���������¼�

• What is sustainable aviation fuel, and why are we not using it already?

• ���������¼� researchers to scale up development of clean aviation fuel thanks to $1.2m TRaCE award

• Roadblocks still abound en route to decarbonisation of Australia’s freight industry

• A carbon levy on global shipping promises to slash emissions. We calculated what that means for Australia’s biggest export

• Scientists use AI to make green ammonia even greener

Neil Martin��00:00
Welcome to ���������¼�’s Engineering the Future podcast. Today we are talking about how green fuels made from plants, waste materials and renewable electricity can power transport and industry while slashing carbon emissions. We'll explain what ‘Power to X’ means and why it could be vital in providing cleaner energy use and storage.

Emma Lovell��00:30
“I think actually ‘Power to X’ is the future, and I sound maybe a little bit optimistic when I say that. But as we transition, as we move toward this new energy sector where we have an abundance of renewable energy, but we don't necessarily have the abundance of the downstream processes yet, we have a huge opportunity.”

Neil Martin��00:55
That's Dr Emma Lovell, a lecturer at ���������¼� whose research aims to develop new catalysts for a range of applications. On Engineering the Future, we speak to academics and industry leaders who are embracing cutting edge ideas and pushing the boundaries of what is truly possible. Join us as we discover how world changing action starts with fearless thinking in ‘Engineering the Future of Green Fuels’.

Hello and welcome to Engineering the Future of Green Fuels. My name is Neil Martin, and I'm a journalist and STEMM communicator working in the Faculty of Engineering at ���������¼�. Joining me today to discuss the advancement of more eco-friendly fuels is Dr Emma Lovell, a senior lecturer and ARC DECRA Fellow in the School of Chemical Engineering at ���������¼�. Emma researches sustainable energy solutions in the Particles and Catalysis Research Lab, and completed her PhD in 2016 developing materials for carbon dioxide conversion. Her current work focuses on improving catalytic materials for a range of different energy inputs, including for conversion of renewable electricity into other forms of energy using heat, light and plasma. Hi Emma.

Emma Lovell��02:17
Hi Neil. Thanks for having me.

Neil Martin��02:19
Also with us is Constantine Tsounis, who is set to take up a role at Climate Tech Partners as an investment associate. In that role, he brings a blend of technical and commercial expertise with a background in chemical engineering and investment experience spanning early-stage R&D, startups and renewable infrastructure. He was previously Senior Investment Analyst at ARENA, the Australian Renewable Energy Agency. All views expressed in this episode are his own. Thanks for being here, Con.

Constantine Tsounis��02:50
Hi Neil, thanks for having me.

Neil Martin��02:52
So as the world pushes towards the goal of achieving net zero emissions, green fuels are emerging as a critical piece of the energy puzzle. Those can include green hydrogen or biodiesel made from vegetable oil or animal fat, or biogas produced from organic waste. And as well as the environmental benefits, many of these green fuels can be used in current engines and supply chains with only minimal modifications. Emma, before we really dig into the details, could you explain to our listeners what we actually mean when we say green fuels?

Emma Lovell��03:31
Neil, that sounds like a really easy question, but it's actually quite a complicated one, because when someone says green fuel, they don't necessarily always mean the same thing. So typically when we refer to green fuels, we mean renewable fuels, or fuels that can be produced from naturally replenished sources. These typically sort of fall into two buckets.

One is a biological resource. So these are typically referred to as biofuels. They can be biofuels, such as biodiesel, bioethanol, biomethanol, biogas that come from biological sources like organic matter or oils or algae or digestion of wastes.

On the other side, we have synthetic fuels. And these are synthetic fuels which can come from, for example, captured carbon dioxide that can then be converted into fuels that don't require fossil fuels as the starting point, but have potentially similar chemical properties. These synthetic fuels can be, for example, hydrogen from splitting water. They might be synthetic diesel that comes from CO₂ or even things like methanol or ethanol as well.

Neil Martin��04:42
Con, why are green fuels important? I think Emma's done a great job of explaining them there.

Constantine Tsounis��04:47
Yeah, she definitely has. And I think that's a much easier question as well. They're essentially important because they replace fossil fuels. And we all know when you combust fossil fuels, you produce carbon dioxide, and that accumulates in the atmosphere and accelerates climate change.

And so what we're really seeing with these renewable fuels is that they become quite important when you're looking to decarbonise hard to abate industries such as the maritime industry, aviation industry, and perhaps even the mining industry as well. So they're a replacement for fossil fuel usage in those industries.

Neil Martin��05:17
When you say things are hard to decarbonise, some people listening might say, ‘Well, why can't we just electrify everything? You know, we've got solar panels, we've got wind turbines. We can generate renewable energy there. We can store in batteries. Why do we need these green fuels?’

Emma Lovell��05:33
It's a really good question in terms of why we need green fuels and also why we still need carbon based materials in general.

So some forms of transportation, for example, aviation or maritime and even heavy vehicles, are not inherently compatible with electrification. The batteries to provide the energy required in order to drive these big vessels, or these heavy vessels long distances, are very heavy. They take a long time to charge. They require huge amounts of critical minerals, among other things. And therefore, trying to shift these whole sectors to electrified transportation is really a very big challenge.

