fuel, and how Minnesota can get it right. Let's begin the recording. Hi, everyone. Welcome to our webinar, Sustainable Aviation Fuel How Minnesota Can Get It Right. My name is Jo Olson, and my pronouns are she her. I'm the lead director of communications and engagement at Fresh Energy. Thank you so much for joining us this morning. Um, before we dive into introductions, I want to do a bit of housekeeping. So first, many of you have asked via email, yes, we will be sharing a recording of this webinar probably today. I think if I'm able to get it up on YouTube quick enough, everyone who registered will get a recording via email today or tomorrow, hopefully today. Um, we'll also be posting it on our joint website Minnesota saff.com. And second, many of you did your homework and submitted questions when you registered for today's webinar, which is awesome.

Jo Olson: [00:01:33] We really appreciate when folks do that. We're also taking questions in real time, and we'll be addressing as many as we can. At the end of the webinar, there's a handy Q&A function. It's like a little button at the bottom of your zoom window, so you can submit your questions via the Q&A anytime, whenever you think of them. And we're holding hopefully ten minutes, maybe more at the end to get through your questions. And we just have a lot of info to share, but I'm hopeful we can get to quite a few. So like I said, very ambitious agenda. We'll be discussing what Sustainable Aviation fuel or SAF is and why now is the time. The guiding principles that our three organizations that's Fresh Energy, The Nature Conservancy and Friends of the Mississippi River partnered to create and why those guiding principles are important for our respective organizations. And then that's when we'll get to all of the audience questions. But first, we have a bunch of presenters today. So let's do a quick round robin introducing everyone. So Margaret, let's kick it off with you and then go in the order on the screen.

Margaret Cherne-Hendrick: [00:02:40] Good morning. Great to be with you all today. And thanks so much for joining this important conversation. My name is Margaret Hendrick. I'm the senior lead of Innovation and impact. With fresh energy. I use she her pronouns fresh energy for folks Who don't know, is a nonpartisan, clean energy advocacy nonprofit non-profit based in Saint Paul, Minnesota. We've been operating in Minnesota and the Midwest for over 30 years, and our mission is to shape and drive bold policy solutions to achieve equitable, carbon neutral economies. And through our work, we're really striving to prevent the worst impacts of climate change by fully decarbonizing our economy by mid-century. And I'll turn it over to Trevor and then Peter.

Trevor Russell: [00:03:19] Good morning. I'm Trevor Russell. I'm the water program director with friends of the Mississippi River. And I'm joined today by Peter Lafontaine, former AG policy manager. Fmr. Is a river focused organization engaging people to protect, restore and enhance the Mississippi River and its watershed in Minnesota. And our water program works to accelerate the adoption of market based cropping systems that achieve our dual goals of clean water and prosperous farms. We can pass it over to Eleanor.

Eleanor Trenary: [00:03:52] Good morning. My name is Eleanor Trenary. I'm the external affairs director for the Nature Conservancy in Minnesota, North Dakota and South Dakota. Nature Conservancy is the largest conservation organization in the world. We're focused on fighting the dual crises of biodiversity loss and climate change. And we work in all 50 states in the US and almost 80 countries worldwide. We work on local conservation issues in our Minnesota chapter here that are connected to sustainable aviation fuels, such as protecting and managing and restoring grasslands, freshwater systems and forests. Um, TNC takes a science driven, bipartisan approach to our work, and we collaborate across sectors to find solutions that work for people and nature.

Jo Olson: [00:04:35] Perfect. Thank you everyone, and we'll be hearing from you all all throughout the webinar. Um, so let's talk about why we're here. Sustainable aviation fuel or SAF. Um, already SAF is getting coverage in state and national media. It's also being marketed to the American public. Uh, I was very surprised when I got off a United flight a couple of weeks back, and Oscar the Grouch was staring me right in the face. Um, so he's part of the SAF campaign for United Airlines, and I shuddered to think at how many trash cans he's buying with that salary. But as you can see in this photo, SAF gets a shout out. So this is hitting the mainstream. Uh, and I think we can all take some great office decorating tips from Oscar there. So anyway, the conversation about SAF continues across the country Fresh Energy, The Nature Conservancy, and Friends of the Mississippi River. We all saw an opportunity to partner up and put forward some guiding principles for SAF in Minnesota. So those guiding principles, I think we launched them in, oh, maybe August or September. Um, they're on that website. You can get to it by scanning the QR. We'll send it out after this event. But now I'm going to turn it over to Margaret to share a bit more about why our three organizations are working together on this issue.

Margaret Cherne-Hendrick: [00:05:53] Great. Thank you. Jo. Um, TNC FMR and fresh energy are here today because emissions from aviation are large and they're continuing to rise. And while some parts of the economy are going to be decarbonised through electrification, this is not going to be one of them. So while we can explore other modes of transportation and lean into flying less, the fact is that commercial aviation is here to stay, and we believe we have an obligation to really lean into investigating opportunities for decarbonization. And for the time being, those are really going to include investigating alternative fuels to the current business as usual jet fuel, which is derived from fossil fuels, namely petroleum. So our three organizations are here today because we all really contribute important perspectives in order to ensure that we're having a robust conversation about how we do this and the most sustainable way possible. That's going to add value to the work that's already happening on the ground in Minnesota and across the country.

Jo Olson: [00:06:54] Excellent. Thank you. So before we dive into these guiding principles put forth by our three organizations. So let's let's take a bit of time to share what SAF actually is. Um, so Margaret, we're going to go back to you, since your voice is already warmed up and tell us what SAF is and why now.

