(U.K. Department for Transport) Seeks industry views on the supply of advanced non-HEFA (including PtL) SAF and the issue of tankering. -- This call for evidence seeks views and evidence from industry on the availability of future non-HEFA SAF supply once the HEFA cap and PtL obligation take effect.
We are also requesting updated evidence on changes in aviation fuel management in particular tankering following the implementation of the UK SAF Mandate. READ MORE
SAF Mandate: SAF supply and industry certainty in an evolving market
The Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF) Mandate, which came into force on 1 January 2025, is the UK’s key policy mechanism to secure demand for SAF.
It delivers greenhouse gas (GHG) emission savings by encouraging the supply of SAF. The SAF Mandate sets a legal obligation on fuel suppliers in the UK to supply an increasing proportion of SAF over time. Suppliers receive certificates for the SAF they supply in proportion to the level of GHG emission reductions their fuel delivers.
Government has received positive feedback from industry on the SAF Mandate’s structure and support for diversifying SAF technologies. We want to ensure the SAF Mandate continues to incentivise a vast range of SAF technologies and support aviation decarbonisation for years to come.
The SAF Mandate has 2 obligations:
- the ‘main obligation’ from 2025
- a ‘power-to liquid (PtL) obligation’ from 2028
From 2027, the SAF Mandate also has a ‘hydroprocessed esters and fatty acids (HEFA) cap’. The HEFA cap is designed to encourage the development of more advanced fuels (both PtL and non-PtL).
From 2027 to 2040, HEFA SAF decreases as a proportion of total SAF supply eligible under the mandate. As the HEFA cap is set as a percentage of the main SAF obligation, the absolute amount of HEFA that can count towards compliance is likely to increase as the SAF Mandate rises.
This is even as HEFA’s share of the total obligation is reduced, due to the SAF Mandate’s increasing targets. This assumes jet fuel demand continues to increase, and the carbon intensity of HEFA remains stable as changes to the lifecycle GHG savings will impact the volumes supplied.
The SAF Mandate compliance guidance provides further detail on eligible SAF types and the obligations.
It is crucial to diversify viable SAF pathways and scale up advanced technologies to avoid reliance on HEFA SAF. Future HEFA supply is predicted to be limited and demand is expected to significantly increase as more countries introduce SAF policies. This is in addition to competition from other sectors who rely on HEFA feedstocks. As SAF Mandate targets rise, a successful scale up of advanced SAF is required in order for the UK to meet its long-term aviation decarbonisation objectives.
Suppliers comply with the main obligation by redeeming certificates, which can be gained either by supplying SAF or purchased from others that have supplied fuel. Where an insufficient number of certificates have been redeemed, suppliers can buy out of their obligation. By creating guaranteed demand for SAF, the SAF Mandate is designed to accelerate the development of domestic and global supply, reduce aviation’s lifecycle carbon emissions, and support the UK’s wider net zero commitments.
Availability of future SAF supply
The SAF mandate is intended to be ambitious but deliverable, setting a clear trajectory of increasing SAF uptake to drive up greenhouse gas (GHG) savings and speed up aviation decarbonisation.
Government recognises the interdependencies between demand and supply and remains steadfastly committed to encouraging the development of a domestic SAF industry alongside the SAF Mandate.
There are promising signs about global HEFA supply to the UK in the near term, however, it is essential to ensure that a future diverse supply of SAF continues to be available so that the SAF mandate remains effective at decarbonising aviation. Government is supporting industry to develop advanced SAF production in the UK though the revenue certainty mechanism, the Advanced Fuels Fund and successor schemes.
The SAF Mandate allows compliance in 2 ways:
- by redeeming certificates (from supply or purchasing from other account holders)
- by paying the buyout price
We recognise that, if there is insufficient global supply available, this would reduce the options that fuel suppliers have to comply with the obligation to only buyout.
Buyout is an important mechanism for delivering aviation decarbonisation at a reasonable cost. It provides fuel suppliers with an option in circumstances where supply is unreasonably expensive, effectively capping the cost of the scheme. Some level of buyout can also be useful as an investment signal to the market that there is unmet demand available to be met. However, buyout does not deliver the carbon savings that the SAF Mandate is designed to deliver.
