Decarbonisation Technology November 2025 Issue

November 2025 Decarbonisati n Technolo gy Powering the Transition to Sustainable Fuels & Energy May 2023

Powering the Transition to Sustainable Fuels & Energy

CIRCULAR CARBON ECONOMY RENEWABLE HYDROGEN & HYDROGEN SAFETY

IMPROVING PROJECT BANKABILITY DECARBONISATION OF REFINING VALUE CHAINS

HYDROGEN INSIGHTS SUSTAINABLE AVIATION AND MARINE FUELS

DECARBONISING GAS NETWORKS UTILISATION OF CAPTURED CARBON

UPDATE YOUR SUBSCRIPTION REGISTER FOR A PRINT OR DIGITAL ISSUE TO RECEIVE A REGULAR ISSUE OF DECARBONISATION TECHNOLOGY ANY QUESTIONS? REGISTER CONTACT US CLICK HERE

Contents

November 2025

How hydrogen is quietly maturing into reality Özlem Duyan Hydrogen Council

One hundred years of Fischer-Tropsch: Part 1 Dan Carter, Richard Pearson, and Andrew Coe Johnson Matthey James Paterson bp

Making FOAK energy projects bankable in an uncertain market Jacqui Allen Wood

Waste carbon is key to scaling sustainable fuels Freya Burton LanzaTech

From CO 2 to jet fuel: success of the consortium model Isobel Thomas-Horton CNF Energy

Crossing the advanced waste gasification valley of death Amna Bezanty

Unlocking the carbon economy: from extraction to utilisation Vahide Nuran Mutlu, Bilal Guliyev, and Başak Tuncer SOCAR Türkiye Research & Development and Innovation Inc.

Circular solutions to shape industrial sustainability Cécile Plain Axens

Clean power 2030: why green gases will be key to success Orlando Minervino Xoserve

Securing the minerals that power the energy transition Shqipe Neziri Vela and Sebastian Sahla

Decarbonisation through innovation Zwick’s Sealed Bearing reduces emissions with zero-leakage design

© 2025. The entire content of this publication is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means – electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise – without the prior permission of the copyright owner. The opinions and views expressed by the authors in this publication are not necessarily those of the editor or publisher and while every care has been taken in the preparation of all material included the publisher cannot be held responsible for any statements, opinions or views or for any inaccuracies.

www.decarbonisationtechnology.com

Prepare for Takeoff

Find out more

A Safe Flight Toward Decarbonization Axens has developed extensive knowhow and industrial experience in the renewables field and now offers a complete portfolio for the transition to the bioeconomy, including several Sustainable Aviation Fuels pathways. www.axens.net

axens.net

In this issue, we celebrate companies that are helping to progress the energy transition. These range from established companies that are adapting existing conversion processes to incorporate renewable feedstocks and lower the carbon intensity of our fuels and chemicals, to start-ups progressing along tortuous pathways to bring new processes and technologies to market. We need both approaches for a successful energy transition. In 2025, we can celebrate 100 years of the Fischer-Tropsch (FT) process. The FT process was originally commercialised to convert coal into liquid fuels, first in Germany, then South Africa, and more recently in China. Applications were then successfully extended to (natural) gas-to-liquids (GTL) with the bp plant in Alaska, Shell Bintulu in Malaysia, and the Pearl GTL unit in Qatar. The application window for the FT process is now being extended further, using captured carbon dioxide to synthesise sustainable fuels and chemicals. It is important to recognise and celebrate other innovative approaches, such as LanzaTech’s gas fermentation process, which uses microbes to convert waste carbon dioxide streams into ethanol and then synthesise sustainable aviation fuels. This is a new application of possibly the world’s oldest commercial chemical process. On a more sober note, DNV has just released its Global Energy Transition Outlook 2025 . In its latest forecast, DNV considers the current trajectory of the energy transition means we are unlikely to reach net-zero carbon emissions until 2060. Up to this point, DNV, consistent with other credible agencies such as the International Energy Agency (IEA), had considered net zero by 2050 to be feasible, provided there was an immediate, massive increase in investment. It is highly likely that we will overshoot the 2ºC target in the next decade, making carbon withdrawals essential (as recognised by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [IPCC]). Innovative applications that utilise captured carbon may yet help restore a healthy equilibrium in the Earth’s carbon cycle. In the next decade, we can anticipate accelerated investment in renewable hydrogen and its derivatives as First-of-a-Kind (FOAK) plants demonstrate commercial readiness across a range of technologies. Government initiatives, in the form of targets and mandates, that support the scale-up of capacity for renewable hydrogen and its derivatives, particularly e-fuels, will be essential. Technology companies, from R&D start-ups through to global multinational engineering and energy majors, all have a role, and we will continue to recognise progress and celebrate success whenever we can.

Managing Editor Rachel Storry

rachel.storry@emap.com tel +44 (0)7786 136440 Consulting Editor

Robin Nelson robin.nelson@ decarbonisationtechnology.com Editorial Assistant Lisa Harrison lisa.harrison@emap.com Graphics Peter Harper Business Development Director Paul Mason info@decarbonisationtechnology.com

tel +44 844 5888 771 Business Development Luke Massingham Luke.Massingham@ petroleumtechnology.com Managing Director Richard Watts richard.watts@emap.com

EMAP, 10th Floor Southern House Wellesley Grove, Croydon CR0 1XG

Cover Story ArcelorMittal Steelanol Facility using LanzaTech technology Photo Credit: Bjorn Heijstra, LanzaTech