Margaret Cherne-Hendrick: [00:07:12] Great. Thanks, Jo. Um, I'm going to do this a little bit blind because I actually can't see the slides myself. So I'm going to ask you to walk through them together. But I'll give a high level overview, as Jo mentioned, of why we're talking about SAF, what SAF is, and where we think the promise and the peril lie in helping to kickstart a sustainable market development in Minnesota. So, as you can see here, if we're looking at the broad transportation sector wedge of emissions for the United States of America, this is EPA data through 2022. We see about 9% of those emissions are derived from aircrafts and aviation emissions are underpinned, as I mentioned before, by fuel combustion as the dominant source of those greenhouse gas emissions. We can go to the next slide. And as you can see on this slide that represents the US domestic and international aviation emissions, and this is Federal Aviation Administration data from 2021, we can look closely at where those aviation emissions are coming from. And what we really see is that commercial aviation, some general aviation, but mostly commercial aviation are dominating these emissions. So next slide. So what does that mean in terms of the solutions for decarbonization that we have at our disposal. So this is a wedge analysis from the Department of Energy's SAF Grand Challenge report from 2022 that just projects out emissions to 2050. Um, and really is illustrative of what sorts of tools we have at our disposal here. So as we mentioned, commercial aviation just really isn't, uh, a good opportunity to pare in terms of decarbonization with electrification and batteries.

Margaret Cherne-Hendrick: [00:08:58] Um, it's just not a technical pathway that is viable. So the opportunities we have at our disposal are non-fuel based, as you can see, with the red bracket at the top here on the far right. Um, and those are going to be energy efficiency, fleet modifications, mode shifting, flying less. And that's only going to get us a small way to getting to zero emissions by 2050, which is where we know we need to go based on our climate goals. So the end result here is that we really understand that to be able to get all the way to zero, as you can see with this green bracket on the far right, we have to have a drop in fuel and alternative fuel to the petroleum based fuels we use today, which we believe is going to be the sustainable aviation fuel that we're talking about. So next slide. So what is sustainable aviation fuel, also called SAF or SAF? There are many ways to make it. I like this Venn diagram from for. Air because it really clearly describes the three main categories of feedstock used to make SAF today. Biomass, waste and power. So biomass is kind of running the gamut here in terms of being able to be made from conventional cropping systems like soybean and corn, purpose grown crops like camelina, which the FMR team will talk about in more detail later on. We also have waste. So conventional sources like wood waste, solid waste use, cooking oil, and also power.

Margaret Cherne-Hendrick: [00:10:20] And here power to liquid, I want to note, is uh, synonymous with other terms like power to X or power to jet. And what this fuel pathway looks like is a type of energy, we think renewable electricity derived from carbon free sources like wind and solar are best creates hydrogen, and that hydrogen is paired with CO2. Clc power to liquid listed three different times. That is because it is differentiated by where the CO2 is coming from. So the blue dot and the power circle is CO2 derived from direct air capture taken straight from the atmosphere. The waste by power middle dot is CO2 that's going to be sequestered from, uh, industrial sources like cement manufacturing. And then where you have the overlay of all three bubbles, that's going to be CO2 sequestered from a biomass manufacturer. So it's important to note at this time that the carbon intensity is going to differ based on what feedstock you're using for SAF, and that the science is still developing around how to calculate this carbon intensity, as well as the federal and state incentives that are aligned with the science are still in development. And Eleanor from TNC is going to dive a little bit more deeply into this later in the conversation. Um, it's also important to note at this time that the current status in terms of blending for sustainable aviation fuels is 50% up to 50% blended with conventional jet fuel today. So of course, we expect this blend rate will go up to 100% or nearly 100% as we grow the market for SAF, and we have more firm product available for airlines to rely on.

Margaret Cherne-Hendrick: [00:12:04] However, this blend rate is regulated at the federal level through the Federal Aviation Administration. So just good to note that the state of Minnesota will not have a particular say in the blend rate conversation. Um, and again, SAF is called a drop in fuel because it can be used directly in existing aircraft engines and fuel systems without any modifications needed. So why are we here today talking about SAF? It's because our promise in growing a sustainable aviation fuel market in Minnesota, but then also some peril. So a lot of risk to avoid as well. So starting with kind of the opportunity here, I'm just going to hit on some common themes that you're going to hear today. So one of the biggest opportunities, of course, that we see here and leaning into SAF production is that we can really achieve critical greenhouse gas reductions, both across the agriculture and transportation sectors, to reach our climate goals. And we can stand to improve environmental impacts on the landscape and beyond achieving these emissions reductions, we can also leverage a medicinal model for local SAF production that stands to grow rural economic opportunities, jobs and tax revenue. And our three organizations really want to co-create this model for local production that's going to benefit communities. And that's part of the reason to have this conversation today is to invite folks to the table to be able to have this conversation now, noting Minnesota is really an ideal location, location to stand up SAF production.

Margaret Cherne-Hendrick: [00:13:29] This is because of all the feedstocks that we just mentioned with that Venn diagram. Most of them are produced in Minnesota. We have ample rail lines that can move those feedstocks around. We have great airport hubs, and we have a lot of private and public sector interest in growing this SAF market. Now the peril. The risk that we need to avoid that is very real is that we really need to ensure that staff is actually sustainable and that we understand what sustainable means in practice. And that's not really well defined now either in terms of policy or regulation. So what we're going to discuss today is how we avoid locking ourselves into a market scheme that ends up potentially exacerbating emissions or doing harm to the landscape. And it's also important to note that from our perspective, while carbon intensity scores are going to provide one metric of success here, we really need to lean into developing an environmental integrity score that's going to fully parse sustainability. So the vision for this II score, as we're calling it, is to really bring a value add. It would be a voluntary option for producers and a good sort of Example of how this could work is through the air quality and water quality certification. This could be a good model where farmers can proactively seek new opportunities. So with that, Jo, I'll pass it back to you. Perfect.

Jo Olson: [00:14:47] Thank you Margaret. So now that we've had a bit of a primer, let's do a brief overview of our guiding principles themselves. So in case you haven't had a chance to look at them, I'm going to drop a link in the chat. And then we'll send them out again via email after today's webinar. So, Eleanor, your turn. Why don't you give us a brief overview of the guiding principles, if you would, please?

