“Beware the Green Smoke Screen:” IPS Report Finds Flaws with MA Sustainable Aviation Fuel Workgroup Recommendations

Boston, MA – A new report that focuses on state-specific findings, “Barriers to Implementing Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF) in Massachusetts,” published by the Institute for Policy Studies, takes issue with the MA SAF Workgroup report released in May 2025.

In May 2025, the MA SAF ad-hoc Workgroup released their “Recommendations to the Governor on Accelerating the Adoption of Sustainable Aviation Fuels in Massachusetts and New England.”

Massport, convenor of the Workgroup, is advancing a vision of the Commonwealth becoming a hub for production of sustainable aviation fuels (SAFs). They are pressing the legislature to allocate funds for tax credits and other state subsidies for SAF research and production. 

The Commonwealth has made meaningful commitments for greenhouse gas (GHG) reductions and a transition to renewable energy.  This new report analyzes the “Recommendations” of the MA SAF Workgroup, reviewing the best available science to determine the feasibility, affordability, energy requirements, and timetable regarding implementation of SAF technologies, considering these commitments. 

“The MA SAF Workgroup’s recommendations risk engulfing the Statehouse and the Commonwealth’s taxpayers in a thick green smokescreen,” said Chuck Collins, report co-author and researcher at the Institute for Policy Studies. “No one wants to talk about the trade-offs if we invest billions in attempting to reduce aviation emissions and divert the limited amount of renewable energy resources to aviation e-fuels.”

Key Findings: 

• Massachusetts has ambitious plans to reduce GHG emissions while aviation emissions continue to grow.  As the Commonwealth reduces GHG emissions in many sectors, aviation emissions continue to rise.  For example, we found:
  • The CO₂ emissions from jet fuel consumed in the Commonwealth today are 5.9 megatons per year and growing, while the City of Boston’s emissions today (all sources except aviation) are 6.0 megatons per year and falling. The technical options to address aviation emissions by 2050 are limited.
• The possibility of e-fuel technologies is not realistic because the huge diversion of clean energy to e-fuel production will increase GHG emissions and be prohibitively expensive.
  • CO₂ emissions are five times lower if we direct new clean electricity to the grid to displace natural gas, instead of using it to create e-fuel SAF. In other words, a switch by Massachusetts to e-fuel based on grid electricity would save 5.9 MT of fossil jet emissions but add 21 MT of grid emissions, for a net increase of 15.1MT of CO₂ per year.
  • To displace current fossil jet fuel use with e-fuel in Massachusetts would require annual subsidies of $2.9 billion to $16.5 billion. This is 2 to 12 times the entire annual Massachusetts Transportation budget of $1.37 billion.
• The magnitude of electrical power required to produce e-fuel to meet Massachusetts aviation requirements is much more than the Commonwealth generates today.
• In relation to biogenic fuel options, our report confirms the assertion of the MA SAF Workgroup that land use for crop-based fuels would compromise food security and lead to resulting deforestation with attending reductions in CO2 sequestration.  Inexplicably, the Workgroup Recommendations fail to exclude proposed subsidies for this pathway.

• Technical options to reduce aviation emissions by 2050 are limited: electric aircraft will only address a fraction of short-haul flights.

• SAF solutions will not be available at scale on a timetable that will have any significant benefit to the 2050 Massachusetts GHG plan.  
• Any of the SAF production scenarios would require massive taxpayer subsidies.

In May 2024, IPS published a report, Sustainable Alternatives to Jet Fuels: Promising Solution or Industry Hype? and shared the findings with MassPort. MassPort did not invite independent researchers to participate in the MA SAF Working Group, including those who had raised legitimate scientific questions about the feasibility of different SAF technologies.  Many of them provided valuable review of this paper.

“A powerful private aviation industry, including the lobby for private jet operators and producers, has pushed SAFs to justify immediate expansion of aviation infrastructure,” said Collins.  “The job of Massport is to do no harm –and protect the taxpayer’s wallet.”

Read the full report: https://ips-dc.org/report-barriers-to-implementing-sustainable-aviation-fuel/ 

Contact:
Chuck Collins, chuck@ips-dc.org

Resources:

MA SAF Working Group, “Recommendations to the Governor on Accelerating the Adoption of Sustainable Aviation Fuels in Massachusetts and New England,” May 2025. https://www.massport.com/sites/default/files/2025-07/MA-State-SAF-Workgroup-Report.pdf

Jon Chesto, Massport pushing to make the state a hub for sustainable aviation fuels, The Boston Globe, June 5, 2025. https://www.bostonglobe.com/2025/06/05/business/massport-sustainable-aviation-fuels/

###