Dr Robin Nelson

www.decarbonisationtechnology.com

The world’s energy system is changing. To solve the challenges, Shell Catalysts & Technologies is developing its Decarbonisation Solutions portfolio to provide integrated value chains of technologies to help industries navigate the energy transition. Our experienced teams of consultants and engineers draw on Shell’s owner–operator– licensor expertise to co-create pathways and technology solutions to address your specific decarbonisation ambitions – creating a cleaner way forward together. Learn more at shell.com/decarbonisation. Accelerating decarbonisation solutions together

How hydrogen is quietly maturing into reality

Key findings from the Global Hydrogen Compass 2025 report, combining industry data, insights from CEO leaders, and lessons learned from hydrogen projects

Özlem Duyan Hydrogen Council

L ike the turning of the ocean tide, yet behind the surface, a far more important story is unfolding: one of industrial maturity, global collaboration, and continued progress. Just as wind and solar went through early ebbs and flows before reaching scale, hydrogen is aso navigating its own cycle of trial, consolidation, and growth. Not every project will reach the shore, and this is a normal part of industrial evolution. However, those that do will set the course for the next decade of clean energy transformation. They are proving that hydrogen is moving into the build-out phase, establishing the foundations for scale, cost reduction, and long-term competitiveness. hydrogen’s progress advances in waves – sometimes barely visible from the shore, The first wave takes shape The Hydrogen Council’s latest report, Global Hydrogen Compass , tracks this evolution across the globe ( Hydrogen Council, 2025 ). Drawing from a comprehensive dataset and direct perspectives of more than 70 CEOs and industry leaders, we see a sector progressing steadily from ambition to execution. Globally, more than 1,700 clean hydrogen projects have been announced across the value chain. Of these, 510 projects have advanced past final investment decision (FID), entered construction, or are already in operation, representing more than $110 billion in committed capital. That is a rise of $35 billion in just the past year, and a remarkable 50% average annual growth since 2020. Behind those numbers lies a clear signal:

hydrogen investment is not slowing down; it is maturing. The sector is beginning to deliver on the infrastructure, partnerships, and policy frameworks needed to transform early ambition into lasting impact. Lessons from attrition As it matures, every industry goes through a natural process of consolidation. In hydrogen, at least 50 projects have been publicly cancelled over the past 18 months, most of them early- stage renewable hydrogen ventures. About 38% of those cancellations were linked to policy and market uncertainty, while 27% stemmed from financing challenges. While such figures may appear discouraging at first glance, they actually reflect a healthy phase of industrial maturation and need to be read in the context of a natural pipeline shakeout. Similar patterns were seen in the early years of solar and wind, two sectors that also went through waves of adjustment before achieving scale. In each case, the pruning of projects with less competitive advantage paved the way for stronger, more competitive ones to advance. Without further action, some projects, including renewable hydrogen projects in the US, challenged by recent regulatory changes, and in Europe, impacted by relatively high power costs in some regions, could become at risk. As our conversations with CEOs revealed, this process of natural attrition is helping the sector focus its capital and effort where it can have the greatest near-term impact. Projects with strong fundamentals – credible offtake, access to infrastructure, and policy alignment – are moving forward. The result: fewer announcements, but

www.decarbonisationtechnology.com

to 85% of planned global low-carbon hydrogen production. However, the slow implementation of landmark regulations, such as the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), has led to proportional delays in projects dependent on these support mechanisms. Regulatory clarity on timelines and implementation will be critical. Developers are moving forward, but the speed of progress will depend on how quickly demand-side mechanisms and infrastructure align. Meanwhile, Europe continues to set important precedents in regulation and infrastructure planning. From the Renewable Energy Directive III (RED III) to the Hydrogen Bank and the European Hydrogen Backbone, the EU has built the most comprehensive regulatory and infrastructure framework in the world. However, it must ensure that this ambition translates into projects on the ground. Although the region accounts for nearly two-thirds of the expected 2030 global demand, it accounts for less than 20% of total committed investment today. This mismatch reflects the challenge of turning policy intent into projects on the ground and highlights the importance of clear, long-term demand signals to de-risk private investment. The message is clear: ambition sets direction, but certainty unlocks delivery. The supply foundation Hydrogen supply is already shifting from concept to capacity. As of 2025, the global project pipeline includes about 6 million tons per year (mtpa) of committed clean hydrogen capacity, of which 1 mtpa is already operational – a milestone largely driven by the rapid scale- up of electrolysis in China. This projected supply range reflects the potential of the current project pipeline through 2030. However, the actual volumes that materialise will depend on how much capacity secures firm, often policy-supported, offtake agreements. Without clear demand signals, production assets risk remaining underused or becoming stranded. Across conversations with CEOs, a consistent note of optimism emerged: once market demand strengthens, the existing supply pipeline will be ready to rise to the challenge. Yet, many emphasised that supply alone will not be enough to spark wider adoption. Our analysis

