Vitesco Technologies signs $1.9B SiC long-term supply agreement with onsemi; investing $250M in SiC capacity expansion
Study finds shortage of critical metals could put the brakes on electrification in Europe

T&E study: Europe’s growing use of animal fats in fuels is becoming increasingly unsustainable; 8,800 dead pigs for Paris-NY flight

Europe’s growing use of animal fats to power its cars and planes is becoming increasingly unsustainable, according to a new study by Cerulogy funded by European NGO Transport & Environment (T&E). The green group calls for greater transparency so that consumers know what is going into their tanks and fueling their flights.

Use of animal fat biodiesel has doubled in the past decade and is 40 times higher than it was in 2006. Demand for animal fats in biofuels is also projected to triple by 2030 compared to 2021 according to data collected by T&E from Stratas Advisors.

European lawmakers have been promoting the by-product of industrial meat farming as a way of reducing the carbon impact of transport fuels.They are now setting their sights on planes and to a lesser extent ships. However, there is not enough fat to go around.

Nearly half of all European animal fats already go into biodiesel, despite being used extensively in the pet food, soaps and cosmetics industries. With the burning of animal fat biofuels set to triple by 2030, there will not be enough to scale it up sustainably, warns T&E.

Airlines such as Ryanair and Wizz Air have recently struck large deals with oil suppliers for what are termed ‘sustainable aviation fuels’ (SAF). Details of the exact feedstocks used in SAFs are often vague. But projections obtained from Stratas Advisors, a consultancy, shows that animal fats are expected to be the most common waste feedstock used in SAFs, alongside used cooking oil. Like all waste biofuels, the availability of animal fats is limited. Scaling up industrial meat farming is neither doable nor desirable. A flight from Paris to New York needs 8,800 dead pigs, T&E’s calculations show. Applying the current 50% maximum blend of HEFA that can be certified, 4,400 dead pigs per flight would alternatively be needed.

This is particularly problematic for the pet food and soap and cosmetic industries who use animal fats extensively with few or no alternatives. Pet food makers have already warned that they will have to switch to “less sustainable options” such as palm oil, while soap and cosmetic producers will also most likely switch to palm as it is the cheapest option available.

In the most extreme case, where virgin palm oil substitutes animal fats in the oleochemicals industry (soaps, cosmetics), CO2 emissions of animal fats biofuels could be nearly twice as bad for the climate asconventional diesel.

The competing uses for animal fats lay bare the challenge of scaling up waste biofuels production. Animal fats don’t grow on trees. Pet food suppliers, for example, will now have to reduce the sustainability of their products by using palm oil instead. And as we have seen with used cooking oil, this also increases the risk of fraud. The potential mislabelling of animal fats suggests fraud could be taking place on an industrial scale.

—Barbara Smailagic, Fuels Policy Officer at T&E

Animal fats are divided into three categories. Categories 1 and 2 include animal fats that cannot be consumed by humans or animals, as they are poor quality or likely carry disease. These are normally only used in transport fuels and for heating. Category 3 animal fats are better quality and are used by a number of different industries.

The EU’s Renewable Energy Directive (RED) encourages the production of animal fats for transport fuels by allowing fuel suppliers to meet renewables targets with them. The RED prioritizes categories 1 and 2 for transport fuels by allowing them to count for double in meeting targets.


Animal fats consumption for biodiesel in the EU (SHARES and EFPRA data). Source: T&E

Last year, European countries reported consuming twice the amount of biofuels derived from the categories 1 and 2 as the animal fats industry reported producing. This suggests higher-grade category 3 animal fats are being mislabeled as categories 1 and 2, T&E said. As these animal fats are more valuable in transport fuels, there is a risk that producers and suppliers downgrade high quality animal fats to meet renewable transport targets. If this is being done deliberately it would represent fraud at an industrial level, warns T&E.


Illustration of potential animal fats fraud case. Source: T&E

T&E suggests the following recommendations to EU decision-makers and national authorities:

  • National authorities must cap the categories 1 and 2 to avoid further increase at national level, for example at their 2020 levels. Moreover, they should not deviate from the limit of 1.7% applied on biofuels part B of Annex IX - that includes animal fats category 1 and 2 and UCO. National authorities must exclude animal fats category 3 from the list of eligible biofuels in the national biofuels schemes.

