Running a Hydrogen Plane Could Be Cheaper than Traditional Aircraft by 2035

May 26, 2023

Print This Article Share it With Friends

(Transport & Environment) Deploying hydrogen planes in Europe is economically feasible, new study shows, but must be supported by the right set of policies and incentives. -- Hydrogen jets could be cheaper to run than fossil fuel planes from 2035 provided kerosene is taxed adequately, a new study shows^[1]^,[2]. In 2035, running planes on hydrogen could be 8% more expensive than using kerosene. But with a tax on fossil jet fuel and a price on carbon, hydrogen planes could become 2% cheaper to operate than their kerosene counterparts. These pricing measures are key to the deployment of green technologies like hydrogen planes, T&E says.

An economic study by research group Steer, and commissioned by T&E, looked at future operating costs of hydrogen planes on intra-European flights and found that they could be an efficient, cost competitive technology to decarbonise the sector.

But aircraft manufacturer Airbus, which has launched three concepts for hydrogen planes, is yet to prove it will be able to meet its planned 2035 launch date for its plane. It has warned that the slow development of the hydrogen ecosystem could delay the launch of its zero-emission planes. Airbus has also opposed a criteria in the EU taxonomy – the EU’s list of sustainable investments – whereby only zero emission aircraft would get a green investment label. This suggests Airbus doubts it will sell many of these aircraft, T&E says.

Carlos López de la Osa, aviation technical manager at T&E, says: “Airbus promised the world it would build a hydrogen jet by 2035. Building these planes is economically feasible, but if we want Airbus to walk the talk, we’ll need to create a market for zero emission aircraft, by taxing fossil jet fuel and mandating zero emission planes in the future. If we have to rely only on Airbus’ goodwill, hydrogen jets will never be more than a pipe dream.”

The analysis also shows that the total cost of deploying hydrogen aircraft for intra-European aviation would be €299 billion by 2050^[3]. The development of hydrogen aircraft would only represent 5% of the cost (€15 billion)^[4]. This relatively small upfront cost must however happen before 2035, or risks jeopardizing the success of these new planes.

The bulk of the spending will not lie within the sector. It instead relies on the wider development of the green hydrogen economy, which is developing in parallel. Over half of the cost (54% or €161 billion) will come down to the production of green hydrogen^[5]. Another 23% will be needed for liquefaction of hydrogen – the process by which gaseous hydrogen is cooled at very low temperatures to become a liquid. Further costs lie in developing hydrogen infrastructure at airports (12%) and the distribution of the fuel to airports (6%).

The study also shows that the total cost could go down by €100 billion if leisure and business traffic remained respectively at 100% and 50% of 2019 levels. Reducing demand for business travel will not only be key to reduce emissions, but also to save costs, T&E says.

Technological hurdles around the development of hydrogen planes are significant. Liquid hydrogen has low energy density relative to kerosene, meaning that a larger volume of fuel is required to power the same distance. This limits the range of these aircraft, but hydrogen planes can still provide a viable alternative to decarbonise regional and short-haul routes, which represent 50% of Europe’s aviation emissions.

“There is no silver bullet to decarbonise aviation. Green fuels, demand reduction and hydrogen will all play a role. For hydrogen planes to take off in the next decade, we need to enter the virtuous circle of regulation, investment, a fall in prices, followed by stronger uptake. But the cost must be shouldered by the aviation industry and its users, by ring fencing part of carbon and kerosene tax revenues for green tech like zero emission planes and clean fuels,” concluded Carlos López de la Osa.

^[1] If fossil kerosene is taxed in line with the Energy Taxation Directive proposal by the European Commission, at €10.75/GJ – approximately €0.37/L.

^[2] The study considers jet aircraft using a fossil kerosene and Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF) blend.

^[3] The study looks at costs needed for hydrogen for European aviation up until the year 2050, but further analysis is required to model scenarios for the next half of the century.

^[4] This figure is an estimate based on previous new aircraft programme developments – for example, the Airbus A350 programme has been estimated at €12.5 billion over seven years (source). It includes the non recurring costs of aircraft design, testing and certification.

^[5] The study assumed that all hydrogen will be produced in Europe.