100

2020

2021

2022

2023

2024

2025

more credible execution. The hydrogen industry is entering its buildout phase, more disciplined and grounded in realism. China’s acceleration Nowhere is that momentum clearer than in China, a region that is deploying a hydrogen playbook reminiscent of its industrial strategies for solar, wind, and batteries, leading to rapid deployment of electrolytic hydrogen capacity. The country leads the world in total committed investments ($33 billion), boasts half of the global renewable hydrogen capacity, and leads in hydrogen vehicle deployment, with thousands of heavy-duty trucks and buses already on the road. Operational electrolysis capacity has grown sixfold since 2022, outpacing every other market. Most projects are financed, built, and consumed domestically, a self-reinforcing loop that ensures resilience and speed. When surveyed, 97% of CEOs agreed that China will remain one of the leading regions for hydrogen deployment, and nearly a third believe it could maintain its current leadership position in the years ahead. China’s model – build first, learn fast, scale relentlessly – carries lessons for others. It demonstrates that policy ambition, industrial coordination, and infrastructure readiness can combine to accelerate progress even in uncertain global conditions. North America and Europe’s diverging paths North America offers a different story. With $23 billion in committed investments, it is now the world’s second-largest hydrogen market, home Figure 1 Global cumulative committed (FID+) investment in clean hydrogen projects by 2030, $ billion. Source: Global Hydrogen Compass report (Hydrogen Council, 2025)

www.decarbonisationtechnology.com

reinforces this view. Our report shows that an estimated 9-14 m tpa of clean hydrogen supply could realistically come online by 2030; however, only around 8 m tpa of demand currently shows a policy-supported, positive business case. The demand challenge If the hydrogen supply chain provides the foundation for progress, demand is what sets it in motion. Without secure offtake agreements, even well-funded projects can struggle to move forward. As of 2025, around 3.6 mtpa of binding offtake agreements have been secured, covering around 60% of committed capacity. Most of this demand (70%) remains anchored in existing industrial uses, with refining and ammonia accounting for the bulk. Ammonia alone represents about 43% of total binding offtake, making it the single largest demand segment at present. Regional patterns are emerging. China and Europe lead on renewable hydrogen offtake, with China sourcing all volumes domestically. The US and Canada dominate low-carbon offtake, which is also primarily domestic. While the majority of existing capacity still serves domestic markets, early signs of an international market are taking shape; already 45% of Europe’s offtake is imported, signalling the first flows of cross-border hydrogen and derivatives. Up to 8 mtpa of clean hydrogen demand carries a positive business case under existing or announced policy frameworks, notably the EU’s RED III quotas and clean power mandates across East Asia, and could materialise by 2030. Achieving that outcome will depend on how effectively these mechanisms are implemented and on whether infrastructure can expand quickly enough to connect supply with demand. Infrastructure as catalyst Demand is now the single most critical factor determining how quickly the ecosystem will scale, with infrastructure deployment the next most important. Infrastructure readiness is the make-or-break factor in regional hydrogen competitiveness. It underpins costs, investor confidence, and market formation. For hydrogen to move into profitable, scalable deployment, demand and infrastructure

must advance together, de-risked by policy certainty and anchored in industrial clusters, until economies of scale bring costs down. Advancements in both new and existing infrastructure have expanded the geographic range of offtake, allowing it to occur at greater distances from production sites than in the past. Prior to 2021, offtake was predominantly co-located with production. Today, while international offtake markets are still developing, domestic offtake benefits from improved logistical and distribution infrastructure. An additional 13 mtpa could be unlocked by 2030 with the scale-up of enabling infrastructure. Expansion of midstream infrastructure to enable low-carbon supply for existing use cases is critical to address the cost gap with higher- emission alternatives for new end uses. Framework for success Lighthouse case stories from the first wave of clean hydrogen projects – 12 of which are included in the Global Hydrogen Compass report – can teach us valuable lessons on what it takes to succeed in hydrogen today. In our report, we identified six enabling factors that distinguish projects moving toward execution from those that remain stalled. These include:  Strategic location selection : connection to pipelines, storage, or hubs.  Capex and technology optimisation : efficient design, phased build-out, and local resource fit.  Cost and schedule optimisation : disciplined delivery and smart contracting.  Offtake and commercial strategy : credible offtake and end-use partnerships.  Policy landscape navigation : clear compliance and incentives.  Value chain collaboration : experienced teams and proven technology. While successful projects may not have to excel across every single dimension, we noticed that the common denominator among successful projects was the combination of a majority of the above enabling factors. The next wave: what will shape hydrogen’s expansion A convergence of trends across sectors will determine how the next wave of clean hydrogen

www.decarbonisationtechnology.com

hydrogen corridors. However, infrastructure investment depends on one essential condition: demand clarity. Binding targets, quotas, and mandates that underpin offtake contracts are indispensable to de-risk capital and attract financing. Without them, even regions with abundant, low-cost renewables may struggle to convert potential into investment. Ultimately, scale will come from a combination of market-enabling, technology-neutral policies, efficient project design, and a robust base of trade and transport infrastructure. Together, these elements can carry hydrogen from its current wave of demonstration to the sustained tide of commercial deployment. The road ahead The next two to five years will determine whether hydrogen’s first wave becomes a sustained tide. The foundations are strong: supply capacity is growing, projects are consolidating, and policies are advancing. But the balance between supply and demand remains delicate. To stay on course, the sector needs clarity on policy frameworks, timelines, and demand formation. Clear, stable, practical conditions enable capital to flow, infrastructure to form, and technology to scale. Without them, even regions rich in natural resources risk being left behind. Global Hydrogen Compass shows a sector that has moved beyond first ambitions into a more pragmatic phase focused on delivery. If the early 2020s were about announcements, the late 2020s are about execution. The pioneers of this first wave – those securing offtake, breaking ground, and building infrastructure – are defining how fast the second wave can rise. To succeed, the hydrogen industry must stay the course: anchor demand through credible, long-term frameworks, invest in connective infrastructure that reduces cost and risk, and adopt pragmatic, pathway-agnostic strategies to scale. VIEW REFERENCES