Eleanor Trenary: [00:15:11] Yeah. Thanks, Jo. So, um, you've all probably heard already in the 16 minutes we've been on here that our three organizations have very different missions, areas of expertise, ways of working, and these principles represent weeks of conversation. We really saw an opportunity in the landscape for kind of a middle of the road, um, approach that provides some practical, foundational principles to do SAF well and to capitalize on that promise that Margaret just described. Um, sustainable aviation fuel policies have enormous potential in Minnesota to drive social and environmental outcomes that we're excited about. There are also environmental risks we need to look out for to grow that market for SAF sustainably and achieve the best outcomes. We need to engage in thoughtful debate guided by best available science. That's why our three organizations work together to develop these principles. Saf has the potential to reduce emissions in the transportation and agricultural sectors. As you heard. If done right, it could also drive economic growth in rural communities and offer environment and water quality benefits. Um, without those social and ecological guardrails, SAF production could actually increase emissions through agricultural practices or specific crops, processing, transportation, etc.. Um SAF production could also lead to direct or indirect land conversion, depending on how the incentives are structured. Accelerate, which would accelerate biodiversity loss, poor water quality and community inequities.

Eleanor Trenary: [00:16:38] These are outcomes no one wants. Um, our principles are meant to offer guidance on future staff, public and corporate policies, with an emphasis on using the best available science, which will change over time. These are not prescriptive solutions. Rather, they're intended to be foundational principles. Um, we think of this document as the start of the conversation, not the end. So I want to just highlight a couple of principles in there, and we will be touching on these themes throughout today's webinar. Um, staff must operate within the broader clean energy landscape. So using both realistic emissions reductions goals and a realistic lens on the future demands and availability of clean energy across sectors. The sustainable part of staff must incorporate land use, air and water quality, biodiversity and sustainable market growth metrics. We feel it's critical to favor the most sustainable fuel pathways, not just the most readily available. So as new technologies are developed and scaled, the most sustainable fuel pathways are probably going to shift over time. And we are looking for actionable commitments and investments from decision makers to ensure environmental justice and equity is embedded into SAF markets. We are happy to discuss any of these ideas in more detail. And like I said, you'll hear these themes kind of throughout this hour.

Jo Olson: [00:17:56] Thank you Eleanor. So now all three of our organizations, as both Eleanor and Margaret mentioned, have a really different focus. So now we're going to take some time to dive into why each of us joined together to get involved in SAF. So let's do a round robin. Eleanor, you're all warmed up. Let's start with you and Tnc's perspective. Then we'll go to FMR. And then we'll close with Margaret. Yeah.

Eleanor Trenary: [00:18:19] So The Nature Conservancy again, we're a global organization. So we're really bringing that global perspective onto our work on the ground wherever we work. But particularly for like an issue like SAF um, as a sort of, um, fundamentally a land organization. We're really concerned with the issues around land use change. Um, and then we have also been working in a number of different fronts, policy and corporate engagement around this idea of an environmental integrity score, which I'll talk more about. Um, TNC looks for opportunities to work at scale and to be influential, kind of at the decision making level. Um, so we're engaged in SAF because it offers this important opportunity to reduce carbon emissions. But again, without those important ecological and social guardrails, it also risks accelerating biodiversity loss. Um, as a global organization, we know and see firsthand that the markets and policies we have here in Minnesota also impact ecosystems in neighboring states and across the globe. Um, one of those guardrails that's fundamental for TNC is no direct or indirect land use change resulting from SAF. So if SAF production leads to land use change. Not only will that have negative impacts on biodiversity and water quality, it will also reduce or even negate the climate benefits of SAF. So this is why NZ's position has is that bio based SAF must be a near-term bridge solution, while we continue to develop and scale other fuel pathways.

Eleanor Trenary: [00:19:45] If you think about that Venn diagram that Margaret showed in the principles document, we suggest that sustainable should be defined to include air and water quality and biodiversity outcomes. Current government and corporate policies focus on carbon intensity without holistically measuring the potential impacts to biodiversity, water and food security. So we've been mentioning this idea of the E score, environmental integrity score. This is a term that we're using as kind of a placeholder for a concept. It's not like a finished product at this stage. Um, but the idea in this context is pretty simple. It's a voluntary yes or no kind of add on to the Cy score for producers who are already using this expanded set of practices that support not only climate, but water and biodiversity benefits as well. It's really a way to add value for producers. We're hoping to work with partners to develop this idea and design an AI scoring system, or whatever we call it, that's specific to Minnesota and the Upper Midwest. Ultimately, we think this is a really good way for farmers to get better market access while scaling the practices that have a positive impact on the landscape. Um, and I will turn it over to my friends from FMR.

Trevor Russell: [00:20:56] Eleanor. Uh, again, Trevor Russell, friends of the Mississippi River. And, you know, FMR. Is engaged in staff because in recent decades, US transportation emissions reductions have really focused on biofuels. As a result, transportation biofuel policies and incentives have become some of the nation's most influential agricultural policies. Because agriculture is a leading source of pollution to our state's waters. Transportation policy can now have a significant impact on our great river and the river and its watershed are struggling. And I'll ask Jo to put up a slide to illustrate that. On the left side, you'll see that about 50% of Minnesota's waters don't meet water quality standards, including every mile of the Mississippi River in Minnesota. The middle and right graphics show how groundwater is also at risk. About 10% of private wells tested in the state fail to meet drinking water standards for nitrate. Several hundred communities have elevated levels of nitrate in their community wells, and the US. Epa has now intervened to force more state action on nitrate in the eight southeast Minnesota counties that are at increased risk due to their karst topography. A safe approach that relies on dominant cropping systems like corn and soybeans would reduce aviation emissions, and that's great in a vacuum. But this approach could have unintended consequences for agriculture and water quality. If done poorly, producing too much SAF each year from these crops would require a large increase in production, which could result in increased fertilizer and herbicide pollution, reduced soil health, the loss of conservation lands, and a reduction in diverse crop rotations, resulting in fewer choices for farmers and more pollution to our waters. However, if done well, row crop based SAF, if kept largely to the same acreage we have today, is an economic opportunity that might modestly improve water quality by incentivizing or requiring producers to adopt conservation practices like cover crops, no till, optimum nutrient management and other practices in order for those crops to qualify as low carbon feedstocks. However, there is another purpose grown crop that we're most excited about that we think would be truly transformative. And for that, I'll turn it over to Peter.