READ MORE

Analysing the costs of hydrogen aircraft (Steer)

New reports highlight the costly challenge of transitioning to hydrogen and electric aviation (GreenAir Online)

Target True Zero: Infrastructure for alternative propulsion flight (McKinsey and Company)

Hydrogen Business Jet Could Turn Private Aviation Green (AIN Online)

Does Hydrogen Have a Future in Business Aviation? (National Business Aviation Association)

Excerpt from GreenAir Online: Two new reports have highlighted the considerable costs and logistics of transitioning air transport to novel propulsion aircraft, both emphasising the need for urgent action to enable the switch. A report by the World Economic Forum (WEF) as part of its Target True Zero initiative indicates that by 2050, the aviation industry will need to invest between $700 billion and $1.7 trillion to provide sufficient infrastructure for hydrogen, battery-electric and hybrid-electric aircraft. It argues the foundation elements must be in place by 2025 and says new partnerships are essential between the aviation sector and energy suppliers. A parallel report by European advocacy group Transport & Environment (T&E) says hydrogen-powered aircraft will cost 8% more to operate than fossil-fuelled planes but could be 2% cheaper from 2035 if their development is supported by government incentives, funded through taxes on conventional jet fuel and a price on carbon. “These pricing measures are key to the deployment of green technologies like hydrogen planes,” says T&E.

The WEF report was produced with the support of McKinsey and Partners, the Aviation Environment Federation and the Aviation Impact Accelerator of the University of Cambridge to help quantify challenges involved in the transition to new propulsion technologies. It estimates that by 2050, battery-electric and hydrogen-powered aircraft could comprise between 21% and 38% of total fleets, and require 15% to 34% of the industry’s total energy needs.

Of this power, says WEF, between 89% and 96% would be needed for hydrogen-powered aircraft, with the remaining 4% to 11% for battery-electric turboprops, regional jets and small narrowbody planes. The introduction of hydrogen and electric propulsion would also require separate infrastructure value chains and necessitate production of power away from airports, which would not have sufficient land for the energy infrastructure. “The investments needed to meet 2050 alternative-propulsion-related infrastructure goals must start now,” stresses the report, with the first elements required to be in place by 2025.

“Getting infrastructure right will be critical in allowing this new industry to take off – whether that means ‘on-airport’ infrastructure, such as chargers and refuellers, or ‘off-airport’ infrastructure, such as producing enough green electricity,” write McKinsey Partner Robin Riedel and WEF Climate Head Pedro Gomez in their foreword to the report. “There is a great deal at stake in getting this transition right. Collaboration across geographies, industries and stakeholders is critical to fast-track aviation’s trajectory towards a more sustainable future.”

The sheer volume of energy needed to power the emerging generation of novel propulsion aircraft is identified by WEF as a key challenge in the transition to zero-emission commercial flights. Globally by 2050, it estimates alternative propulsion systems could need between 600 and 1,700 terrawatt hours of clean energy, “which is equivalent to the energy generated by around 10 to 25 of the world’s largest wind farms, or a solar farm the size of Belgium.”

As well, to power alternative propulsion aircraft, the WEF report says airports will need to massively increase their on-site energy use, with battery-electric and hydrogen-powered fleets each needing their own energy infrastructure. “For an airport that is a large hub looking to invest in on-site hydrogen liquefaction and charging for battery-electric powered aircraft, total on-site electricity consumption for terminals, ground support and other uses could be between 1,250 and 2,450 gigawatt hours per year, which is about five to 10 times more electricity than London Heathrow currently consumes.”

Producing new power would also present a major challenge, for while most airports would have room to develop hydrogen liquefaction and storage infrastructure, they would have nowhere near enough land for infrastructure to generate the clean energy required to power battery-electric or hydrogen aircraft.

“While airports have been touted as possible energy hubs, the scale of energy demand for alternative propulsion will make it extremely difficult to perform all energy production at airports,” says the report. “If Paris Charles De Gaulle Airport is used as an example of a major international hub, it would require approximately 5,800 hectares of solar panels to generate sufficient electricity to meet its demands under the Mission Possible Partnership’s prudent scenario. This far exceeds the size of the airport itself, which now occupies 3,300 hectares.”

The report says transition to novel propulsion aircraft would require capital investment of between $700 billion and $1.7 trillion by 2050, around 90% of which would be for off-airport infrastructure, mainly to generate power and for hydrogen electrolysis and liquefaction. On-airport infrastructure, which comprises the remaining 10%, will total “a more modest” $66 billion to $114 billion by 2050.

“Capital expenditures in green power generation for aviation alone would double the current projections for global airport capital infrastructures, $1.68 trillion by 2040 at $84 billion per year,” it calculates. “This makes it almost certain that aviation players will need to form partnerships with companies in other industries, such as energy providers and those in hydrogen-consuming industries, to secure the required investment.

“The investments needed to meet 2050 alternative-propulsion-related infrastructure goals must start now. The first elements of on-airport infrastructure must be in place by 2025 to meet the expected energy demand.”

The report’s authors also say operators of alternative propulsion should expect to pay between 76% and 86% more than the market price for renewable electricity, pricing which reflects additional costs of operating aviation infrastructure. READ MORE