The nascency of the SAF industry makes it essential to provide a clear and stable demand signal to support investor confidence in advanced SAF technologies. The SAF Mandate provides certainty to industry by setting a legal framework that establishes the demand for SAF in the UK. This certainty facilitates an environment in which commercial decisions can be made confidently, supply chains are developed, and investment is attracted into the sector.
Therefore, while it is important that we monitor technical and commercial developments to ensure sufficient SAF availability over the long-term, government is committed to maintaining certainty and confidence in support of diversifying SAF feedstocks and technologies, which the SAF Mandate is designed to encourage.
We will not propose changes unless:
- there is a strong rationale
- such changes are consistent with wider government objectives and maintain policy stability and investor confidence in the UK SAF industry
Government remains supportive of the diversification of SAF technologies, which are crucial for the long-term future of SAF.
We are seeking industry views
Since the SAF Mandate launched, we have received feedback from industry that once the HEFA cap and PtL obligation come into force, availability of advanced non-HEFA and PtL SAF risks being lower than previously anticipated.
Government recognises that the SAF Mandate interacts with the whole supply chain, not just the fuel suppliers who are obligated by it. This is why we are keen that this call for evidence is far-reaching and we welcome responses from:
- fuel producers and suppliers
- feedstock suppliers
- airlines
- airports and the wider aviation industry
- investors
- industry bodies, NGOs and other interested parties
This call for evidence provides those stakeholders with an opportunity to engage with DfT on the extent and drivers of uncertainty around future non-HEFA SAF supply.
We will maintain overall SAF Mandate targets
The government is dedicated to delivering greener transport, kickstarting economic growth and to making Britain a clean energy superpower.
We are not proposing any changes to the overall SAF Mandate targets nor are we seeking to reduce the SAF Mandate’s climate or environmental ambition. SAF is one of the key measures required to reach net zero emissions from aviation by 2050.
Rather, through this call for evidence we are seeking views on how government can best support industry in meeting the mandate to ensure delivery of this ambition. We want to ensure the SAF Mandate continues to support aviation decarbonisation for years to come.
We are seeking industry views on:
- the availability of advanced non-HEFA and PtL SAF
- the types of potential changes to the HEFA cap and PtL obligation and flexibility measures that could be introduced if there were significant concerns about availability - including making no changes to the SAF Mandate as currently designed
We are seeking evidence in relation to emissions reductions, costs, supply and industry certainty. Through this call for evidence, we are also seeking updated views and evidence on the impact of tankering as a result of the SAF Mandate.
We will not propose any changes to the SAF Mandate unless there is sufficient evidence that maintaining the same policy design would cause significant harm for industry and consumers.
Any decisions will be considered carefully, balancing the needs of the whole supply chain, whilst aiming to protect investment in developing an advanced SAF industry in the UK.
Any changes to the SAF Mandate policy design would be subject to a formal consultation (beyond this call for evidence), as required by the SAF Mandate’s legislation.
Areas for consideration and evidence
Questions are included within this document so you can see what we are asking in context. See the How to respond section of this page to see how you can respond to these questions.
Availability of advanced SAF
Feedback from industry stakeholders indicates that advanced, non-HEFA SAF is not yet being produced in significant quantities, and there are concerns over meeting the SAF Mandate’s future supply targets. We are seeking evidence from industry to understand the expected trajectory of this supply, as targets rise to 2040.
Question 1. Do you expect there to be sufficient non-HEFA SAF (either PtL or non-PtL SAF), domestically and globally, to meet the SAF Mandate targets until 2040?
Please provide any supporting evidence including how you expect availability to change over time.
The case for maintaining the current SAF Mandate policy design
Maintaining the current design of the SAF Mandate would maintain investment confidence that is vital to the development of the SAF industry, in particular the more advanced fuels necessary for meeting the mandate in later years.
Fuel suppliers would continue to be able to meet the SAF Mandate obligations through the established existing routes - physical supply, trading certificates, or paying the buy-out price. Retaining these established compliance routes of the mandate design maintains certainty and confidence for suppliers and the wider supply chain, who will be now familiar with the policy.
In the event that suppliers do buy out the non-HEFA share of the main obligation, this would be a relatively small percentage in the context of overall mandate demand. In 2027, non-HEFA SAF accounts for 7.7% of the total mandated SAF volume, meaning the vast majority of the SAF Mandate’s obligation could still be met using HEFA. Use of buyout in this instance would also provide a clear investment signal to the market to help support the scale-up of alternative SAF pathways.
