It's not necessary to be a perpetual pessimist to fear that it will be nearly impossible to make the aviation industry climate-neutral in the short or medium term. Technological breakthroughs like solar-powered planes or electric aircraft are not expected anytime soon. Progress in the production of sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) is slow. The situation is further exacerbated by the fact that air travel is on the rise again after the pandemic, leading to increased emissions.

German politicians have recently reiterated its support. Chancellor Olaf Scholz emphasized at the National Aviation Summit in Hamburg that transitioning to sustainable flying must not come at the expense of European airports and airlines. However, protecting domestic companies is hardly possible when national regulations primarily determine how and when to move towards sustainability. The EU's plans under the climate protection package "Fit for 55," for instance, set guidelines for the use of sustainable aviation fuel, leaving the rest of the industry largely unaffected. Consequently, air traffic might shift from Europe to the Middle East or Turkey, harming both the European industry and the environment due to longer routes and higher emissions.

It is now globally recognized that using synthetic fuels derived from renewable energy sources is the most effective way to decarbonize aviation. Nonetheless, the green electricity needed for production is not readily available, and neither are the facilities for industrial-scale production. According to Lufthansa, the airline would require half of Germany's entire electricity production to switch its fleet to green fuels like e-kerosene. With the current global SAF supply, the German airline could sustain its operations for a mere two weeks. Statements like those from the German Federal Minister for Economic Affairs, suggesting that the growth of SAF could benefit the German engineering sector and innovation, are of little help without concrete actions to follow.

Moreover, there is a lack of financial resources to boost SAF production to an industrial level. Without substantial capital provided by banks and investors, this endeavor will not succeed. While there might be interest in financing such endeavours, the existing uncertainties are too significant for the financial sector to engage. Evaluating the risks of such an investment is nearly impossible because it's unclear how the price of green kerosene, currently six to eight times more expensive than conventional aviation fuel, will evolve. State support mechanisms are also only sporadically available. Given this context, significant oil producers are hesitant to diversify towards green kerosene as well.

Experts predict that the global aviation industry's fuel demand will increase from the current 400 billion liters of kerosene to 500 billion liters by 2050. If, as planned in Europe, over 60% of this is supposed to be sustainable fuel, around 300 billion liters of the rare commodity must be produced by then. In comparison, approximately 300 million liters were produced in 2022. To establish the necessary facilities, investments of several trillion dollars might be necessary. The government can't really provide this funding. However, it can create incentives — for airlines to use more SAF and for potential producers to manufacture more green jet fuel. The Inflation Reduction Act in the US, which promises tax benefits for SAF, is a step in the right direction. Although it's just a small step, the earnings from the German aviation tax should support the promotion of SAF production.