  • The national authorities must also ensure that the limit and restrictions apply across all transport sectors, including aviation and shipping. ReFuel EU and Fuel EU maritime should not lead to even more demand for biofuels from animal fats or Used Cooking Oil. To ensure this, animal fats category 3 should be excluded from these Regulations (de facto there should be no incentives for their use) and the limit set on categories 1 and 2 in the RED should effectively apply.

  • The European Commission must investigate the potential risk of fraud in relation to the increased demand for animal fats for biofuels in the EU, derived from the existence of a differentiated policy treatment for the different categories of animal fats 1, 2 and 3.

  • The European Commission and national authorities must provide transparent and accessible numbers about the different types and quantities of animal fats used in biofuels, per fuel suppliers, as requested by the RED.

  • The European Commission and national authorities should ensure that the auditing systems put in place to prevent fraud are truly independent and robust. This should not be left to economic operators but instead should be a process that is overseen by an independent EU or national authority. It is also crucial that economic operators follow the correct classification of animal fats in their reporting and that sanctions are applied if that is not the case.



A dumb idea took flight.


You would hardly expect to fly NY - Paris with 8800 live pigs, now would you.
Using up excess animal fats in SAF is fine, you may as well do something with it. Creating extra animal fat beyond what is already generated is a crazy idea. As is using palm oil where we used to use animal fats for pet food, soap, etc.
Best just use fossil fuels and pay the carbon tax (while waiting for Hydrogen or a miracle (i.e. another breakthrough)).


@ mahonj:
In my personal opinion, (green) hydrogen is nothing more than a scam; it's highly inefficient, completely uneconomical, difficult to handle and extremely volatile. Better off, waiting for a miracle.


Animal fat will be a low carbon fuel when pigs fly.


Stupid "study". Pigs are going to be turned into bacon whether you fly or not. This is similar to BP's “carbon footprint" scam.

Carbon footprint was invented by the oil industry


The problem is that there is only so much animal fat available from food production waste. These pigs are already being turned into bacon - fair enough.
But there is nothing like enough animal fats to power global aviation, so we have a problem. A further problem is that we were already using animal fats for other things (soap, pet foods) so those industries will have to look elsewhere for fats.
It is also rather tragic that when pigs finally do fly, they either fly as a component of the fuel, or as ham sandwiches on board, not even in the hold as pets or mascots.


This is pork barrel politics!
Even more dumb than ethanol from corn, which uses huge imputs of water, fertiliser etc.

I've nothing against SAF, but from this sort of source in any volume?


If the price of pork fat went high enough, You could imagine that "they" would breed for fatter pigs to get a higher body weight % of fat.
(My understanding is that now they breed for lean meat, assuming that meat is more valuable than fat.)
Once you do that, there must be a better way of getting the raw materials directly from plants (Ideally not palm oil).

What you need is a domestic "fat reactor" which enables people to save and either sell or use their own pork (or any meat) fat.

In my house, when I was small, we used to burn most of our waste in a stove, but now it goes into 1 of 3 bins (and the air is a lot cleaner).

(Makes a change from talking about batteries)


Hi Jim.

I have just discovered a brand new ( to me ) energy vector which I did not even know existed.

Apparently you can burn metals, and in the case of iron at least, no CO2 is released, with the iron ( which becomes rust ) recyclable back to iron.

They already have it up and running:

' A demonstration plant is already up and running in Budel, near Eindhoven, The Netherlands, using iron as its fuel source this generator can produce 1 MW of steam in a unit that stands in a warehouse. '

They say that the energy density is around that of petrol etc, so very theoretically it could even power cars etc!

I'll believe that when I see them, but it seems that it may be a practical carbon free energy source for industrial and utility scale power without carbon emissions,

Iron is easy to ship about, but I have no idea what the round trip efficiency and so on is.


Using animals killed for fuel is the worst crime a civilisation can commit. Civilisations or western ways of life cant survive such crimes.


I always ask you to pay attention to why T&E has these studies done against the mobility of ordinary citizens.

As we know, millions of gallons of kerosene are wasted every day by the militaries worldwide for stupid wars! T&E probably doesn't know yet that civil aircraft are already flying with H2 and regular HVO fuel can also be used for aircraft.

So this "animal killing panic ala PETA" by T&E is wanted to ban private travel! Politicians, populists and the military fly with 100% fossil kerosene. Also note that NH3 is said to be environmentally friendly as a fuel!

H2, i.e. hydrogen, HVO and e-fuels, are repeatedly rated negatively by affine BEV fans. I would even say that T&E is a political association that denies mobility to us citizens!

The comments to this entry are closed.