The other piece of that puzzle as well is that these vehicles that we have, have infrastructure that is very expensive and has been built up over a really long time. And if the intention is to live in a more sustainable and circular economy world, then chucking out all of these resources that we've built and established, as opposed to looking at ways that we can do things more effectively, doesn't necessarily align.

People often say that, ‘Oh, we need to decarbonise everything now’. But in that picture, we often forget that so much of what we rely on every day are carbon based materials that are currently derived from fossil fuels. So we don't just use fossil fuels to power things. We also use fossil fuels to make things like pharmaceuticals, plastics, fertilisers, asphalt for the road, detergents, nearly everything that we leverage every day actually comes from carbon from a fossil fuel source.

So in the process of making green fuels, we also have a pathway to make these green chemicals which, at the moment, we don't have.

Neil Martin��07:26
And Con, picking up on what Emma said there in terms of the existing infrastructure, how important is that, if we can manufacture and increase these green fuels? Because we might not have to completely reinvent the wheel in many other ways?

Constantine Tsounis��07:41
Yeah, it's a great question. And the answer is, it's very important. So a lot of these green fuels that we were sort of talking about before, such as sustainable aviation fuel, or SAF, or renewable diesel, they're often referred to as drop in fuels, which means that they can be used to directly replace the fossil derived incumbent, and they are chemically identical as a fossil drive incumbent as well.

So like Emma was saying, to be able to use that infrastructure in the way that we've sort of designed it, and really just replace those fossil fuels with the renewable fuels really does offer a low hanging alternative that we can address quite immediately.

And I think as well in the longer term, for example, if we're looking at the maritime sector, instead of synthetically producing heavy oil, we can synthetically produce things like renewable methanol, which might have more favorable properties as well.

So we can actually improve the efficiency and potentially the economic outcomes from these industries as well by using new fuels.

Neil Martin��08:39
You mentioned that there are a range of green fuels, and they cover a variety of different processes. Can you just give a little bit more explanation of kind of each of the main ones that you think are going to be developed in the short to medium term?

Emma Lovell��08:54
Yeah, absolutely. So there are some processes that have been developed and are commercially available now. So for example, E10 in your cars are typically a bioethanol that have been put in our cars for a very long time. Not dissimilar to the way our current energy sector runs, where you have gas that is used to cook at home, and then you have petrol and diesel and aviation fuel - bio derived green fuels can also sort of follow this trajectory. Where you might have bio gas, which can be a mixture of methane and CO₂ and other things that come from anaerobic digestion, which is essentially, if you're in a landfill and things are decomposing, you can capture that gas and do something with it.

You then have pathways such as biodiesel. So this is where, Con was saying, biodiesel can be a drop in fuel, because it can be very chemically similar, if not identical, to conventional diesel. Biodiesel is typically made from oil feedstocks. That oil might come from canola oil. So in the future, it might come from algae oil, and then that can be transformed into biodiesel, which can then be put into systems that currently leverage diesel.

Other pathways include sort of that bioethanol. So that is taking, for example, corn or sugar cane and driving that process to produce ethanol. So there are a range of different processes which depend on, firstly, the feed stock, so what you're putting in, what you're using to make the green fuels, as well as what your end goal is. And I think there's challenges on both ends in terms of which feedstock you should be using and which process, but broadly, there is a range of different technologies available to convert a range of different feedstocks to a range of different products, depending on that end use case.

And then on the other side of things, when we talk about that second bucket of synthetic green fuels, that's where we might be able to take carbon dioxide that we could capture from power plants, from point source emissions of CO₂ - also eventually, ideally, direct air capture - taking CO₂ out of the air and then transforming that into carbon based products.

Neil Martin��11:13
There's lots of different options there. And is it confusing for, I guess industries, in terms of the range of things that are happening at the moment, or even for researchers in terms of what should I be focusing on? What's going to be the best thing to find the solution? How does that work in terms of all these different options that are potentially available?

Constantine Tsounis��11:39
I think once you sort of identify what type of fuel you want to create, and that obviously depends on what application you have for that fuel, it's really about leveraging, I guess, comparative advantages that you have available to produce that fuel. And so, for example, if we think about Australia, we have all of this low cost, low carbon, renewable energy that we can potentially leverage to drive processes.

And for example, if we think about the synthetic fuel synthesis process that requires quite a lot of energy, and so we can really harness that advantage. We also have an abundance of biomass as well. If you think about sort of the canola and the tallow sugar cane up in Queensland, potentially forestry residue further down south, we can really start to harness that biomass to produce some of the biofuels. So it really just depends on what sort of advantages you want to leverage to make those fuels.

Emma Lovell��12:28
And I think in that piece as well, I don't think that there is a solution. I think in the past, maybe our energy sector, our fuel sector, has really been built on this one size fits all. We take our fossil fuels, we burn it, we process it, and then we power whatever we need to.

The future will allow for a much more bespoke solution, where there are the significant benefits of having a fuel that's specifically targeted toward what you're trying to drive, but also having a feedstock that enables you to leverage the resources that you have. So we almost need to shift our mindset to say, ‘OK, there's not a one size fits all anymore’. But we have an immense opportunity to then pick whatever is the most suited for the application that we're looking at.