deployment takes shape. Growth in end-use markets such as mobility, fertiliser, and maritime, coupled with the build-out of connective infrastructure and the implementation of new policies, will define the pace and direction of progress. In mobility, the first hydrogen ecosystems are now materialising with fleets, refuelling stations, and supply contracts aligned in early regional hubs. Yet large-scale rollout remains challenging: vehicles, refuelling infrastructure, and hydrogen supply must all develop in parallel, with utilisation rates high enough to keep costs competitive. In fertiliser and industrial feedstocks, demand for clean ammonia is advancing on the back of new policies. The EU Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) and Cross Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) are tightening the cost of carbon for both domestic and imported “ To stay on course, the sector needs clarity on policy frameworks, timelines, and demand formation. Clear, stable, practical conditions enable capital to flow, infrastructure to form, and technology to scale ” ammonia, strengthening the case for low- emissions options. In Japan and Korea, power sector auctions and contracts-for-difference are boosting co-firing with clean ammonia in coal plants, while governments in the US, China, and India are promoting production through distinct incentive frameworks. The maritime sector is emerging as an important frontier for hydrogen-derived fuels. The upcoming IMO decision on the Net-Zero Framework this month could become the defining inflection point for global shipping. It will set the regulatory basis for the industry that will shape demand for hydrogen-derived fuels, vessel technologies, and port infrastructure over the coming decades. Delivering this expansion requires midstream solutions that connect production with users. For long-distance transport, industry players are assessing opportunities to repurpose existing gas pipelines and build new dedicated

Özlem Duyan research@hydrogencouncil.com

www.decarbonisationtechnology.com

Where energies make tomorrow

With 55 years of proven expertise in ethylene plant design and delivery, we lead the way in energy efficiency and CO₂ reduction— creating a solid foundation for the future of decarbonization. We offer proven low-emission cracking furnace, engineered to highly improve fuel efficiency while significantly reducing CO₂ emissions in ethylene production. Powering Ethylene Decarbonization

Key Benefits: ∙ CO₂ emissions reduced by 20-30% through proven technology ∙ Maximized flexibility ∙ Reduced operational costs and boosted margins ∙ Ideal for expansion of existing assets or furnace revamps

Improve your ethylene production. Reduce your carbon footprint.

www.ten.com

Trust the security of your supply chain. Link up with a supplier who can provide alternatives that the others can’t.

Spherical Catalyst Carriers

EXCELLENT SIZE CONTROL WITH UNPRECEDENTED FORMULATION FLEXIBLITY

With Saint-Gobain NorPro, you can count on a secure supply of Accu® spheres catalyst carriers, custom-made to your requirements. We offer new materials as carriers that were not previously available: • Narrow size distribution • Excellent control to average particle size • Control of porosity • Alumina, silica, titania, zirconia, zeolite, and mixed oxides

For inquiries or product samples: www.norpro.saint-gobain/accuspheres

One hundred years of Fischer-Tropsch: Part 1

The Fischer-Tropsch process continues to evolve, driven by innovation in catalyst design, reactor engineering, and feedstock flexibility

Dan Carter, Richard Pearson, and Andrew Coe Johnson Matthey James Paterson bp

T he decarbonisation of the transportation sector, particularly in aviation and marine applications, is an important component of the global transition to net-zero emissions. Synthetic fuels derived from eligible feedstocks offer a viable pathway to reduce lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions while maintaining high energy density and performance (IATA, 2025 ). This two-part series presents the development and commercialisation of the FT CANS technology, a Fischer-Tropsch (FT) system co-developed by Johnson Matthey and bp. By integrating advanced catalyst design with a novel reactor architecture, FT CANS enables the scalable and efficient production of synthetic fuels from a variety of carbon sources. Introduction: transitioning transport to low-carbon fuels As global energy demand continues to rise, the need for renewable and sustainable energy sources becomes increasingly urgent. The European Union has raised its renewable energy target to 42.5% by 2030 ( European Commission, 2023 ), introduced its Fit for 55 package targeting emissions reductions of 55% by 2030 ( European Commission, 2021 ), while many countries plan to phase out internal combustion engine vehicles by 2040 or earlier ( ICCT, 2021 ). However, the transportation sector, particularly aviation and marine transport, remains one of the hardest to decarbonise due to its high energy density fuel requirements, which are not easy to substitute with current renewable technologies.

In the meantime, there is a real need for scalable fuel alternatives with reduced lifecycle carbon emissions. This includes continuous innovation and improvement in renewable fuel technologies to meet EU and global climate targets. For more than two decades, Johnson Matthey (JM) and bp have collaborated to develop an efficient reactor system and catalyst for the FT process ( Font Freide, Collins, Nay, & Sharp, 2007 ), ( Gamlin, Hensman, Nay, & Sharp, 2004 ). This technology offers an effective way to convert a wide range of carbon sources into high-quality, synthetic, liquid hydrocarbon fuels, supporting the transition to a low-carbon future. Unlocking carbon value from waste Currently, the world consumes approximately 60 million barrels of transportation fuel each day ( bp, 2024 ), mostly derived from crude oil. Each barrel contributes 350-400 kg of carbon dioxide (CO₂) ( US EIA, 2024 ) over its lifecycle, highlighting the urgent need for alternatives. Meanwhile, vast amounts of carbon-rich waste, such as municipal solid waste and residual woody biomass, are landfilled, incinerated, or left to decompose, with methane or CO being released into the atmosphere. These sources collectively emit billions of tonnes of CO₂ and methane annually ( Wang, et al., 2024 ). Rather than allowing this carbon to escape, it can be captured and converted into synthesis gas (syngas) through gasification, reforming, or CO₂ capture followed by reverse water gas shift (RWGS). This syngas can then be used to produce synthetic fuels, potentially reducing lifecycle CO 2 emissions by up to 80% and

www.decarbonisationtechnology.com

of sources, including coal, natural gas, municipal solid waste, and biomass. The FT process primarily yields long, linear paraffins, which are then upgraded through catalytic hydrocracking. This step breaks and rearranges the long chains into shorter, branched hydrocarbons suitable for use as diesel, kerosene, and other fuels.