Peter LaFontaine: [00:23:07] Thanks, Trevor. Um, from a water quality and soil health perspective, the biggest problem with most biofuel crop systems is that they only have living plants in the ground for a few months in the summertime, leaving the ground unprotected the rest of the year. One particularly effective solution here is to use cover crops, which get planted after the fall harvest, go dormant over winter, and then emerge early in the springtime to help mitigate those early season rain events and create biomass biomass. Now, most cover crops have a limited market, but a big exception is winter oil seeds. At the risk of stating the obvious, these are just what they sound like. They're crops that produce seeds with a high oil component, and they're able to survive our harsh winters. The University of Minnesota is developing two of those crops, winter camelina and field pennycress, which can be used for a variety of products, including Saaf. Winter oil seeds have ultra low carbon intensity scores, much better than soybeans or corn, and up to 70% lower than conventional jet fuel. And they also have significant benefits for soil health. They create habitat for pollinators and other wildlife, and they greatly reduce erosion and nutrient loss. And perhaps most importantly, these crops make money for farmers. Common cover crops like winter rye do improve yields and resilience in the long term, but we're stuck at about a 2 to 4% adoption rate because they cost money and hassle in the near term.

Peter LaFontaine: [00:24:34] Winter oilseeds, in contrast, have an immediate payoff, and because they fit into rotations with summer annuals like corn and soy, they unlock significant additional income streams for farmers without requiring more farmland. This means they have a real chance to achieve scale millions of acres in Minnesota alone. This isn't pie in the sky conservation messaging either. It's real, it works, and it is safe. Back in September, the Minnesota Safe Hub coordinated its first flight, fueled with a winter camelina blend. Major companies like Cargill are investing millions into research partnerships and farmer adoption because they see the tremendous promise of these feedstocks. In a recent analysis projected that we could have up to 9 million acres of winter oilseeds in Minnesota alone by 2050, given the proper investments. For all those reasons, we've made winter oilseeds a central component of our SAF principles. Margaret's going to talk next about long term pathways. But as she said at the beginning, we need to act now and explore every tool in the toolbox. Winter oilseeds are the right tool for the moment because they're not just a super low carbon aviation fuel. They'll greatly contribute to clean water and prosperous farms. Margaret.

Margaret Cherne-Hendrick: [00:25:48] Yeah. Thanks, Pete. Yeah. So I'm going to speak a little bit about Fresh Energy's perspective. And unlike our partners at FMR and TNC, you know, we are squarely a clean advocacy nonprofit and so are really interested in how this SAF market development scheme is going to intersect with our clean energy economy and our decarbonization goals economy wide. And so that's really the perspective that we're bringing to bear in this conversation, and that lands us squarely in really talking about this power to jet fuel pathway that kind of intersects with both the waste and biomass, um, feedstocks as well, but really is a feedstock that is kind of moving us away from, you know, biomass, biomass and waste and squarely into the realm of renewable electricity. And so, from Fresh Energy's perspective and from, you know, how the science is developing some of the lowest carbon intensity scores that we can achieve for some of these fuel pathways are really leaning into applying renewable electricity to produce green hydrogen and then sourcing CO2 in the most carbon neutral manner possible to be able to create a power to jet fuel pathway. And so we're really trying to understand, as we look at end uses across the economy, including aviation, that are not going to be able to be decarbonised with electrification or batteries. You know, how can we best prioritize allocating renewable electricity, green hydrogen to these end uses to be able to support create supports to scale this market? And so Minnesota is a really interesting state to be doing this work because we have great frameworks for policy in place already.

Margaret Cherne-Hendrick: [00:27:38] We have the 100% by 2040 bill that passed in 2023. That really requires us to be carbon free in the electricity that we're bringing in to serve Minnesota by 2040, which creates a wonderful opportunity to have abundant renewable resources to create green hydrogen. Now, that being said, we're looking at an economy wide decarbonization trajectory to meet our greenhouse gas reduction goals for the state. We need to be reduced 50% by 2030, which is just around the corner, and we need to be at carbon neutral by 2050. So that means economy wide. There are going to be a lot of sectors that are going to be scrambling for the same renewable resources. And so we're really aiming to bring to bear in the conversation this idea that end uses like aviation that aren't going to be decarbonised through electrification and through batteries are really going to be very deserving of allocating resources like renewable electricity and green hydrogen to be able to decarbonise. Um, we're also hoping to thread the needle on CO2 sourcing as well. Um, and this is a challenging conversation across the stakeholder community in Minnesota, which we fully acknowledge.

Margaret Cherne-Hendrick: [00:28:51] And from our perspective, the way to thread the needle on this conversation is to identify sources of CO2 that provide co-benefits to economy wide decarbonization. And what I mean by that is a great example of, again, that intersection of waste with Power in that Venn diagram that I presented at the beginning of the conversation is, how can we identify sources of CO2 from other end uses that won't be decarbonised through electrification, like cement manufacturing, where we can help to draw down those emissions in heavy industry, at the same time helping to draw down emissions in aviation. And so we're really aiming to be able to drive market forces, to be able to bring down the cost of sources and be able to, um, identify new sources to help, again, across dual purposes. So as we're kind of rounding the bend and talking about how to develop this SAF market, you know, like Pete mentioned, there are a lot of tools available in the toolkit, many feedstocks available to us. And from our perspective, keeping all of those tools at our disposal early on is really important, but also really having a clear eyed vision and a science driven approach to determining sort of long term potential for driving down emissions. Long term potential for, you know, achieving high environmental integrity scores is the best benefit here.