Neil Martin��13:17
And who drives that? Is that industry giving that information and saying we need our fuel to do X, Y, Z, and for somebody to come up with that solution? Or is it people trying to do research and see what they can create and then find a use-case for it? Chicken versus egg, I guess?

Emma Lovell��13:37
Oh, I think it has to be both, right? We don't know what we don't know. And so doing both enables us to open up a range of potential avenues. So for example, in the sustainable aviation fuel sector, or SAF, there are mandates that are coming from individual companies. Qantas has a goal to hit, I think 10% SAF by 2030. There are sort of government regulations. So EU and other governments have put in mandates for hitting certain targets. And then there's also companies that are taking this opportunity to be able to say, ‘OK, well, what can we do?’

And researchers, again, are looking at what potential options are out there. So I think we do a disservice if we say, hey, let's just focus on one of those avenues, but let's all work together to try and come up with a solution that is better than what we have now.

Neil Martin��14:26
I see you nodding in agreement there. Con.

Constantine Tsounis��14:28
Yeah, I totally agree. I think, in terms of the production pathways, what I see as sort of the end technology map would really consist of a range of technologies to produce a range of different fuels, and like Emma said, they're very bespoke and they're application dependent.

Neil Martin��14:44
One thing that maybe people have heard of, and don't think we've mentioned it too much so far, is green hydrogen, which I think has got a lot of publicity at certain times in the in the recent past. Can you just explain kind of what green hydrogen is? But also where you think that fits in? Is that the magic bullet, or does it just fit into this broad range of fuels that are available, and it's one option for a certain sector.

Emma Lovell��15:11
So green hydrogen is produced, typically from electrocatalytic - or essentially using renewable energy or electricity to drive a process where we split water in order to produce hydrogen. And oxygen is also produced as a byproduct. When you recombine hydrogen and oxygen, you produce energy and you also make water. So in a way, it's a really promising approach to store and transport and utilise energy, because you start with water and you end with water whilst producing and storing energy or transforming electrical energy into chemical energy.

Hydrogen is a really interesting use case because it's gone through these journeys. A few decades ago, hydrogen was a really sort of hot topic, and it's sort of fallen out. And then recently, hydrogen has been really, let's say, in the past five or 10 years, examined as almost put forward as a turnkey solution to all of our decarbonisation problems. ‘OK, we have hydrogen. We don't need to look at decarbonising hard-to-abate sectors. We can use hydrogen to solve these problems’.

My view on it is that hydrogen is an important piece of the decarbonisation puzzle. But hydrogen, by itself, isn't going to solve all of these challenges.

Neil Martin��16:30
Can you expand on why not?

Emma Lovell��16:31
Why not? So hydrogen is a really tiny molecule. Because it's a really tiny molecule, it's really quite difficult to store. So when you load hydrogen into, say, a vessel made out of metal, that hydrogen molecule can diffuse or move through the metal, and when it does that, it can cause the metal to break or rupture or become weakened. And that's known as embrittlement, and it's a really big challenge in storing hydrogen.

But potentially, green hydrogen can be used as a feedstock with CO₂ or for some of the oils that we discussed before, to transform them into liquid fuels, which we already have the established infrastructure around using. Or green hydrogen might be used to enable the production of green steel. Many, many, many industries use hydrogen as a feedstock. 98-ish percent of the world's hydrogen currently comes from fossil fuels, so using steam to reform methane to make hydrogen. So if we can make that hydrogen without using fossil fuels, without emitting CO₂, then we're in a much better position. But hydrogen as a standalone fuel is absolutely under some questions now. Con, what do you think?

Constantine Tsounis��17:47
Yeah, I want to reiterate some of those points you made about the importance of hydrogen in terms of how we currently use hydrogen, primarily as a chemical feedstock. And first of all, we need to obviously replace all of that hydrogen which we currently use, and that's derived from methane primarily, or sometimes coal gasification.

But having said that, in terms of the broader range of applications in the emerging sort of areas as well, we still have a very strong pipeline of hydrogen projects in Australia. We still acknowledge the important role that hydrogen is going to play in industries such as green steel, for example. And of course, in its current role as a chemical feedstock.

I think the market sort of shifted a little bit in terms of that very broad sort of use of hydrogen as a sort of general purpose fuel, and has sort of honed down on these specific applications. So while there has been quite a lot of sentiment and sort of media on it recently, we still see that very strong pipeline of hydrogen developments.

Neil Martin��18:44
And if hydrogen is the one that's got a lot of the headlines over the last few years, what are one or two of the other green fuels that maybe haven't been getting so much attention that you think are interesting and the use cases for those. What's your favorite one?

Emma Lovell��18:59
Yeah, it's like picking a favorite child. I only have one child, so that's fine. I think that synthetic diesel — so synthetic diesel through Fischer-Tropsch, in particular CO₂-Fischer-Tropsch — is a really interesting use case, because it can take CO₂, direct CO₂, and convert it into a range of different hydrocarbons.