We are supporting investment in the advanced SAF industry, including through the revenue certainty mechanism and £219 million in grant funding to support UK SAF production.
Government has consistently iterated that there is a high bar for changes under the SAF Mandate - creating certainty for industry is key.
Question 2. In your view, what would be the likely consequences of maintaining the current approach (no policy change)?
Please provide any supporting evidence.
Advanced non-HEFA non-PtL SAF
...
We are seeking evidence on the impact of the HEFA cap and potential options for amending the HEFA cap. When answering, we ask you to consider how amending the HEFA cap could affect:
- SAF supply availability
- investor confidence
- the pace of scale‑up for advanced SAF
We are also seeking views on the potential implications of amending the HEFA cap on environmental outcomes. Please consider the impact on lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions as well as any indirect impacts on the long‑term objectives of the SAF Mandate in supporting a diverse, resilient and sustainable SAF industry.
Question 3. If you believe a change to the HEFA cap is required in 2027 or subsequent years to address insufficient supply, what type of change do you think is required?
Please provide detail of the change and evidence to support it. If you do not believe a change is required to the HEFA cap, please state why. Please provide any supporting evidence as justification. Consider supply availability, and the impact on investment, industry and the environment in your answer.
Question 4. What would be the impact on investment in non-HEFA production domestically and globally by any change in the HEFA cap?
Please provide evidence including differential impacts of different approaches to changing the HEFA cap. How could a change be implemented that mitigated impacts on non-HEFA production most effectively?
Advanced PtL SAF
...
We are therefore seeking views on expected availability of PtL SAF, domestically and globally. To reach higher SAF targets, we will need a diverse range of innovative technologies drawing upon a wide range of feedstocks. We want to support investment in these technologies through clear and ambitious policies. In particular, we are asking you to consider how supply is likely to change over time, how this relates to demand under the SAF Mandate and whether any changes to the PtL obligation are required.
We are also interested to understand how any changes to the PtL obligation could affect future supply from projects and emissions reductions.
Question 5. If you believe a change to the power-to-liquid (PtL) obligation is required in 2028 or subsequent years to address insufficient supply, what type of change do you think is required?
Please provide detail of the change and evidence to support it. If you do not believe a change is required to the PtL obligation, please state why. Please provide any supporting evidence as justification. Consider supply availability, and the impact on investment, industry and the environment in your answer.
Question 6. What would be the impact on investment in non-HEFA production domestically and globally by any change to the PtL obligation?
Please provide evidence including differential impacts of different approaches to changing the PtL obligation. How could a change be implemented that mitigated impacts on non-HEFA production most effectively?
Wider flexibility options
...
We are interested to understand if there are any additional flexibilities that could be introduced to help support cost-effective compliance by reducing the risk of buyout.
Examples of such flexibilities could include:
- increasing the proportion of the obligation that can be met with the previous year’s certificates (from 25%)
- extending the regulation that a proportion of the obligation can be met with the previous year’s certificates to a greater number of years
- allowing a proportion of an obligation to be carried over between years, similar to the design of the zero emission vehicle (ZEV) mandate
- rewarding certain fuels (for example, advanced types of SAF) with additional certificates to incentivise their production and support achievement of targets (similar to how waste-based or development fuels are rewarded in the RTFO)
The above options are not an exhaustive list, and we invite views on the types of flexibilities that could be implemented to address any fluctuations in supply, without diminishing the SAF Mandate’s environmental ambition or investment signals to investors.
Question 7. Do you think there are additional options for flexibility within the SAF Mandate that should be considered to help support delivery of the mandate while not undermining investment in SAF production?
If so, what are these options and what would be their pros/cons. Please provide evidence. Consider supply availability, and the impact on investment, industry and the environment in your answer.
Wider system considerations
This government is also seeking evidence about the impacts of tankering.
Tankering is the practice whereby airlines opt to take on additional fuel for inbound journeys to cover the outbound return, mainly for economic optimisation. Full tankering occurs when sufficient fuel is uplifted to cover the entire return flight, while partial tankering covers only part of the return journey.
...