n-Parans

Coal, natural gas

Catalyst design and process optimisation

CO H

CO → CO

Methane

‘e-fuels’

Support Cobalt

Water electrolysis (HO to H) Biomass, biowaste, biogas (CO/CH)

Municipal solid waste

Synthetic biofuels

Wax from FT reaction (clean, high quality product)

Figure 1 Typical FT commercial processes use a syngas feed from bio or fossil fuels and convert it to FT product.

even achieving net-negative emissions when combined with renewable electricity and carbon sequestration ( Blanshard & Gibson, 2023 ). Although biomass gasification is well- established, it has traditionally been used for power generation rather than chemical synthesis. FT synthesis, however, demands a precise hydrogen-to-carbon monoxide (H₂-to-CO) ratio and is sensitive to impurities. Syngas derived from biomass and wastes often contains contaminants that must be removed to protect catalyst performance and ensure high-purity fuel output ( Partington, Clarkson, Paterson, Sullivan, & Wilson, 2020 ). As a global leader in syngas purification and treatment, JM offers advanced solutions to condition syngas from any feedstock, enabling efficient conversion of these feedstocks into synthetic fuels ( Rowsell, et al., 2024 ). The Fischer-Tropsch process: from carbon to clean fuels The FT process, developed in 1925 by Franz Fischer and Hans Tropsch, celebrated its 100th anniversary in 2025. In enabling the conversion of carbon-based feedstocks into liquid hydrocarbons via syngas, this process ( Equation 1 ) forms the basis for producing synthetic fuels:

As shown in Figure 1 , FT synthesis is a multi-step process that transforms bio- or fossil-derived syngas into high-quality fuel products. These synthetic fuels offer a promising route to decarbonise sectors like aviation and heavy transport. Catalysts and reactor technologies Catalysts are essential to make the FT process industrially viable. Two main types are used ( Basu, 2018 ) ( van der Laan & Beenackers, 1999 ): • Cobalt-based catalysts: Preferred for high activity, selectivity toward paraffins, and long-term stability, while making a high-purity product. • Iron-based catalysts: Less expensive and capable of handling syngas with higher CO₂ content, but they produce a broader mix of olefins and paraffins. From syngas, these catalysts also have some water gas shift (WGS) activity, which can limit process efficiency, while CO₂ conversion often gives higher selectivities to lower-value products, which can be economically limiting. FT synthesis typically operates at 200-240°C and 20-40 bar. The reaction is highly exothermic, so efficient heat management is critical to reactor design. Pore diffusion and mass-transfer effects play a key role in FT catalyst performance due to the need for H₂ and CO to move into and along the catalyst pores against the movement of long-chain hydrocarbon molecules going the other way.

[2H₂ + CO]n + H₂  CH₃(CH₂)n-2CH₃ + nH₂O (Eq 1)

Syngas, a mixture of hydrogen (H₂) and carbon monoxide (CO), can be derived from a variety

www.decarbonisationtechnology.com

Reactor designs: fixed- bed vs slurry There are several benefits to using fixed-bed tubular reactors ( Dry, The Fischer- Tropsch Process: 1950- 2000, 2002 ) ( Dry, Practical and theoretical aspects of the catalytic Fischer- Tropsch process, 1996 ), which is why JM and bp have favoured this design. Fixed-bed tubular reactors are widely used. These reactors hold the catalyst in static beds, minimising catalyst loss and contamination. Their modular design allows for capacity expansion by adding more tubes, making

Figure 2 Nikiski demonstration plant

Courtesy of bp PLC

and catalyst longevity. A single catalyst charge operated for more than 7,000 hours, creating a high-quality dataset to underpin JM’s long catalyst life predictions, under operational conditions and without the need for regeneration. The integrated facility tested three core FT technologies: a novel compact reformer for syngas production, a fixed-bed FT reactor, and mild hydrocracking of FT waxes to yield synthetic crude. Originally, this reactor design aimed to monetise stranded natural gas in remote areas. However, it was only economically viable at large scales, above 30,000 barrels per day (~3,850 metric tonnes per day), and in regions with low gas prices and high oil prices. Recent interest in FT technology has shifted toward smaller-scale applications that convert municipal solid waste and cellulosic biomass into renewable fuels. To make this economically viable, JM and bp focused on reducing costs and improving process efficiency. In 2009, JM developed a novel catalyst carrier designed to fit inside tubular reactors, enabling the use of smaller catalyst particles. Simultaneously, bp created a second-generation (Gen2) FT catalyst with enhanced performance ( Peacock, et al., 2020 ). When combined, these innovations delivered a step change in FT synthesis efficiency and scalability (see Figure 3 ). The resulting FT CANS technology has received global recognition, including the IChemE Global

scale-up relatively simple. However, they require careful balancing of tube diameter and catalyst pellet size to manage heat and pressure drop effectively. Typical designs use thousands of 25 mm (1 inch) tubes filled with 1-2 mm catalyst pellets, which can limit mass/heat transfer, productivity, and selectivity. Slurry reactors , on the other hand, offer superior heat removal and use fine catalyst powders (tens of microns in diameter) to reduce diffusion limitations. However, they are more prone to catalyst attrition, which can lead to catalyst losses and compromised product purity and are generally more complex to scale up. Demonstrating industrial FT: The Nikiski Plant milestone Since 1996, JM and bp have collaborated to scale up FT synthesis for industrial use. The first major milestone was the construction of bp’s Nikiski demonstration plant in Alaska in 2002 (see Figure 2 ), which used a first-generation (Gen1) FT catalyst within a conventional tubular fixed- bed reactor ( Font Freide, et al., 2003 ). Designed to process natural gas, the plant produced approximately 300 barrels per day of synthetic crude. By the time it was decommissioned in 2009, it had surpassed all performance targets, including catalyst productivity, hydrocarbon selectivity, CO conversion, methane suppression,