So if you could take CO₂ and hydrogen, put them together through this Fischer-Tropsch, or FTS reaction, you end up making chemicals that might be used as diesel, sustainable aviation fuel, but also long chain waxes and things that you could use in those other industries that we talked about before. And that's a really exciting use case that is already relatively well established. FTS has been used for a really long time in places like South Africa, because they don't have a bunch of liquid fuel reserves, but they take coal and gasify it and make that pathway.

So to me, that's probably the most exciting place at the moment.

Neil Martin��19:58
And I guess on that one as well, you're also taking CO₂ out of the chain, out of the cycle so to speak. So is there a double benefit there?

Emma Lovell��20:06
So absolutely there is. But it depends on what you do with the fuel that you make at the end. So if we take CO₂ and we put it with hydrogen in this Fischer-Tropsch reaction, and we make fuel, and then we burn that fuel, we're also releasing CO₂. So when we're talking about carbon-based green fuels, that end point that you're using it, you're still burning it, and you're still releasing that CO₂ in the end.

So it's looking at how we can do this and use our fuels in a circular way, and close that loop. Now, if you aren't burning it, but you're using it for some of those other applications I discussed earlier, then, yes, you're in a carbon negative way. But if you're burning it, then your CO₂ is kind of net equal, which is better than where we are now. But it's not perfect.

Neil Martin��20:52
Con. Would you have another green fuel that you think people should know a little bit more about?

Constantine Tsounis��20:58
Yeah. Yeah, really tough to pick a favorite. I agree. Look, I think renewable methanol is a really interesting one. And unlike renewable diesel, which is a really long chain of carbon, this is perhaps the most simple alcohol that we have, methanol, and it's produced in a variety of ways.

So for example, you could take biogenic carbon dioxide, combine that with renewable hydrogen, like we mentioned before. And this is another use case of hydrogen to produce that renewable methanol, create synthesis gas, and then eventually create that methanol.

You can also do it in a way that uses biomass. So for example, forestry residues, or even biogas as well. And I think it's quite interesting, because its main sort of emerging renewable use case that we see in the market is as a maritime fuel, as I mentioned before, and that's because it's a high energy, dense molecular fuel. We have bunkering facilities, which have shown that you can actually use methanol in these facilities, so we understand how the technology works. And a lot of the large engines that are used in cargo ships can actually use that methanol in dual fuel applications as well. So it's one that we see a really emerging and a very sort of strong use case.

And we see on the market, for example, Maersk, one of the largest shipping companies. They currently have the largest dual fuel methanol ship at the moment, and that's 16,020-foot container equivalent in terms of its overall capacity. So yeah, we see that sector moving quite quickly with it.

Neil Martin��22:30
And there's a big carbon emissions reduction result there, I guess, as well.

Constantine Tsounis��22:35
Yeah, absolutely. So you're replacing heavy oil, which is typically, in some ways, sort of the bottom of the barrel in terms of its sort of quality and price and potential sort of emissions with something that's either derived synthetically or using biomass.

Neil Martin��22:51
And I guess that kind of answer just reiterates what you said before, that these different green fuels are being used in different areas, and different industries are wanting different types of green fuel to achieve what they need to achieve.

Emma Lovell��23:06
And there's not necessarily also consensus within the industries about the best pathway to go at the moment as well.

So for example, sustainable aviation fuel, there's a lot of sort of potential pathways and potential feedstocks that are being investigated, depending on the country of origin, or what the blending desire limit is. Or even in maritime there was a big argument, or there's a lot of debate going on, about whether methanol or whether ammonia or other fuels might be the way to go.

And so there's a lot of interesting sort of opportunities, I'm going to say as well. It's complicated, and there's a lot to work out. There is a huge opportunity to work out then what works best for each individual industry and application.

Constantine Tsounis��23:50
Totally agree. And that whole ammonia versus methanol argument hasn't been solved. I see a role for both.

Neil Martin��23:56
Yeah, like the old-school VHS versus Betamax, which video format is going to come out on top? One will win, and the other will completely disappear.

Emma Lovell��24:05
Blu-ray is more my generation.

Neil Martin��24:08
Showing my age there!

Emma Lovell��24:11
But yeah, look, it's interesting. And it can be seen as this point of contention, but we can also see it as a really big opportunity.

Neil Martin��24:19
Well, that might lead on to one question that I wanted to ask, which is, kind of, why are green fuels not already more popular and widespread? Which I guess more broadly, is kind of, what are the challenges there that still need to be overcome for all of these green fuels?

Emma Lovell��24:35
So again, because green fuels is such a diverse bucket, it's hard to sort of really narrow down exactly why certain fuels aren't being used in certain applications.

But if we, for example, look at biofuels, then there are challenges associated. One, with cost. Simply, it's more expensive at the moment to produce these fuels than to utilise fossil fuels.

The second is that there are competing use cases, and there are ethical questions about whether it makes sense, and whether we should, for example, be using corn to make fuel. Or should we be using corn to feed people? And leveraging sort of these first generation feedstocks, which are like sugar cane and corn and canola oil and other things to make fuels, is a really big question about, really, should we be using food to make fuel when people around the world can't eat? So that is, that is a big challenge.

