Expensive, inefficient and scarce: E-fuels are unsuitable for passenger cars, according to a review. However, the study does point out alternatives. Several associations criticize the paper (update).
Are e-fuels a future-oriented fuel for vehicles?
luchschenF / stock.adobe.com
A recent metastudy questions the use of e-fuels in passenger cars. The study by the think tank Forum Ökologisch-Soziale Marktwirtschaft (FÖS) (source in German) on behalf of the Klima-Allianz Deutschland (Climate Alliance Germany) shows that e-fuels are not a viable alternative to the planned phase-out of the combustion engine due to high costs, poor availability and inefficient use. The climate alliance calls for a focus on e-cars and public transport.
E-fuels are synthetic fuels. They are produced using electricity from renewable sources, water and CO2 from the air. For the meta-study, FÖS combined findings from the Allgemeiner Deutscher Automobil-Club (ADAC), the German Federal Ministry for the Environment (BMUV), the Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research (Fraunhofer ISI) and the International Energy Agency (IEA), among others.
E-fuels in the Passenger Car Sector Are a "Fata Morgana"
According to the metastudy, even with high government subsidies, insufficient quantities of e-fuels will be available by 2035 to achieve climate targets. By 2045, the passenger car fleet in Europe is expected to be almost completely electrified, while vehicles with e-fuels will play only a marginal role.
"The metastudy proves that anyone who questions the European phase-out of combustion engines is misleading car buyers", says Stefanie Langkamp, Executive Director of Politics at Climate Alliance. E-fuels in the passenger car sector are a "fata morgana" and not an alternative to e-cars.
E-fuels "Indispensable" in Aviation and Maritime Transport
According to the metastudy, 150 onshore wind turbines could supply 240,000 electric cars with electricity, but only 37,500 combustion engines with e-fuels. "With the same amount of electricity, more than six times as many vehicles could be operated electrically", explains Matthias Runkel, Head of Transport and Finance Policy at FÖS and author of the study.
According to Runkel, e-cars are also much more climate-friendly because "over their entire life cycle, e-cars produce 40 to 50 percent less CO2 emissions than cars that run on e-fuels". According to the experts, the scarce e-fuel resources should rather be used for sectors that are difficult to electrify, such as air and sea transport, where they are "indispensable".
The CDU/CSU and FDP Support E-Fuels for Passenger Cars
The European Union (EU) had decided that from 2035, only new cars that do not emit any climate-damaging CO2 when in operation should be registered. Recently, however, the center-right alliance EPP, among others, wanted to reverse the so-called combustion ban. At the urging of the FDP, the then German government had advocated that there should be exceptions for so-called e-fuels.
In this context, there is also talk of an energy tax reduction for e-fuels. According to the FÖS study, however, these subsidies would burden the national budget with at least 45 billion euros by 2050. "We urgently need these tax revenues for the expansion of climate-friendly mobility. The next federal government must prioritize strengthening public transport and specifically promoting small electric cars for people with lower incomes", demands Langkamp.
eFuel Alliance Austria: E-fuel Study is "Old Hat"
The meta-study by the FÖS has been criticized by the eFuel Alliance Austria. It is neither a study nor does it provide any new insights. Jürgen Roth, President of the eFuel Alliance Austria, comments: "The 7.5 pages headed 'Factsheet' are mainly political rhetoric, the results of supposedly used studies are turned into the opposite, comparisons are chosen in such a way that the result is known from the outset. Essential facts are kept secret. The paper is backward-looking instead of paving the way for the transformation necessary for climate protection."
Stephan Schwarzer, Secretary General of eFuel Alliance Austria, adds: "The Berlin Ministry of Climate, led by Robert Habeck, acts as a promoter of FÖS, and its purpose seems to be to spread doubt about e-fuels in line with an ideology."