The government wants to ensure that greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reductions are maximised under the SAF mandate. When tankering occurs, the additional fuel carried increases aircraft weight, resulting in higher fuel burn and greater carbon emissions. Whilst emissions may be displaced from the UK to other countries, this may still cause an increase in total global carbon emissions (carbon leakage). We are seeking updated views on current and future concerns and asking stakeholders to submit any available evidence they can provide.
Question 8. In your view, what impact is the SAF Mandate expected to have on future tankering compared to current practices?
Please provide any supporting evidence to highlight the environmental and economic impact.
Additional or alternative approaches
Question 9. In your view, are there any alternative options which have not been considered in this call for evidence which would help delivery of carbon savings from the SAF Mandate and help maintain investment and supply certainty for industry?
...
What will happen next
Following the closure of the call for evidence, government will review responses and publish a summary of responses, including next steps. Our intention is to publish this summary of responses in autumn 2026, subject to the usual approval processes. Paper copies will be available on request.
Any proposed changes to the scheme would need to undergo a focused consultation and be supported by analysis of the costs and benefits.
Freedom of information
Information provided in response to this call for evidence, including personal information, may be subject to publication or disclosure in accordance with the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) or the Environmental Information Regulations 2004. READ MORE
Nearly 60,000 articles in our online library!
Use the categories and tags listed below to access the nearly 60,000 articles indexed on this website.
Advanced Biofuels USA Policy Statements and Handouts!
- For Kids: Carbon Cycle Puzzle Page
- Why Ethanol? Why E85?
- Just A Minute 3-5 Minute Educational Videos
- 30/30 Online Presentations
- “Disappearing” Carbon Tax for Non-Renewable Fuels
- What’s the Difference between Biodiesel and Renewable (Green) Diesel? 2020 revision
- How to De-Fossilize Your Fleet: Suggestions for Fleet Managers Working on Sustainability Programs
- New Engine Technologies Could Produce Similar Mileage for All Ethanol Fuel Mixtures
- Action Plan for a Sustainable Advanced Biofuel Economy
- The Interaction of the Clean Air Act, California’s CAA Waiver, Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards, Renewable Fuel Standards and California’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard
- Latest Data on Fuel Mileage and GHG Benefits of E30
- What Can I Do?
Donate
DonateARCHIVES
- September 2026
- August 2026
- July 2026
- June 2026
- May 2026
- April 2026
- March 2026
- February 2026
- January 2026
- December 2025
- November 2025
- October 2025
- September 2025
- August 2025
- July 2025
- June 2025
- May 2025
- April 2025
- March 2025
- February 2025
- January 2025
- December 2024
- November 2024
- October 2024
- September 2024
- August 2024
- July 2024
- June 2024
- May 2024
- April 2024
- March 2024
- February 2024
- January 2024
- December 2023
- November 2023
- October 2023
- September 2023
- August 2023
- July 2023
- June 2023
- May 2023
- April 2023
- March 2023
- February 2023
- January 2023
- December 2022
- November 2022
- October 2022
- September 2022
- August 2022
- July 2022
- June 2022
- May 2022
- April 2022
- March 2022
- February 2022
- January 2022
- December 2021
- November 2021
- October 2021
- September 2021
- August 2021
- July 2021
- June 2021
- May 2021
- April 2021
- March 2021
- February 2021
- January 2021
- December 2020
- November 2020
- October 2020
- September 2020
- August 2020
- July 2020
- June 2020
- May 2020
- April 2020
- March 2020
- February 2020
- January 2020
- December 2019
- November 2019
- October 2019
- September 2019
- August 2019
- July 2019
- June 2019