The cost is another piece. I think the incentive needs to be there. So why would a company say, ‘Hey, I'm going to spend, I don't know, two to five times more for sustainable aviation fuel when there's no real driving force’.

In order to do that, there are some aspects where you say, maybe the technology isn't quite there too, and developments absolutely need to be made. I think more they sit then in the reducing the cost at the moment.

Constantine Tsounis��25:58
Yeah, I agree with you. I think definitely technology and cost cover most of sort of the renewable fuels that we've been discussing.

If we sort of hone down specifically into synthetic fuels, for example, I think it's really the cost of low carbon renewable electricity there, because it requires so much energy to convert that carbon dioxide molecule into something that's practical. And so, you know, really thinking about access to renewable energy that's firmed and reliable is sort of a key driver there.

I think on the biofuel side of things like you mentioned, there's a huge sort of debate about food versus fuel. There's various sort of sustainability principles as well that we need to sort of think about in terms of the carbon intensity of the feedstock, how we use that land, whether or not that's going to have any other broader sort of social and environmental impacts as well.

And I think we have come back to this a few times now, in terms of, you know, having a range of pathways and having a range of fuels. One of the issues that we see with biogenic feedstocks is sort of the issue with scalability as well. So while it's sort of poised to play a very big role in terms of that renewable fuel mix, it might not be able to cover that whole spectrum.

Neil Martin��27:09
Do we know stats or figures in terms of, you know, like, how much land use it would actually take to create these green fuels. I know that's probably a hard question.

Emma Lovell��27:18
Yeah, so actually, this came out of an undergraduate course that we're teaching at the moment that are looking at designing a sustainable aviation fuel plant. That's their fourth year capstone project. And one of my groups was looking at, ‘OK, what if we used ethanol in order to make this SAF for a certain sort of Australian aviation fuel need?’ And they found that we would need to use pretty much all of Australia's ethanol in order to fulfill that demand. Similarly with canola oil, it's not all of it, but it is a really significant portion.

And so there are movements and pushes to move away from these first gen feedstocks that are typical that could be used as a food source, to second gen, which are, I think Con’s mentioned a few times, like forestry residue or wood chips. Or, you know, what's left over when you process the sugar cane, it's called the gas, but you take that and instead of chucking it, you then use more complicated processing, but you can then convert that into these feedstocks.

And then the next-gen is looking at algae oils. So taking algae which doesn't take land, which consumes CO₂, which can be done in salt water, brackish water, those sorts of things, and then extracting the oil from that algae. And then you have that benefit of��CO₂ capture, but also you get a double benefit of the oil inside the algae can be used to make fuels, but also whatever's left over the algae can be used as a feedstock for other things as well.

Neil Martin��28:47
Is it more complicated?

Emma Lovell 28:50
Yes, very quickly, yes. It's quite hard. I mean, algae is tiny. Trying to get the oil out is energy intensive. It's not necessarily as technologically advanced for the algae-oil pathway, but it is something that's been really heavily explored as a potential pathway.

Constantine Tsounis��29:06
And it is really tricky. And even with new crop platforms that are sort of developed on land in sort of agricultural settings, there's quite a few emerging sort of crops that are quite interesting.

And pongamia is one that sort of springs to my mind. And the idea there is that you don't need agricultural land to actually grow pongamia. Pongamia can grow on marginal land and low-quality sort of soil conditions. It can actually improve the quality of the soil. And then you can take the oil seed and use that as a feedstock for renewable diesel as well.

So there are a range of solutions, algae being one of those new sort of crop platforms. But it's really tricky, because even with these new crop platforms that we're, I suppose, a lot more familiar with in terms of working with harvesting, understanding its sort of life cycle, they still need to be sort of tried and tested, and we still need to sort of understand how sustainable these crop platforms are.

Emma Lovell��29:58
Actually one of the other feedstocks we hadn't mentioned as well, is waste oil. So you can take used cooking oil, which is a waste product, and convert that into fuels as well. Obviously, that has a dual benefit of producing a fuel that is not competing with food, but also we're making the use of our oil waste.

The downside is that the quality of waste oil is going to vary really significantly, so there's processing challenges. And also, I think, rough calculations say that we don't have enough waste oil in Australia to fulfill even the aviation sector. But again, potentially a pathway to produce some which then can have that dual benefit.

Neil Martin��30:35
How does government policy play into all this? In terms of focus, I guess, and research money and just general guidance if nothing else.

Emma Lovell��30:48
My view is that it's really challenging, because if we put all of our eggs in one basket, I think what we've learned from this discussion, even just talking to Con, there are pathways that I hadn't thought of as well. Like, there is so many broad options, and if we push — if governments, if industry, if academia push down one specific path, it is not necessarily going to be able to fulfill all of our needs.

And so absolutely, there is a role for government, there's a role for industry, and there's a role for academia in being very strategic about where we invest our energy and our resources — energy, I mean in dual forms — energy and resources, into sort of moving things forward. But also, really making sure that we don't limit ourselves as well.