Margaret Cherne-Hendrick: [00:30:21] And the way to do that is through collaboration. Minnesota is a great proving ground here for all the reasons I mentioned in terms of feedstock availability, rail, you know, and transportation availability, airport hubs. And we've mentioned the Minnesota South hub as well. We've got a lot of private sector interest and be able to send up these fuels. And so in the early days of this market, we're really interested in setting the tone for the conversation. Absent a real well defined definition of what is sustainable, how can we co-create that vision together to be able to maximize our, you know, reliance on Minnesota made products improve and maximize the benefits that we see in rural communities in particular and demonstrate in a potentially, you know. Scalable model nationally how Minnesota can do this right to be able to, you know. Increase production. We have very high volumetric production goals that are being set by the Department of Energy right now. How can we meet those goals while also maximizing our emissions reductions and improving environmental integrity scores across the landscape? So Fresh Energy is bringing to bear that perspective on the clean energy economy, while also intersecting with our partners again at TNC and FMR and some of the land conservation and alternative cropping system conversations. So, Jo, back to you.

Jo Olson: [00:31:48] Wonderful. Thank you. Margaret. Um, so that brings us to the Q&A portion of our webinar. There were a lot of questions submitted in advance, and I know we've already had some pop up in the actual, um, function through zoom. Um, before we do that, I just wanted to share everyone's email addresses so you can reach us if you want to talk about stuff. Um, you can always also just email me too, and I'll send you in the right direction. Um, we're going to dive into the Q&A now. So I'm going to stop sharing. And I think we had a really excellent question to kick us off. So I'm Elena, I'm looking at you for this one. Um, big picture. What role can policy play in SAF?

Eleanor Trenary: [00:32:41] Yes. Um, and I will just expose my own bias as someone who works in policy. So I think policy is relevant for everything. Um, but policy plays a big role in SAF. We have existing state tax credit. We have, um, couple different incentives and policies at the federal level that are, um, encouraging staff production right now. Um, We also know that the the change in administration may impact some of that as well. I think our, you know, folks on this call are excited about the durability of some of the staff markets, because we know that these are, um, commitments that airlines who are working globally have made. We have other global governmental bodies who have put out staff kind of ambitions, and we really see this as a nonpartisan issue. Um, so we're kind of seeing the interest from a lot of different sides and, and feel like, um, there's not just interest at the global scale, but there's also real local benefits when we get down into kind of like individual communities in Minnesota and elsewhere. Um, so all of that to say, I think policy plays a big role. We've got some things on the landscape, some things in development and coming down the pike. Um, and we, you know, our three organizations are eager to be engaged in those conversations and help shape smart policy that, um, has positive outcomes.

Jo Olson: [00:34:04] Thanks. Awesome. Thank you. Um. All right, so now we got a question submitted from Peg, and Peg asks if we could explain how we are defining sustainability within that SAF sustainable aviation fuel label. So, Margaret, maybe you can kick us off with this. And I'm sure, Eleanor, you'll have something to add as well.

Margaret Cherne-Hendrick: [00:34:28] Yeah. Peg, I think this is this is the question of the day. Right. And as we've tried to be really transparent, you know, the reason our three organizations are leaning into this conversation is because there isn't a clear answer to how we define sustainable. And we think that there needs to be, um, a more fully fleshed conversation about this as we stand up the market and just given the sheer amount of, um, I think, motivation around doing so now is the time, you know, we're coming into the conversation at a time when we don't have, you know, critical mass and things aren't fully baked. And so this is the right time to be having the conversation. We need as many voices as possible at the table to have that conversation. Um, and notably, you know, I think what we're aiming to achieve through this webinar and through other outreach that we've done for our three organizations is to start to socialize this concept that, you know, SAF market development has a lot of potential in Minnesota. And to get it right, we need to be thinking about a lot of these cross-sector dynamics. We need to be thinking about, you know, what it means to lean in from the private and public sector. You know, in good faith. We have a lot of folks who are really interested in this and really good faith and want to make sure that they're, you know, making good on their own greenhouse gas reduction goals that they've set for their companies.

Margaret Cherne-Hendrick: [00:35:55] Um, but I think we all need to, as this is such a new concept kind of come together and help to define some of this. And, you know, that may be at the state level at this juncture. Again, as as Eleanor mentioned, we're going to have to see what happens at the federal level. But I think the state has a lot of potential to be able to start to set enabling policy that, um, you know, helps to drive down the costs of some of the, you know, component parts that we're going to make up, you know, SAF fuel pathways. And I think, um, you know, we're we're at the early stages of this conversation and really inviting folks to be able to to come and contribute to that conversation so that we're not leaving folks behind. This is this is a large sector wide energy transition. We're mounting economy wide energy transitions right now. And when we're fully acknowledging, you know, we don't leave core partners behind, we need to bring people along, and we need to enable folks to be able to participate in this new economy. So, Eleanor, do you have anything to add?

Eleanor Trenary: [00:37:02] Yeah, I think, you know, we've touched on this a little bit already, but I think there are some existing definitions. And as Margaret said, it's also really an open conversation right now that that we would like to be part of. Um, you know, I'll just without getting too far down into the weeds, um, point out that there's a group called the International Civil Aviation Organization. They require that staff reduces greenhouse gas emissions by at least 10%, relative or relative to a petroleum conventional fossil fuel jet fuel. Um, domestically, our own Department of Energy in the US defines um uh SAF as reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 50% or more, but those are all focused on the emissions reduction and carbon intensity. And I think we feel like there's opportunity to dive deeper into that sustainability piece and bring in, um, metrics around water quality, air quality, biodiversity, land use, etc.. Um, so that's a that's a long way of saying, um, it's messy and we're, we're interested in wading through the mess.