Efficiency is Not the Only Decisive Criterion
Specifically, the eFuel Alliance Austria criticizes the FÖS paper's ruling that it is based primarily on the efficiency in the engine. "Contrary to what the FÖS paper claims, it has been known for a long time that engine efficiency is not the only decisive criterion for assessing the usability of a technology". the association said. The paper fails to mention "that electricity from the grid is highly CO2-intensive, especially in the cooler half of the year. Electricity will become more expensive as the scarcity will by no means decrease. From today's perspective, an uninterrupted power supply for all consumer groups cannot be guaranteed", says the eFuel Alliance Austria.
Other points are also wrong. E-fuels could be produced in large quantities. This should make them cheaper and help to significantly reduce transport emissions in the 1990s. According to the eFuel Alliance Austria, data from the current Frontier Economics study (source in German) supports this assessment. However, the paper's conclusion that e-fuels are urgently needed for aviation is correct. However, the conclusion from this is not to keep e-fuels away from passenger cars, but to share the burden between aviation and other parts of the mobility sector. The faster production is ramped up, the sooner aviation can benefit.
Do Not Lose Sight of Existing Fleets
The eFuel Alliance Austria also has the existing fleet in mind. "E-cars will still be a minority program in the thirties, so a fuel-based solution is needed. eFuels will not be too late, they can come earlier if politicians create the necessary framework", says Stephan Schwarzer. Even the FÖS does not expect a high proportion of e-cars in the fleet until 2045 and does not address the question of how CO2 emissions can be reduced by then, says Schwarzer.
Frank Atzler, professor at the Institute for Combustion Engines and Powertrain Systems at the Technical University of Dresden, also warns against losing sight of existing fleets. As he explains in the interview "Methanol – the oil of tomorrow?" (source in German), solutions are needed for existing vehicles. "When it comes to defossilizing the old fleet, we are talking about around 50 million vehicles in Germany alone – and over a billion vehicles worldwide", says Atzler. In addition, e-fuels have further advantages: Existing infrastructure such as the filling station networks could continue to be used, and e-fuels could also store energy and transport it over long distances.
Criticism from Associations: Incomplete and too One-sided
In addition to the eFuel Alliance Austria, other associations are also criticizing the FÖS paper, including the Federal Association of Independent Filling Stations (bft), Uniti Federal Association of Energy SMEs and the E-Fuels Forum initiative, as well as Dr. Ulrich Kramer (Director of FVV Fuel Studies III, IV and IVb). For Uniti CEO Elmar Kühn, the paper is "a smokescreen in the debate about e-fuels and the combustion engine", for bft CEO Daniel Kaddik, the results of the study are "cherry picking.". Dr. Ulrich Kramer describes the methodology of the study as "negligently unscientific". Accordingly, its results and conclusions are to be evaluated as "fundamentally wrong and misleading".
The FÖS paper is criticized for making a false basic assumption about production in Germany, using one-sided scenarios for the passenger car sector, ignoring synergy effects during the ramp-up, and providing insufficient cost and efficiency analysis. In addition, the study's assumptions regarding environmental protection and mobility in rural areas are said to fall short.
Conclusion: E-fuels and E-mobility Complement Each Other
What can we learn from the debate? Perhaps the assessment of the fuels working group of the Research Association for Combustion Engines (FVV) can help here, which compared and evaluated various mobility scenarios. As explained in the German book chapter E-Fuels/Fuels, "not all applications can probably be covered exclusively by (battery) electrification", explain the authors, including Dr. Ulrich Kramer. It is likely that quickly refillable fuels with a high energy density will be required, especially for heavy-duty commercial vehicles, long-distance passenger cars and plug-in hybrid vehicles. However, synthetic hydrocarbons are also necessary for the defossilization of sectors such as aviation, maritime transport and the chemical industry.
According to the FVV study, synthetic fuels (e-fuels) and e-mobility would complement each other. E-fuels could serve as a necessary and useful support for an e-mobility strategy. It goes on to say: "The production, distribution and use of sustainable, electricity-based fuels is technically feasible. Costs and customer acceptance are crucial to the success and ecological leverage of all energy sources and drive systems."
This is a partly automated translation of this German article.