And it's a challenge. So for example, there are guidelines given by the aviation industry that set the maximum blending capacities and the potential pathways that are allowed. So there are eight pathways now that you can make SAF that can then be put into planes and that can operate safely up to varied blending capacities based off of their chemical properties. And so in that space, we say, ‘OK, well, here are the avenues that are technically possible’.

But I would be really reluctant to say, ‘OK, everyone focus on this’, because what makes sense in Australia, where we have these great sort of resources for variable renewable energy, and we have big land mass, but we also have constrained water supplies and constrained supplies on land that we want to actually use for food versus fuel. Versus other countries, will have different limitations.

And so, me personally, I don't think that we should be limiting things. But we should be very strategic about where we're investing as well.

Neil Martin��32:32
And Con, do you have a thought about that kind of question and how important that might be?

Constantine Tsounis��32:38
Yeah, I think Emma's covered it really, really well. And I think there's an aspect of diversification, and there's also an aspect of being strategic as well. And an example of being strategic is if we look at, sort of, the sugar cane industry in Queensland and all of the infrastructure that's there to collect, to process, to aggregate that sugar cane, and sort of thinking about, you know, potentially creating ethanol from that sugar cane and then potentially upgrading that to SAF.

That's one of the comparable advantages that we should really leverage, and that's sort of a strategic play in that space there. But it doesn't mean that other pathways towards SAF are not as valid or won't be as economical elsewhere.

Neil Martin��33:16
But I guess it is hard with all these potential different options, and you kind of maybe even need a crystal ball to predict, you know, what might be best, or what might be good or bad, or, you know, it's hard I guess.

Emma Lovell��33:30
It's incredibly difficult. And so we've talked a lot about a range of different feedstocks and a range of different processes and a range of different end products. But maybe one thing to highlight is that the same process could be driven by a range of different feedstocks, and the end product doesn't necessarily change a whole lot.

So SAF is SAF. Sustainable aviation fuel is sustainable aviation fuel. And whilst there might be some differences and some blending limits, you're still ending up with SAF and you're still using that as a drop-in fuel for, you know, the conventional planes that we're looking at. So that part, that end use isn't changing.

In this case, what is changing is how we get there and that feedstock of how we get there. We can then be really smart and strategic about, you know, OK let's use waste oil and substitute that in with the oil that are from different crops, or start with canola oil, and pivot things as we go. So there is potential to use this — I keep saying it — but you know, we have an opportunity here to do what makes the most sense and to design things really smartly. We just need to be strategic about how we do it.

Neil Martin��34:42
In terms of very futuristic technological advances, is there anything that's kind of maybe not being done at the moment that you're aware that might come to fruition in the next sort of 20 or 30 years? Kind of thinking outside the box.

Emma Lovell��34:58
Yeah. So I mean, we have a few processes that are really exciting. So I spoke previously about sort of the CO₂ FTS pathway — so CO₂ and hydrogen directly into these diesel and longer chain things.

So at the moment, we're working on using sunlight to drive that process. So can we use light and heat from the sun to control and tune the system so that we can get that best end product that we want.

There's some research coming out of the University of Sydney that are taking biogas and using plasma, which is essentially lightning in a bottle, to convert that biogas into a range of different hydrocarbons. And that provides that opportunity to then pick which exact end use case that we want.

There's a heap of really early emerging research that's doing very exciting things in this space, like in ammonia, in green hydrogen, and all of this will be able to enable the best end point, I think, for these green fuels.

Constantine Tsounis��35:57
Yeah, it's such an exciting space, because I suppose the importance of these technologies is that they can reduce sort of the energy required to actually drive these reactions. So make these processes that produce renewable fuels more efficient, which ultimately could reduce the operating costs. And as we sort of mentioned before, cost is one of the key barriers there.

So this sort of early stage innovation is really critical so that in the longer term, we can actually produce renewable fuels much more cost effectively. And I think as well, so beyond sort of operating costs, capital costs is obviously a huge part when you're thinking about the development of any large project. And some of this research, as well, sort of lends to reducing that capital cost.

So combining processes and one that sort of springs to my mind, and Emma, you've done research in this area as well, is carbon dioxide reduction using an electrolyser. And what that essentially means is that at the same time as you sort of produce that hydrogen, you can actually convert carbon dioxide into carbon monoxide. And as we sort of talked about before, that is synthesis gas. And from that synthesis gas building block, you can build a range of sort of products.

And so yeah, you can really start to see, you know, the potential impact of very early stage, sort of R&D, and sort of how that scales up, but more broadly, in terms of what that means for that end solution, in terms of energy efficiency, cost, and therefore widespread sort of adoption of these fuels.

Neil Martin��37:23
In and around the university I hear and read about ‘Power to X’ technologies. Can you explain to people who, and I would probably include myself in this sector, people who maybe don't exactly know what that is, what it's used for?

Emma Lovell��37:40
Yeah. I think a lot of what we've been discussing today could broadly be classified as Power to X. So Power to X is the conversion, broadly, the conversion of electrical energy into chemical energy. So typically, when we talk about Power to X, we normally mean variable renewable energy, converting that power into X — being a range of different things. So here we mean X as a variable.