- May 2019
- April 2019
- March 2019
- February 2019
- January 2019
- December 2018
- November 2018
- October 2018
- September 2018
- August 2018
- July 2018
- June 2018
- May 2018
- April 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- August 2016
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- February 2016
- January 2016
- December 2015
- November 2015
- October 2015
- September 2015
- August 2015
- July 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- June 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- June 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- October 2006
- April 2006
- January 2006
- April 2005
- December 2004
- November 2004
- December 1987
CATEGORIES
- About Us
- Advanced Biofuels Call to Action
- Aviation Fuel/Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF)
- BioChemicals/Renewable Chemicals
- BioRefineries/Renewable Fuel Production
- Business News/Analysis
- Cooking Fuel
- Education
- 30/30 Online Presentations
- Competitions, Contests
- Earth Day 2021
- Earth Day 2022
- Earth Day 2023
- Earth Day 2024
- Earth Day 2025
- Earth Day 2026
- Executive Training
- Featured Study Programs
- Instagram TikTok Short Videos
- Internships
- Just a Minute
- K-12 Activities
- Mechanics training
- Online Courses
- Podcasts
- Scholarships/Fellowships
- Teacher Resources
- Technical Training
- Technician Training
- University/College Programs
- Events
- Coming Events
- Completed Events
- More Coming Events
- Requests for Speakers, Presentations, Posters
- Requests for Speakers, Presentations, Posters Completed
- Webinars/Online
- Webinars/Online Completed; often available on-demand
- Federal Agency/Executive Branch
- Agency for International Development (USAID)
- Agriculture (USDA)
- Commerce Department
- Commodity Futures Trading Commission
- Congressional Budget Office
- Defense (DOD)
- Air Force
- Army
- DARPA (Defense Advance Research Projects Agency)
- Defense Logistics Agency
- Marines
- Navy
- Education Department
- Energy (DOE)
- Environmental Protection Agency
- Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)
- Federal Reserve System
- Federal Trade Commission
- Food and Drug Administration
- General Services Administration
- Government Accountability Office (GAO)
- Health and Human Services (HHS)
- Homeland Security
- Housing and Urban Development (HUD)
- Interior Department
- International Trade Commission
- Joint Office of Energy and Transportation
- Justice (DOJ)
- Labor Department
- National Academies of Sciences Engineering Medicine
- National Aeronautics and Space Administration
- National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
- National Research Council
- National Science Foundation
- National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB)
- Occupational Safety and Health Administration
- Overseas Private Investment Corporation
- Patent and Trademark Office
- Securities and Exchange Commission
- State Department
- Surface Transportation Board
- Transportation (DOT)
- Federal Aviation Administration
- Federal Transit Administration
- Maritime Administration (MARAD)
- National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA)
- Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Admin (PHMSA)
- Treasury Department
- U.S. Trade Representative (USTR)
- White House
- Federal Legislation
- Federal Litigation
- Federal Regulation
- Feedstocks
- Agriculture/Food Processing Residues nonfield crop
- Alcohol/Ethanol/Isobutanol
- Algae/Other Aquatic Organisms/Seaweed
- Atmosphere
- Carbon Dioxide (CO2)
- Field/Orchard/Plantation Crops/Residues
- Forestry/Wood/Residues/Waste
- hydrogen
- Manure
- Methane/Biogas
- methanol/bio-/renewable methanol
- Not Agriculture
- RFNBO (Renewable Fuels of Non-Biological Origin)
- Seawater
- Sugars
- water
- Funding/Financing/Investing
- grants
- Green Jobs
- Green Racing
- Health Concerns/Benefits
- Heating Oil/Fuel
- History of Advanced Biofuels
- Infrastructure
- Aggregation
- Biofuels Engine Design
- Biorefinery/Fuel Production Infrastructure
- Carbon Capture/Storage/Use
- certification