www.decarbonisationtechnology.com

CANS catalyst carriers ( United States of America Patent No. US8906970 (B2), 2014 ), effectively forming a series of mini radial-flow reactors with interbed cooling. Syngas enters from above, flows down a porous central channel (A), and moves radially through the catalyst bed (B) where the FT reaction occurs. The gas then exits through a porous outer wall (C) and is cooled as it flows down the space between the carrier and the reactor wall, transferring heat to boiling water on the shell side (D). A seal ensures the gas flows into the next carrier, repeating the process (E) (see Figure 4 ).This design allows for: • Efficient heat transfer due to high gas velocity and radial flow. • Improved temperature control without quenching the reaction. • Use of wider tubes (75-100 mm) while maintaining low pressure drop. • Operation with >50% inerts , enabling high CO conversion (>90%) in a single stage recycle loop (see Figure 5 ). Performance and practical benefits Compared to conventional fixed-bed reactors, the CANS system: • Reduces the number of reactor tubes by 95%. • Cuts capital costs by ~50%. • Triples production capacity for the same reactor size. • Halves the catalyst volume required.

A step change in FT

Catalyst carriers

Gen 2

Reactor improvements

Catalyst improvements

Gen 1

100

150

200

250

300

350

C productivity (g/l/hr) +

Awards (2017), the Rushlight Clean Energy and Bioenergy Awards (2020) and the Gulf Energy Excellence Awards (2024), highlighting its potential to support the evolution of the synthetic fuels industry. A hybrid reactor design The FT CANS system merges the strengths of fixed-bed and slurry-phase reactors. Its modular design supports low-risk scale-up and straightforward operation, while the use of sub-millimetre catalyst particles boosts both productivity and selectivity. Each reactor tube contains 60-80 stacked Figure 3 Step change in FT performance through innovative catalyst and reactor technologies

Benets of FB and Slurry combined Pressure drop – bed length reduced by 85%

B C

Heat can be removed easier from exothermic reaction

L/70

Bed length L (10-15m)

∆P across 2-3m of catalyst (sum of black arrows, not red arrows) Improved heat transfer and controlled pressure drop over conventional tubes ∆P across 10-15m of catalyst

Figure 4 S chematic of the CANS catalyst carrier (left), and some of the operational benefits that are achieved (right), namely reduced pressure drop across the catalyst in the CANS carriers than the same catalyst in a conventional tube and improved heat transfer vs conventional fixed bed reactors, where the hottest point in the CANS carrier is adjacent to the cooling tube wall

www.decarbonisationtechnology.com

intensifies, the Fischer-Tropsch process continues to evolve, driven by innovation in catalyst design, reactor engineering, and feedstock flexibility. The development of FT CANS technology by Johnson Matthey and bp represents a significant leap forward in making synthetic fuel production more scalable and economically viable. In Part 2 of this article, we explore how this technology has been rigorously tested, scaled, and validated for commercial deployment, proving its performance under real-world conditions.

Recycle gas

Synthesis gas feed

O gas

Light hydrocarbon

Cooling & separation

Water separation

Water byproduct

CANS is a trademark of Johnson Matthey.

FT wax

VIEW REFERENCES

• Simplifies catalyst handling and replacement, eliminating the need for filtration. These advantages make FT synthesis viable at both small and large scales. A single reactor can produce up to 6,000 barrels per day (770 metric tonnes per day). As the global demand for sustainable fuels Figure 5 Schematic of advanced FT synthesis loop employing CANS catalyst carriers

Dan Carter dan.carter@matthey.com Richard Pearson richard.pearson@matthey.com Andrew Coe andrew.coe@matthey.com James Paterson James.Paterson@uk.bp.com

Decarbonization Through Electrification

Scan code to learn more

by Watlow

watlow.com

Hydrocabone Advert 178 x 125 mm (2025).indd 1

25/04/2025 10:24:26

www.decarbonisationtechnology.com

There’s nothing more deceptive than a foulant hiding in plain sight. At Crystaphase,we gather evidence and build an airtight case against

your reactor’s real culprit. Elementary? Hardly – this is data-driven deduction. That’s the Crystaphase Experience.

crystaphase.com

Making FOAK energy projects bankable in an uncertain market FOAK projects will always carry complexity; however, with the right frameworks, this can be transformed into clarity, thereby fostering trust among investors

Jacqui Allen Wood

The innovation imperative and the investment gap

and national security concerns are reshaping the energy project landscape. Techno-nationalism – the use of industrial policy, export controls, and domestic mandates to secure geopolitical and economic advantage – is becoming a defining force. Decarbonisation, once viewed primarily as an environmental or economic issue, is now framed as strategic competition. Many governments are reshoring supply chains, restricting exports, and directing incentives toward domestic production of critical technologies. This shift adds new layers of ambiguity to global markets. Leaders must now embed geopolitical awareness, supply chain foresight, and policy adaptability into their core strategies. Understanding how techno-nationalism intersects with decarbonisation is essential for managing risk, ensuring competitiveness, and securing long-term project viability. What is bankability? Bankability is the cumulative signal of readiness a project sends to investors, lenders, and