So that could be converting variable renewable energy into hydrogen, into ammonia, into specific green fuels. What it essentially enables is the transformation of variable renewable energy, like from solar panels, like from wind energy into chemical energy, which we are much more effective at storing and transporting. We can store chemicals, like hydrogen, like methane, so natural gas, we can store them for very long times. We can transport them through natural gas pipelines across Australia. We can use them in the way that we've already been established.

We already know very well how to store and use and transport. So broadly, when we say Power to X, we're saying a lot and also saying nothing. But basically converting electrical energy into chemical energy that we can store, we can transport, we can distribute.

Neil Martin��39:05
Is it just a trendy name? Is it like a branding thing? Is this what that is?

Emma Lovell��39:11
I think actually Power to X is the future, and I sound maybe a little bit optimistic when I say that. But as we transition, as we move toward this new energy sector where we have an abundance of renewable energy, but we don't necessarily have the abundance of the downstream processes, yet we have a huge opportunity.

So you know, researchers at ���������¼� have done an incredible job inventing solar panels, and they're being deployed throughout the world. And wind turbines and all of these sort of potential opportunities to get energy are there, but now we need to work. The chemical engineers of the world need to work on how we can do a similar thing, by taking that energy and making the fuels, but also making the chemicals that we need so we can remove the need for fossil fuels.

We can operate in a sustainable and Net Zero economy, but we can also find these huge benefits and use cases for where things make sense to do now.

Neil Martin��40:15
With all these different options and the new technologies, how important do you think research is? Emma, obviously being at ���������¼�, you're going to extol the virtues of research, I guess. But generally, you know, people like you need to be really looking into these things to find new processes and better and cheaper ways, I guess, of doing everything. How important do you think that is? And I guess also to add on the role of government to maybe support research, or just to support development in general.

Emma Lovell��40:47
Yeah. So I think, of course, I'm going to say research is incredibly important. Research and education as well. I think that we also need to look at how we are training our undergraduates who are going to go out in the world and be future leaders who drive this green fuel revolution in the real world. So, you know, we have a dual role to play there, in terms of research and also just sort of propagating green fuels.

There is absolutely a lot to be done on the technical side, and that is developing new processes, developing new ways to drive the processes that are compatible with variable renewable energy, and also looking at how we can make things more efficient and more cost effective.

But then there's also the other side of things, which is we could do all of the best science in the world and understand every single part of the mechanism and the molecule and design the world's best catalyst. But at the end of the day, if that just sits in our lab in, you know, a milligram scale that's, you know, smaller than your hair, that's not going to have any real impact.

And so now's the time where we need to, yes, keep doing the fundamental research, but also look at how we can translate that research into the real world as well, and really try to drive that connection.

And this is where government, industry and academia really need to sort of interface to drive real change and to drive real change in a way that doesn't lead to downstream negative impacts later on. Burning fossil fuels enabled us to develop and build the world we have around us today, but we have this terrible consequence of climate change.

We need to be strategic and forward thinking about what we're doing now. Are we making fuels at the cost of water supply within Australia, at the cost of food supply within Australia? Are we looking at ammonia and disrupting the nitrogen cycle? Are we doing broader things that we're not seeing? The consequence of now, in the sort of name of progression.

Neil Martin��42:52
Is that where governments can step in as well, not just the Australian Government, but governments around the world in their own domains, Con?

Constantine Tsounis��43:00
Yeah absolutely. Obviously we need government funding to do this basic research. And we obviously need government funding to not only look at the basic research, but to also think more strategically about the long term impacts of, you know, what would happen if that research was commercialised? What would happen if we followed XYZ sort of pathways? What does that mean for the environment, for society and so forth.

I think, as well, Emma touched on a really important point, and something that I'm quite passionate about is really translation of research out of the lab. And that's where I really see a strong role for government to sort of support that sort of first-of-a-kind deployment, that sort of pilot scale device that really shows a new process and really demonstrates that it's not just something that exists in a scientist's mind on a lab bench, but something that can actually become tangible.

It's also, you know, where a lot of technologies face, that valley of death. It's really hard to attract private capital. The capital risk is too high to sort of support a lot of these early stage projects.

And so, you know, figuring out this tripartite agreement between government, industry and universities, and, you know, using that as a vehicle to really develop technologies is something where I see so much opportunity in.

Neil Martin��44:11
How does that actually kind of practically work? Is it literally just we need to support with money, or are there other things that are a part of that?

Constantine Tsounis��44:20
Yeah, well, I think money is one thing. You know, the cost of these things are quite high, and as I mentioned before, they are risky. They don't always work out as planned. You don't always get a product that's commercially viable. In many cases, you do. In many cases you don't.

But I think as well, just the general attitude, in terms of, for example, universities and sort of having an inclination to really seeing that technology flourish, and potentially not being too restrictive with what researchers can do with that certain IP, for example.

It could be an attitude change amongst, I suppose, the private sector and industry as well, where they really do see the value and the long term strategic impact of investing in these technologies early on.

I think, you know, a lot of the contractual arrangements, capital structure, the whole spin off process from the university has been really worked on in the last couple of years, and we're making really good ground, and sort of seeing a lot of that commercialisation come to life. But I still think there's a long way to go.