- Deliver Dispense
- Farming/Growing
- Precursors/Biointermediates
- Preprocessing
- Pretreatment
- Terminals Transport Pipelines
- International
- Abu Dhabi
- Afghanistan
- Africa
- Albania
- Algeria
- Angola
- Antarctica
- Arctic
- Argentina
- Armenia
- Aruba
- Asia
- Asia Pacific
- Australia
- Austria
- Azerbaijan
- Bahamas
- Bahrain
- Bangladesh
- Barbados
- Belarus
- Belgium
- Belize
- Benin
- Bermuda
- Bhutan
- Bolivia
- Bosnia and Herzegovina
- Botswana
- Brazil
- Brunei
- Bulgaria
- Burkina Faso
- Burundi
- Cambodia
- Cameroon
- Canada
- Canary Islands
- Caribbean
- Central African Republic
- Central America
- Chad
- Chile
- China
- Colombia
- Congo
- Congo, Democratic Republic of
- Costa Rica
- Croatia
- Cuba
- Cyprus
- Czech Republic
- Denmark
- Dominican Republic
- Dubai
- Ecuador
- Egypt
- El Salvador
- Equatorial Guinea
- Estonia
- Eswatini/Swaziland
- Ethiopia
- European Union (EU)
- Fiji
- Finland
- France
- French Guiana
- Gabon
- Georgia
- Germany
- Ghana
- Global South
- Greece
- Greenland
- Grenada
- Guatemala
- Guinea
- Guyana
- Haiti
- Honduras
- Hong Kong
- Hungary
- Iceland
- India
- Indonesia
- Iran
- Iraq
- Ireland
- Israel
- Italy
- Ivory Coast
- Jamaica
- Japan
- Jersey
- Jordan
- Kazakhstan
- Kenya
- Korea
- Kosovo
- Kuwait
- Laos
- Latin America
- Latvia
- Lebanon
- Liberia
- Libya
- Lithuania
- Luxembourg
- Macedonia
- Madagascar
- Malawi
- Malaysia
- Maldives
- Mali
- Malta
- Marshall Islands
- Mauritania
- Mauritius
- Mexico
- Middle East
- Moldova
- Monaco
- Mongolia
- Morocco
- Mozambique
- Myanmar/Burma
- Namibia
- Nepal
- Netherlands
- New Guinea
- New Zealand
- Nicaragua
- Niger
- Nigeria
- North Africa
- North America
- North Korea
- Northern Ireland
- Norway
- Oman
- Pakistan
- Panama
- Papua New Guinea
- Paraguay
- Peru
- Philippines
- Poland
- Portugal
- Qatar
- Republic of
- Romania
- Russia
- Rwanda
- Saudi Arabia
- Scotland
- Senegal
- Serbia
- Sierra Leone
- Singapore
- Slovakia/Slovak Republic
- Slovenia
- Solomon Islands
- South Africa
- South America
- South Korea (Republic of Korea)
- South Sudan
- Southeast Asia
- Spain
- Sri Lanka
- Sudan
- Suriname
- Sweden
- Switzerland
- Taiwan
- Tanzania
- Thailand
- Timor-Leste
- Togo
- Trinidad and Tobago
- Tunisia
- Turkey
- Tuvalu
- Uganda
- UK (United Kingdom)
- Ukraine
- United Arab Emirates UAE
- Uruguay
- Uzbekistan
- Vatican
- Venezuela
- Vietnam
- Wales
- Zambia
- Zanzibar
- Zimbabwe
- Marine/Boat Bio and Renewable Fuel/MGO/MDO/SMF
- Marketing/Market Forces and Sales
- Opinions
- Organizations
- Original Writing, Opinions Advanced Biofuels USA
- Policy
- Presentations
- Biofuels Digest Conferences
- DOE Conferences
- Bioeconomy 2017
- Bioenergy2015
- Biomass2008
- Biomass2009
- Biomass2010
- Biomass2011
- Biomass2012
- Biomass2013
- Biomass2014
- DOE Project Peer Review
- Other Conferences/Events
- R & D Focus
- Carbon Capture/Storage/Use
- Co-Products
- Feedstock
- Logistics
- Performance
- Process
- Vehicle/Engine/Motor/Aircraft/Boiler/Ship
- Yeast
- Railroad/Train/Locomotive Fuel
- Resources
- Books Web Sites etc
- Business
- Definition of Advanced Biofuels
- Find Stuff
- Government Resources
- Scientific Resources
- Technical Resources
- Tools/Decision-Making
- Rocket/Missile Fuel
- Sponsors
- States/Territories
- Alabama
- Alaska
- Arizona
- Arkansas
- California
- Colorado
- Connecticut
- Delaware
- Florida
- Georgia
- Guam
- Hawai'i
- Idaho
- Illinois
- Indiana
- Iowa
- Kansas
- Kentucky
- Louisiana
- Maine
- Maryland
- Massachusetts
- Michigan
- Midwest
- Minnesota
- Mississippi
- Missouri
- Montana
- Native American tribal nation lands
- Nebraska
- Nevada
- New Hampshire
- New Jersey
- New Mexico
- New York
- North Carolina
- North Dakota
- Ohio
- Oklahoma
- Oregon
- Pennsylvania
- Puerto Rico
- Rhode Island
- South Carolina
- South Dakota
- Tennessee
- Texas
- Utah
- Vermont
- Virginia
- Washington
- Washington DC
- West Coast
- West Virginia
- Wisconsin
- Wyoming
- Sustainability
- Uncategorized
- What You Can Do
tags
© 2008-2023 Copyright Advanced BioFuels USA. All Rights reserved.
Comments are closed.