As industries targeted by climate policy, such as aviation, accelerate decarbonisation, first-of-a- kind (FOAK) projects are becoming increasingly critical. FOAK initiatives integrate emerging fuels, novel energy systems, and enabling technologies in unprecedented configurations. They aim to meet climate targets, advance clean industrial growth, and close the gap between innovation and deployment. Despite their strategic value, FOAK projects face persistent funding barriers. The absence of proven benchmarks, permitting clarity and mature supply chains, creates investor hesitation, compounded by uncertainty around policy alignment, integration complexity, feedstock logistics, and geopolitical volatility. Traditional frameworks for risk allocation and financial readiness are proving inadequate, especially as capital markets become more influenced by national industrial strategies. Hesitancy stems from unfamiliarity with technical configurations

and commercial structures. These

Tax credits, grants, permitting, and regulatory signals

Incentive & policy framework

unknowns raise doubts about whether projects can deliver at scale. As a result, many FOAK ventures stall, delayed by uncertainty around market offtake, technology readiness, and policy incentives. At the same time, climate imperatives

Ability to generate predictable revenue under current/future market conditions

Commercial viability

Technology maturity, scalability, EPC structure and construction/performance assurance

Technical & execution readiness

Proven ability to deliver, nance and de-risk complex projects

Developer experience & capital resilience

Bankable project

Figure 1 Key themes of project bankability

www.decarbonisationtechnology.com

institutional stakeholders. It reflects the project’s ability to withstand technical, financial, regulatory, and commercial scrutiny (see Figure 1 ). For FOAK decarbonisation initiatives, achieving bankability is both a milestone and a negotiation, balancing innovation with investor confidence. At its core, a bankable project aligns three interdependent pillars: financial viability, technical soundness, and investability. A shortfall in one area increases pressure on the others. Together, they enable structured risk allocation – a prerequisite for attracting capital in today’s risk-averse, policy-driven markets. Financial viability: can the project survive market stress? Financial viability means demonstrating the ability to generate predictable cash flows, service debt, and deliver returns under expected and adverse conditions. FOAK projects need robust financial models as well as scenario- tested stress testing to prove resilience against external shocks and operational uncertainties. The goal is not to eliminate uncertainty but to quantify and contain it within a range that investors can price. A financially viable project demonstrates: • Credible revenue forecasts anchored in validated offtake or market analyses. • Defensible cost assumptions based on vendor quotes, early-stage engineering estimates (Class 3-4, typically reflecting ±20-50% accuracy), and conservative contingencies. • Sensitivity-tested models showing impacts of fluctuating inputs, such as feedstock costs, carbon credit values, or energy tariffs on Internal Rate of Return (IRR) and Net Present Value (NPV). Technical soundness: is the risk manageable? Technical soundness addresses whether technology is reliable and executable. For FOAK projects, integration of individually proven components (such as gasifiers, electrolysers, and reactors) introduces significant execution risk. These technologies, while mature in isolation, have rarely been configured together in a single system. Each unit may perform as expected under standalone conditions, but when combined, interfaces can introduce untested dependencies. Without prior demonstration of

full system architecture, real-world performance can deviate from modelled expectations. Credibility depends on showing risks have been anticipated and mitigated through: • Testing and validation : pilot projects or bench-scale results under realistic conditions. • Independent technical review : third-party verification that the design complies with codes, standards and field data. • Contingency planning : fallback options or system redundancies for underperformance. • Track record of the delivery team : Engineering, procurement, and construction (EPC) contractors’ and project developers’ experience with similar complex projects. Investability: are project terms aligned with the capital market? Even promising technologies falter without the right structure. Investability measures whether project risk-return profiles meet capital market expectations, shaped by jurisdictional, regulatory, and structural elements. Investors look for: • Clear, enforceable contractual (offtake, interconnection, and leases). • Policy alignment with mandates such as ReFuelEU Aviation or the Renewable Energy Directive, which stabilise revenues and streamline permitting. • Sound capital structuring with layered financing, protections for early investors, and credit enhancements. • Transparent governance and permitting paths. The interplay of pillars No FOAK project excels across every dimension. Investors judge the holistic profile. Projects with limited technical precedent may still secure capital if supported by strong policy alignment and guaranteed offtake. Conversely, robust technical solutions in volatile jurisdictions may require credit enhancements. The objective is not perfection but a credible plan for identifying, allocating, and mitigating material risks. For example: • If technical risk is high, does the project have a government-backed offtake agreement or credit guarantee? • If returns are marginal, can policy incentives strengthen the capital stack?

www.decarbonisationtechnology.com

Feasibility FEL-1

PreFEED FEL-2

FEED FEL-3

Detailed Design FEL-4

Validate optimised scenario feasibility

Clarify scope, de-risk, project and tighten cost certainty

Finalise design, rene cost certainty

Produce build-ready engineering package

Goal

Estimate class

Class 4

Class 3

Class 2

Class 1

Deliverable maturity

1% to 15%

10% to 40%

30% to 75%

65% to 100%

Traditional model

Figure 2 Adapting project delivery for innovation: traditional model

• If execution risk is uncertain, is the EPC experienced in FOAK deployment? Reframing bankability in the era of techno-nationalism Geopolitical tensions and regulatory changes now shape flows of capital, technology, and critical materials. Projects once reliant on global supply chains must increasingly align with domestic agendas and constrained investment channels. In this context, bankability depends not only on technical merit or financial strength but on strategic alignment with national industrial goals. Innovation cannot scale unless delivery models anticipate risk, allocate it effectively, and build investor trust. Emerging pressures include: • Domestic content mandates are reshaping procurement strategies and supply chains by requiring projects to domestically source percentages of materials, components, or services to qualify for financial incentives or accelerated permitting. • Export controls and sanctions restricting access to critical technology. • Regulatory frameworks favouring projects aligned with national priorities, such as local workforce development, supply chain resilience, or emissions targets. For developers, this means accounting for shifting tax credit landscapes, cross-border compliance risks in offtake, and restrictions on foreign capital. Mechanisms like the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) in the US or EU screening regulations under RED III are raising new barriers, particularly in sectors deemed strategically sensitive, such as sustainable aviation fuel