Neil Martin��45:18
Yeah, like you said, it's making sure that those things don't just sit in Emma's lab, great inventions that the world doesn't get to see.

Constantine Tsounis��45:25
Yeah, and I think, you know, a lot of it depends on the researcher as well. I mean, Emma is obviously amazing at getting things out of the lab and developing the technologies.

But a lot of researchers, oftentimes, aren't motivated by, you know, actually seeing their technology on a larger scale. Sometimes they're incentivised by sort of how many papers they publish or how many citations they get, rather than, you know, really thinking outside of the box and being risky and sort of trying to disrupt the sector and work with industry as well.

So I think there's a general sort of attitude change that needs to occur through all those organisations. And we need to sort of restructure how we sort of incentivise and value basic research and what that means for its commercialisation.

Neil Martin��46:07
Well, that might lead me very neatly onto what my final question is going to be, which is, if you had a magic wand to make one big change or advancement in the world of green fuels, maybe looking ahead 20 or 30 years, what would you choose to do?

Emma Lovell��46:23
Okay, so if I had a magic wand, I'd wish for three more. So I'm going with three, because there always has to be someone that does that.

The first is that I would have shifted the technology levers to make these sorts of green fuel processes economically competitive, because I think money is eventually, inevitably what drives everything. So that's the first I would do.

The second is that I would have a global strategic approach to all green fuels and energy and green chemicals as well. I think for me, that's really key to make sure that we have an overall strategy. And it's not this sort of ad hoc, people are just doing all of these different things. Whilst there is obviously many benefits to having this more diverse sector that is more fit for purpose, which I think we've extensively discussed, there is also a potential for people to run down a pathway that goes nowhere.

And the final is that I would love to make direct air capture an economically and technically viable approach, because direct air capture enables us to take CO₂ out of the air and then convert that CO₂ into these green fuels. And I think eventually that's the future of where we need to go in order to begin to mitigate the impacts of anthropogenic climate change.

Neil Martin��47:42
Emma might have tried to steal one of your wishes there, but I'm going to grab it back.

Constantine Tsounis��47:49
I was also a bit boisterous, and I have two wishes.

Neil Martin��47:55
Five total wishes.

Constantine Tsounis��47:56
Yeah. Well look, I think the 20 or 30 year vision that I have for low carbon liquid fuels in Australia is really having that integrated domestic supply chain where you can go right from the grower to the end consumer. And I think that really benefits all of those stakeholders involved.

You know, the grower can start to think about higher value add crops and produce and things that they can move up the supply chain. And right for the consumer, you sort of have opportunity for affordable, sustainable fuels that you can use. I think there's a huge opportunity there, across the supply chain.

I think as well, as I sort of mentioned, Australia has so many comparable advantages there. So I think in the export market, we'd be very competitive. And, you know, developing these highly technical industries, you can really start to absorb a lot of the R&D and a lot of the PhDs and engineering graduates that come from universities, and really keep them in Australia to sort of develop these sort of next generation technologies. So that's sort of my 20 to 30 year vision for the supply chain.

And when I sort of worked backwards, there are probably two main levers that I thought we could potentially pull. The first is that commercial lever. And like Emma mentioned, cost is everything. We really need to drive down the cost. And I really think that low cost renewable energy is really one of the unlocks there.

If you look at sort of the economics of hydrogen production and the production of a lot of these fuels, a big proportion of the operating cost, sometimes even more than 50% comes from the electricity costs. So it really does highlight the importance of the power in Power to X. So if we can build out that low carbon, reliable, low cost grid, I think that will be a key unlock on the commercial side.

And on the technical side, you're right. I think you know that whole opportunity to spin off technologies, to demonstrate technologies, to have a platform that brings together government, industry, universities, in that sort of tripartite arrangement, I think is so critical to developing that next generation of technology. That can be used in that 20 to 30 year vision, because the industry is ripe for disruption. It's ready to go.

And I think the things that we do now are so important. I couldn't agree more about the strategy piece, too. We really do need to have a strategy that is diversified but also specific, where we can kind of, you know, really support the things that are going to make the most impact.

Neil Martin��50:21
Well, there's lots of wishes there, which is great. Wouldn't it be amazing to be able to click our fingers and jump forward 30 years to see where we're actually at and how different the world might be in terms of fuel and energy, and how important these green fuels have become.

Look, it's been really interesting to hear your expert thoughts and opinions. Dr Emma Lovell, many thanks for joining us.

Emma Lovell��50:44
Thanks so much for having me, Neil.

Neil Martin��50:45
And also Con Tsounis, it's been a pleasure to talk to you.

Constantine Tsounis��50:49
That was so much fun. Thank you.

Neil Martin��50:51
Thank you. Unfortunately, that's all we've got time for. Thank you for listening. I've been Neil Martin, and I hope you'll join me again soon for the next episode in our Engineering the Future series.

You've been listening to ���������¼� Engineering the Future podcast. Don't forget to subscribe to our series to stay updated on upcoming episodes. Check out our show notes for details on in-person events, panel discussions and more fascinating insights into the future of engineering.