Jo Olson: [00:38:06] Mhm. Yeah, absolutely. Um, okay. I've got another question here submitted by Lisa. Um, so Lisa points out that there have been some recent articles published in Minnesota Press that include folks saying that SAF could actually increase emissions when you consider its full life cycle. Uh, Margaret, what is your response to that? And I know, Eleanor, you have some thoughts as well.

Margaret Cherne-Hendrick: [00:38:36] Yeah. Lisa, this is this is a great question. And we've seen some of the same coverage. I think if I had to guess, this is referring to a particular article that was run in the Star Tribune. Oh, I don't know, a couple weeks, maybe a month ago. Um, and I think the particular story you're referencing was a very specific feedstock. And, you know, we're really aiming to have sort of a broader discussion today about multiple feedstocks just recognizing, again, carbon intensity values, environmental integrity scores are going to be different across the various feedstocks that we're using. And there is room to improve those scores based on how we develop those feedstocks over time. So I just want to name, you know, your your scores and your metrics on sustainability are not locked in, but in terms of evaluating kind of business as usual approaches, you know, we're really trying to move away from some of those conventional feedstock development pathways and moving into, you know, more and more, you know, in the case of, you know, bio based feedstocks, regenerative cropping systems, for example, you know, practices that are going to help to draw down conventional cropping systems in their impact on the landscape as well. And so while I think the particular story that you're referencing is, again, sort of really centered on on the role and potential role of dominant cropping systems across the landscape. Um, again, you know, while we see risk in relying on sort of the business as usual approach to developing these cropping systems, you know, there's real value in exploring how to draw down emissions from those systems.

Margaret Cherne-Hendrick: [00:40:20] Um, they're going to be environmental benefit benefits that we want to lift up as well. And we want to be, you know, focused on identifying how to scale new and truly lower, um, you know, intensity cropping systems in the future. Um, and as I mentioned, you know, I think, um, you know, power to jet needs to be part of this conversation, too. You know, we need to be keeping sort of all fuel pathways at our disposal in these early days. And this isn't a conversation just about bio based feedstocks. We have waste feedstocks, we have power feedstocks. And so we really want to make sure that that doesn't get lost in translation as well. And, you know, I think therein lies the opportunity as well to have a lot of folks, uh, derive economic value from participating in this type of market. And I just want to emphasize the sheer volumes that we will have to produce to be able to supply the aviation market. Today in this country, there is room for everyone to participate and to derive value from this. And I think what we're trying to aim to do is to identify, you know, the most sustainable way to develop and scale those feedstocks.

Jo Olson: [00:41:32] Thanks, Margaret. Eleanor. Yeah, please.

Eleanor Trenary: [00:41:35] Yeah, I mean, I this is such a great question. And I think this is part of the reason that our principles document that we have an emphasis on realistic assumptions and full lifecycle analysis, which is kind of an industry standard. Um, we know that when bio based fuels result in land use change, their um value as a climate solution decreases by quite a bit. Margaret has also talked about centering this within the broader clean energy landscape. And so thinking about our transportation options, how we, um, keep the lights on, how we do the processing, all of that goes into the life cycle analysis. Um, so that's part of the reason that we have a big emphasis kind of on the how piece. This isn't just what we do, it's how we do it that makes a big difference.

Jo Olson: [00:42:17] Excellent. Thank you. And I just want to, like, zoom out quick on the reason for this webinar. Like, I know we're speaking in some degree at like a high level on SAF. Um, but over the past six months, as these conversations have happened and like in smaller groups and one on ones, we just kind of wanted to make sure with this big webinar we started at almost at the beginning of SAF. So some of you, you know, your questions that you're submitting are really specific. And we're going to do our best to get to them. Um, but I just want to remind everyone that our policy folks here are available for one on one conversations and want to get into the weeds with you. So I just want to look at just one of these questions submitted through the Q amp a and then I want to talk more about camelina. So, um, Kathleen asks which fuel sources and technologies are ready now. And the answer is a lot, right? So I think, Margaret, should we pop up that Venn diagram one more time and you can do that. And then I want to maybe talk a little bit more about camelina. Does that sound right? I just want to remind people what's ready now. Sure. Okay, great. Okay. Here it is.

Margaret Cherne-Hendrick: [00:43:27] Yeah. So, Kathleen, again, great question. Um, you know, I think in terms of, you know, bio based feedstocks, uh, you know, the, I would say crop based feedstocks conventionally are ready today. Um, I think we're going to hear from the FMC team that purpose grown crops are also ready today and are ready to scale today. And this provides, you know, a wonderful inflection point to really invest in scaling. Um, I think cover crops are probably in that same category. You know, algae. We've we've heard a lot about algae over the years. And I think, um, you know, there are some landscape level concerns with how you scale up algae production. But I would say that's probably the the least developed, at least from my perspective, my personal perspective, willing to be challenged on that, of course. Um, you know, I think in terms of waste, um, you know, there is a ready supply of waste. And we have sort of engaged with this conversation across the sort of energy space for years. And so, um, you know, where you see used oils, um, and tallow and stuff, you know, those are readily available, um, and are already sort of conventionally being used for other fuels, um, production.

Margaret Cherne-Hendrick: [00:44:49] Um, again, we're going to get into different conversations about sort of the sort of values around carbon intensity and, you know, environmental integrity. Um, and then we have, again, a lot of municipal waste, um, at the ready. Um, but, uh, you know, ready availability of feedstock and then conversion of that feedstock to scale into a SAF fuel pathway. Um, I think there's a little bit more conversation to be had about how we do that in a really efficient manner. Power to liquid. Um, you know, we see a lot of potential, again, at least from fresh energy perspective in this fuel pathway in the future. Um, I would say this is probably the least well developed. But that being said, there is an enormous amount of interest in scaling this particular fuel pathway. And we have already seen really promising pilots being stood up in Washington state and others to be able to prove out how exactly we do this in the lowest impact manner. So while it's probably the least well developed from our perspective, it has enormous potential to scale very quickly. So I'll pass it over to you.

