Session Submission Summary
Share...

Direct link:

Policy Pathways in Energy and Aviation Transitions

Saturday, November 15, 1:45 to 3:15pm, Property: Hyatt Regency Seattle, Floor: 5th Floor, Room: 508 - Tahuya

Session Submission Type: Panel

Abstract

As climate change intensifies, the urgency for decarbonization across key sectors demands policy designs that are not only effective but also adaptive, regionally sensitive, and equitable. This panel brings together four papers that explore how collaborative governance, targeted incentives, and institutional learning can support large-scale decarbonization across critical sectors, including aviation, clean energy technologies, and offshore wind. Through techno-economic modeling, public perception analysis, comparative abatement costing, and institutional learning frameworks, the papers highlight how targeted, context-specific interventions can enhance policy effectiveness. Together, they offer insights for designing adaptive policy mixes that reflect regional strengths, respond to public concerns, and support collaborative climate action.


The first paper investigates the regional economic feasibility of sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) production amid post-pandemic recovery and global climate mandates such as CORSIA. While SAF can cut emissions by up to 94%, cost and infrastructure barriers persist. This study enhances the ASCENT techno-economic model by incorporating regional variation in feedstock prices, energy costs, and policy conditions across major aviation hubs. By comparing the minimum selling prices of SAF pathways—HEFA, Fischer-Tropsch, and alcohol-to-jet—the paper identifies feedstock cost as the dominant driver. Findings emphasize the importance of region-specific incentives, such as production tax credits and feedstock subsidies, to support SAF deployment.


The second paper examines how public attitudes toward hydrogen energy and carbon capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS) may influence the equitable deployment of these technologies. Using a mixed-methods approach, the authors analyze a 4,000-person nationally representative survey to assess public perceptions, particularly around local impacts and environmental justice. A survey experiment tests how message framing affects support. Preliminary findings show moderate positivity, tempered by economic and equity concerns. The study offers recommendations for building trust and public engagement to support inclusive low-carbon innovation.


The third paper compares long-term abatement costs of two aviation decarbonization strategies: direct air capture and carbon storage (DACCS) versus synthetic fuels derived from DAC. Incorporating non-CO₂ effects like contrails and nitrogen oxides, the authors find DACCS is more cost-effective for CO₂-only targets, while synthetic fuels become more competitive when broader climate impacts are included. The paper suggests that strategies like contrail avoidance can improve DACCS’s relative advantage, highlighting the need for comprehensive metrics in policy design.


The fourth paper analyzes how six U.S. East Coast states have adapted offshore wind (OSW) procurement processes in response to economic shocks and project setbacks from 2018–2024. Using content analysis of 16 solicitations, the study applies an institutional learning framework to examine policy changes—such as inflation indexing and contract restructuring—aimed at mitigating risk and improving long-term viability. It offers lessons for building resilient procurement strategies in emerging energy sectors.



Together, these papers demonstrate the importance of aligning economic analysis, public engagement, and institutional adaptability in climate policy. This panel underscores the need for multidimensional approaches that are regionally grounded, socially responsive, and capable of learning over time.

Policy Area

Secondary Policy Area

Chair

Discussant

Organizer

Individual Presentations