Decarbonisation Technology November 2025 Issue

is the optimal electrolyser scale? How do water demand, power availability, and land footprint shape economics and site selection, Anticipated variability in biomass, driven by climate, harvest cycles, and seasonal moisture levels, affects far more than just process inputs. It shapes early decisions on storage design (for example, drying requirements), technology selection (for example, gasifier moisture tolerance), and overall feedstock viability. Laboratory testing often reveals that local biomass may fall short of performance, emissions, or yield targets. In such cases, developers may need to source alternative feedstocks, potentially even importing higher-quality material with more favourable specifications to meet techno-economic thresholds. Evaluating these trade-offs early is essential to ensure system resilience and prevent downstream redesign. In parallel, system outputs must be quantified holistically – not only in terms of fuel yields, but also co-products such as oxygen and process heat, as well as potential reductions in lifecycle carbon intensity. Sensitivity testing then probes system performance under different conditions, including hydrogen purity, renewable intermittency, and logistics at scale. Finally, the policy and finance lenses are just as critical. Developers must integrate low-carbon fuel standard (LCFS) credits, SAF mandates, carbon pricing, and regulatory compliance. Technical complexity must also be translated into clear insights that appeal to both regulators and financiers. Together, these analyses provide the foundation for moving from conceptual design to commercial viability. Feasibility: from what is possible to what is investable In feasibility, the most promising options are tested and validated. Each technology is measured against thresholds defined earlier, trade-offs and risks are weighed, Technology Readiness Levels (TRLs) are checked, and site- specific constraints are validated. Integration complexity is assessed for its impacts on operability, safety, and cost. The financial picture is then sharpened: estimating Capex, Opex, utility, and labour; modelling SAF yields and evaluating the

recovery of co-products, such as excess oxygen, process heat, renewable diesel, or naphtha, which can generate additional revenue streams, improve energy efficiency, or reduce waste handling costs. This is where economic performance diverges and viable pathways emerge. But spreadsheets alone do not convince investors. They want to know: Is it real? Can it be delivered? That is why feasibility also assesses permitting risks, land, and environmental constraints, technology track record, and vendor responsiveness. To support decision-making, structured scoring tools allow objective comparison of options and highlight balanced configurations. For FOAK projects, this phase is decisive. It transforms complexity into clarity and builds the confidence investors need to proceed. Done well, it clarifies interfaces, identifies permitting blockers early, and supports bankable delivery pathways such as staged financing, modular scale-up, or risk-sharing. Most importantly, this approach does not replace the traditional project delivery model – it enhances it. By applying systems thinking and risk mapping early, subsequent stages of Pre- FEED, FEED, and Detailed Design advance on stronger assumptions with fewer surprises and higher investor confidence. This reinforces the value of a dedicated Conceptual Phase that focuses not just on technical feasibility but on integration strategy, stakeholder alignment, and risk allocation. For FOAK projects, the disciplined framework turns innovation into a bankable reality. The eight imperatives for FOAK bankability After years of working on complex, innovation- driven projects, clear patterns have emerged. The same critical factors determine whether a FOAK development secures capital or stalls. Eight imperatives consistently strengthen bankability and must be embedded from the very start.  Align with policy priorities : Bankable projects must meet technical or financial thresholds, as well as align with national and regional policy goals. Whether through federal incentives, state decarbonisation targets, or regional funding programmes, policy alignment unlocks grants,