Jo Olson: [00:46:05] Going into that.

Margaret Cherne-Hendrick: [00:46:06] Fmr.

Jo Olson: [00:46:06] Yeah, yeah, I want to really we have a lot of questions specifically about camelina and how it compares to corn and soy or other biofuel crops. So now I want to turn the mic over to both Peter and Trevor to really dig into this, because I see a lot of interest in what that means.

Peter LaFontaine: [00:46:25] Sure. So yeah, in terms of the comparison, it's probably helpful to think of it not as a, um, a separate category of crops that are grown on a, you know, a the same acre of or a different acre of land. When we're talking about winter oilseeds, We're talking about crops that have the potential to fit into these row crop systems in the in the winter months, when things like corn and soy aren't there and wouldn't be, the landscape wouldn't be used anyway. So it's it's important to understand that they're all part of the same landscape. This is not about one replacing the other. It's more about, uh, doubling down on the the best and least carbon intensive fuel options on a given acre of land. Um, with that said, it's really clear that winter annual oilseeds significantly outperform both soy and corn based SAF on a life cycle emissions basis. Um, the Corsia framework that governs SAF in Europe, for example, uses life cycle emissions factors for US grown corn and soybeans at about 78 and 65, respectively. Uh, compare that to preliminary studies and regulatory filings for winter, camelina and Pennycress, on the other hand, which come in at around 22 and 32. Carbon score. So again, that's that's 78 and 65 for corn and soy, 22 and 34, 32 for winter, camelina and pennycress. I mean, it's just a remarkable difference. Um, a couple of things to keep in mind when we talk about carbon intensity. Um, first, they they factor in things like geography and farming practices. So there's, there's not going to be a single score for any biofuel crop. It's it's a range of scores. Um, and second, when it comes to winter annual oilseeds, uh, Margaret and Eleanor have both alluded to this, but one of the, one of the biggest factors for their low CI score, carbon intensity score, is that they really do avoid that indirect land use change element.

Peter LaFontaine: [00:48:26] That is, they increase the productivity of a given acre rather than requiring farmers to plow up new land. Different carbon models weight land use change differently. So that's going to have some bearing on the relative improvement of winter oilseeds over corn or soy. Um, but they're going to wildly outperform under any model. Um, touching briefly on the the idea of scaling right now, both of these crops are moving from the research stage to broader scale adoption on the landscape. Um, we have, I think, about 10,000 acres of winter camelina under production this year in Minnesota alone. Uh, companies involved in those supply chain development efforts and farmer adoption anticipate a pretty rapid scale up again to that millions of acres figure that I that I noted before. Uh, that said, we need a lot more investment. Uh, any new crop needs support to get off the ground or, I guess, get into the ground. Um, and that is no, no different for for winter annual oilseeds. We need to make sure that the the research and, um, uh, agronomic, uh, approaches are funded. We need to make sure that farmers understand, uh, how to plant these crops, how to harvest them. We need to make sure that the supply chain infrastructure is in place for harvest and processing. Um, but all these things are really hopefully just around the corner. They are, uh, you know, we're we're at the stage now where, uh, commercial success is not, uh, guaranteed, but it is expected at this point, I think it's fair to say, um, tr do you have anything you'd like to add or amend there?

Trevor Russell: [00:50:09] I would just say, you know, we're we're busy working with farmers, agribusinesses, supply chains, state agencies, a lot of folks who are on this webinar to invest in research and development, commercialization, adoption, technical assistance and processing infrastructure to help, uh, help get these these systems off the ground.

Jo Olson: [00:50:29] Perfect. Thank you. Um, so now I've got a question that I think is a really great one to come back to. Just for further clarification. So this one comes from Kevin G. And Kevin is asking, does blending SAF with existing carbon intensive jet fuel defeat the purpose of SAF in the SAF initiative entirely, or is it actually the only feasible route that SAF can be successful? So Trevor, why don't you kick us off with this one?

Trevor Russell: [00:50:57] Yeah, Kevin great question. I think the best answer here is blending SAF fuels with jet fuel is the lower carbon alternative we have available right now. As Margaret mentioned earlier, the FAA limits the amount of non-petroleum SAF that can be blended into current jet fuel, and so SAF can be blended at different levels between 5% and 50%, depending on the feedstock and how that fuel is produced. And we can share a source with you after the webinar on that. Um, as Margaret also noted, the federal government may adjust to those rules over time to allow for higher blend rates and reduced reliance on petroleum in SAF blends. But in the near term, blending these sort of lower carbon fuels into petroleum based jet fuel is the most feasible, cost effective route to reducing commercial aviation emissions. It's part of a kind of a transition strategy. Total decarbonization of the aviation sector is a bigger conversation. It's going to require carbon free fuel sources. However, you know, energy alternatives like green electricity or green hydrogen are not as viable for commercial aviation into the very near term. That sector is going to remain pretty reliant on high energy, high energy density liquid fuels for some time to come as new airplanes and propulsion systems come online. So I think for now, the best way to think about it is lower carbon jet fuels are our best option for now, but we don't want to get stuck here. And that's why one of our principles is that bio based SAF pathways are considered near-term bridge solutions toward a decarbonisation of the sector that requires those next generation feedstocks and fuel sources.

Margaret Cherne-Hendrick: [00:52:38] I if I could I'll just add one more thing, Trevor. I think you hit the nail on the head there. But one thing that we've also heard from stakeholders, as we've had these conversations broadly, is that, you know, there's some confusion about what a drop in fuel is and some comfortability that needs to be gained with transitioning fuels in, you know, something as high stakes as commercial aviation. Folks want to have a real sense of security that what they are using to fuel their airplane to get from point A to point B is, is actually going to work. And so, um, just the sheer number of questions that we feel to that effect, I think while it may be just a co-benefit, you know, having some amount of time to, to bake in that comfortability with this type of, you know, market level, you know, transition in fuels is maybe not a bad thing, at least in the very near term. To be able to socialize this and, you know, to to the credit of the airlines, you know, that's why we see this very early approach to some of the marketing is to start to increase that comfortability.

