To achieve the emission mitigation and decarbonization goals, future aviation requires alternative sustainable fuels. Synthetic paraffinic kerosene, generated by Fischer-Tropsch synthesis, is certified as a drop-in jet fuel up to 50%. Potential fuel production routes are via conversion of biomass (Biomass-to-Liquid, BtL), the combination of renewable power and biomass (Power-and-Biomass-to-Liquid, PBtL) and the conversion of carbon dioxide with hydrogen from renewable power (Power-to-Liquid, PtL). In order to compare the three different production routes, an Aspen Plus^® model is designed for each production path and techno-economically assessed for an assumed capacity of 11 Mg h⁻¹ fuel production (equals 90 Gg·a⁻¹ plant capacity). Even though the BtL route allows the lowest net production costs, it has some drawbacks compared to PBtL and PtL. Especially the low H to C ratio of biomass leads to limited fuel yields in the BtL process. These yields can be increased by a factor of about 3 when conducting the PBtL process with the same biomass input instead of BtL. The highest X-to-Liquid efficiency based on power input and energy in feedstock is found for PBtL (51.4%) followed by PtL (50.6%) and BtL (36.3%). For BtL 73% of the introduced carbon is lost as CO₂. The total investment costs are highest for BtL, followed by PBtL and PtL. The net production costs are in the reverse order. The cost analysis reveals total PBtL investment costs of 742 M€ and net production costs of around 3 €·kg⁻¹ with an electricity price of 105 €·MWh⁻¹. The costs for electrolyzer and gasifier represent the largest shares of the total capital costs. As the net production costs are dominated for the electricity costs, low electricity prices and high capacities are advantageous for PBtL, while high electricity and low biomass costs favor BtL concept.

为了实现减排和脱碳的目标，未来的航空需要替代性可持续燃料。费-托合成产生的合成石蜡煤油经认证可作为高达50％的直接喷射式喷气燃料。潜在的燃料生产途径是通过生物质的转化（生物质转化为液体，BtL），可再生能源和生物质的组合（电力和生物质转化为液体，PBtL）以及将二氧化碳与可再生能源中的氢气转化为二氧化碳（液化功率，PtL）。为了比较三种不同的生产途径，一个Aspen Plus软件^®模型被设计用于每个生产路径和技术-经济评估11的Mg H的假定容量^-1燃料生产（等于90千兆克·一^-1工厂产能）。尽管BtL路线允许最低的净生产成本，但与PBtL和PtL相比，它还是有一些缺点。尤其是生物质的低H / C比导致BtL过程中有限的燃料收率。当使用相同的生物量输入而不是BtL进行PBtL过程时，这些产量可以提高大约3倍。PBtL（51.4％），进料量（50.6％）和BtL（36.3％）是基于进料功率和原料能量的最高X-to-liquid效率。对于BtL，引入的碳有73％作为CO ₂损失。BtL的总投资成本最高，其次是PBtL和PtL。净生产成本是相反的顺序。成本分析显示，PBtL的总投资成本为7.42亿欧元，净生产成本约为3€·kg ^-1电价为105€·MWh ^-1。电解器和气化器的成本占总资本成本的最大份额。由于净生产成本以电费为主，因此低电价和高容量对PBtL有利，而高电费和低生物质成本则有利于BtL概念。