(SAF), grid infrastructure, and battery storage. These sectors often intersect with national security, public subsidies, and critical technology domains, triggering heightened scrutiny of ownership, control, and foreign participation. Strategic alignment has become a condition precedent to funding. In today’s environment, investability encompasses not only risk and return, but national interest. A new approach to project delivery FOAK projects often default to traditional linear delivery models: Feasibility (FEL-1), pre-Front End Engineering Design (Pre-FEED or FEL-2), FEED (FEL-3), and Detailed Design (FEL-4) (see Figure 2 ). However, this progression assumes stability, precedent, and modularity – conditions FOAK projects rarely thrive under. Success depends on stage-by-stage rigour and how early decisions reflect interconnected technical, commercial, and policy risks. Conventional feasibility studies tend to isolate variables, evaluating technology selection or site selection separately from feedstock logistics, grid strategy, permitting, or policy incentives. This creates a false sense of certainty and pushes unresolved risks into later phases, where investors expect clarity. To avoid this, a dedicated Conceptual Phase (see Figure 3 ) is essential in serving as a structured pre-feasibility stage for scenario modelling, dynamic risk mapping, and early stakeholder alignment. Rather than treating the project as siloed parts, it frames it as a system where design, finance, policy, and supply chain decisions are interdependent from day one. The goal is to surface interdependencies, reveal overlooked risks, and establish system-level views.

www.decarbonisationtechnology.com

Produce build-ready engineering package Detailed Design FEL-4

Conceptual

Feasibility FEL-1

PreFEED FEL-2

FEED FEL-3

Clarify scope, de-risk, project and tighten cost certainty

Scenario modeling and optimisation

Validate optimised scenario feasibility

Finalise design, rene cost certainty

Goal

Estimate class

Class 4

Class 3

Class 2

Class 1

Class 5

65% to 100%

Deliverable maturity

0% to 2%

1% to 15%

10% to 40%

30% to 75%

Innovation-driven model

Figure 3 Adapting project delivery for innovation, including a Conceptual Phase

not scope alone, but the combination of variable technology maturity, complex regulatory dependencies, and extensive coordination required across engineering disciplines. This stage is about broadening possibilities. Teams explore multiple SAF pathways, such as HEFA, Methanol-to-Jet (MtJ), Alcohol-to-Jet (AtJ), or Fischer-Tropsch (FT), and map flows of feedstock, energy, carbon, water, and value.

Water source

Renewable power

Wood chips

Export

Biomass handling

Water treatment

Wood chip storage

Electrolysis

Gasication

Sub-sea

pipeline

Methanol to jet

Syngas

Methanol synthesis & distillation

Otake

Figure 4 Case study: SAF fuel Pre-FEED

Case study: making innovation bankable through integration strategy The Conceptual Phase has proven vital in emerging sectors like SAF, where diverse feedstocks, technology integration, and policy exposure create complex interdependencies. Here, integration across a multi-step value chain introduces risks and alignment challenges that demand more than engineering discipline. For example, the biomass-to-jet pathway – validated in a recent Pre-FEED (see Figure 4 ) – combines biomass gasification, methanol synthesis, and Methanol-to-Jet upgrading, with renewable hydrogen used to balance syngas composition and improve yields. Although less established than routes like hydroprocessed esters and fatty acids (HEFA), this hybrid bio-power-to-liquids design is emerging as a scalable solution for converting forestry residues, waste biomass, and renewable energy into SAF. What makes it uniquely challenging is

The objective is to identify risks, cost drivers, and opportunities to strengthen returns, while defining clear system boundaries for processing, hydrogen integration, and product export. ASTM certification is a critical milestone in securing investor confidence for SAF projects. Certification confirms that the resulting fuel meets rigorous aviation standards and that the technology pathway fits within established regulatory frameworks. Without ASTM approval, even the most technically promising SAF routes face significant commercial and bankability risk. From concept to feasibility The next step is testing design trade-offs and addressing foundational questions such as: which biomass is the most suitable, and how will key characteristics – including moisture content, bulk density, and chemical composition – vary by sourcing regions and season? What

www.decarbonisationtechnology.com

Page 1 Page 2 Page 3 Page 4 Page 5 Page 6 Page 7 Page 8 Page 9 Page 10 Page 11 Page 12 Page 13 Page 14 Page 15 Page 16 Page 17 Page 18 Page 19 Page 20 Page 21 Page 22 Page 23 Page 24 Page 25 Page 26 Page 27 Page 28 Page 29 Page 30 Page 31 Page 32 Page 33 Page 34 Page 35 Page 36 Page 37 Page 38 Page 39 Page 40 Page 41 Page 42 Page 43 Page 44 Page 45 Page 46 Page 47 Page 48 Page 49 Page 50 Page 51 Page 52 Page 53 Page 54 Page 55 Page 56 Page 57 Page 58 Page 59 Page 60 Page 61 Page 62 Page 63 Page 64 Page 65 Page 66 Page 67 Page 68 Page 69 Page 70 Page 71 Page 72