Jo Olson: [00:53:50] Great. Thank you. Um, I am thinking I'd like to take a question from Greg through the Q amp. A so Greg points out that staff is both a US and a global market. Why do we think that a unique Minnesota model can work, including that voluntary, you know, the environmental integrity score? So what is the economic lens for this Minnesota model? Um, this one's easy. Who wants to take this?

Speaker6: [00:54:22] I'm going to.

Eleanor Trenary: [00:54:23] Start and then welcome additions for my colleagues. Um, so I would say, Greg, that you are absolutely right. This is a global value chain. We have opportunities in Minnesota because we have, as Margaret and Trevor described, producers here, innovation, agriculture, innovation here. We have interested, um, buyers in some of our airlines and in our airport system. So we have an opportunity to build a value chain here. And we're also not the only ones doing it in Minnesota. This SAP is in play globally and across the United States. Um, most of us happen to be sitting in Minnesota and sort of focused on this policy landscape. And so that's what we focused on today. But it is absolutely, like you said, a global phenomenon. And then the second part of your question around the economic lens, I think you are absolutely right. That is part of the reason, you know, when we talk about the environmental Integrity score, um, concept, we're really thinking of it as a way to add value for farmers and producers to a product that they're selling, um, by showing that they are, um, you know, putting in place practices that have greater environmental impact, um, in a positive way. So I think just like two thumbs up to the question that you asked, I think those are the questions we're asking ourselves and our partners as well. Um, and Margaret and Trevor, I don't know if you all have other things you want to add to that.

Trevor Russell: [00:55:48] You know, I would just just observe that in addition to federal decarbonization goals, we've got strong airline decarbonization goals, including from Delta Airlines, who's working quite closely in Minnesota. And as Margaret mentioned, Minnesota has maybe a unique position or an opportunity to help drive this market forward. We've got a strong climate action framework. We have 100% carbon free electricity by 2040. We have strong state leadership and a state Minnesota production tax credit. Uh, and we're also aware a lot of the research, development and sort of supply chain work around this lower carbon winter. Annual oilseeds like camelina and pennycress are taking shape, and so Minnesota won't get to tell the globe how to do this. But we can show how to do it as best as we think we can, and hope that that starts to carry over into other regions with other cropping systems and other strategies to to just move us towards a lower carbon aviation future.

Jo Olson: [00:56:50] Excellent. Thank you. I think we have time for one more question, and I feel like a great closing question comes in from William. Um, so William's saying that, well, William is asking how our combined organisations are working together with organisations who are also working in this space, like greater MSP and some of the companies involved in the subject at this time. Like as we alluded to earlier in this webinar, there is a lot happening in Minnesota on SAF. So which of you wants to talk about Collaboration. I wonder, Margaret or Eleanor? Yeah, Margaret.

Margaret Cherne-Hendrick: [00:57:26] I'm happy to kick us off. And I will give a very friendly shout out to Julia Silvas, who's on today and with greater MSP. And so, you know, I'll just name, you know, we've we've been very engaged. Our three organisations with greater MSP and um have been, you know, grateful for the, you know, open conversations that we've had with, um, you know that facilitating body with the Minnesota Safe Hub. And you know, these are, you know, very early days with, um, getting the hub off the ground. And, you know, I think we've all seen some, you know, releases in the press about blending facilities and, um, you know, safe flights in Minnesota. And so, you know, those efforts, you know, to, to give credit, are largely around Safe hub, Minnesota safe hub, um, collaboration there. And so, you know, part of our goal in getting our three organizations together was to kind of enrich the conversation that's already happening within the Minnesota Safe Hub to be able to say, you know, hey, we've got some really critical perspectives to bring to bear to help encourage this market development in a way that's truly sustainable. We know, based on all of your, you know, corporate goals that, you know, Trevor mentioned that you want to get this right. And so this is, you know, a really golden opportunity to be able to put our heads together, to be able to start to socialize these guiding principles and start to put them into practice. And so, you know, I'll just name that's an ongoing conversation. And again, big thanks to Julia Silvers and Peter Frosch over at greater MSP for engaging in those conversations, continuing to engage in those conversations. And we just think it's critically important that we have this, you know, collaboration across non-profit and private and public sectors. Right. I think, candidly, that's the only way we get this, right. Um, and so, um, it's early days, but yes, there has been quite a bit of dedicated early engagement on that front. I don't know if any of my colleagues want to chime in.

Jo Olson: [00:59:40] All right. With that, guys, it's 11:00 Am on the dot. Let's call it I think we are all going to go have some lunch, enjoy this icy Minnesota day, and stay tuned to your inbox for the recording. Thank you, everyone for joining us and submitting some just really thoughtful questions. It's encouraging to see so many people thinking deeply about SAF in Minnesota. So thanks everyone. On behalf of all three of our organizations, have a great day. Have a great weekend and I'm sure we will be in touch soon. Thank you for tuning in to decarbonize the Clean Energy Podcast from Fresh Energy. You can stay up to date on Fresh Energy's work at Fresh energy.org, or follow us on social media. If you live in Minnesota, you probably know that today is give to the Max day and December 3rd is Giving Tuesday. But did you know that you can support Fresh Energy's work by making a donation? Your donation will drive bold policy solutions to achieve equitable, carbon neutral economies in Minnesota and beyond. Head over to our website to get the latest news from Fresh Energy and to make a donation. Thank you to the Minnesota based band Palm Psalm for their song TGIF off of their album Otuhaka for our theme music. Thanks for tuning in.