![]() The benefits of a cap would also incentivise investments in other types of SAF such as Fischer-Tropsch SAF. There is a concern that mandating SAF use at large-scale could result in a diversion of feedstock away from sectors that currently utilise HEFA fuel (such as the road sector), subsequently causing road transport emissions to rise.Īdditionally, the cap should address sustainability issues linked with increasing demand for feedstock, such as deforestation, and limit the aviation sector monopolising fats, oils, and greases (FOGs). IBA suggest that there should be a cap on alternative fuels, which utilise cooking oil and animal fat feedstock commonly produced via the hydroprocessed Esters and Fatty Acids (HEFA) production pathway. ![]() While increasing SAF supply is a necessity, the sustainability issues linked with a scale-up must be addressed. The revisions put forward require aviation fuel suppliers to supply a minimum share of sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) at EU airports, beginning at 2% of overall fuel supplied by 2025 and reaching 70% by 2050.Īircraft operators departing from EU airports will be required to refuel only with the fuel necessary for the flight, to avoid extra weight and thus emissions.Īirports must ensure that they have sufficient infrastructure to support SAF fuelling. This week, the European Parliament, The Council, and The Commission, finalised negotiations on the EU’s sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) law, known as ReFuel EU Aviation. After today’s release, we will likely slightly revise up our forecast for average 2023 inflation, now at 5.7%.Important changes are being made regarding the ReFuelEU Law This is, in principle, good news for core inflation developments, but data is showing that the process will likely be slow, and should accelerate only over the second half of the year. Producer prices are decelerating sharply and pricing intentions as reported by business surveys have lately extended from manufacturing to services. ![]() Having said that, the path to a further deceleration of inflation remains solid. Also, the initial reopening effect on some services’ prices is proving stickier than expected. As a side effect, this adds so much noise to the data that short-term inter-country comparisons are almost useless. After April’s release the statistical carryover for headline and core inflation for 2023 stand at 5.4% and 4.6%, respectively.Īll in all, today’s data confirms that the disinflationary process is not a linear one, with the profile conditioned by base effects determined by the timing of past administrative actions on energy prices. The disinflationary impact of regulated energy prices, which we had anticipated, and the small deceleration in food, lodging and travel service prices were not enough to compensate.Ĭore inflation was stable at 6.3% for the third consecutive month, suggesting that stickiness will likely make the disinflationary process a relatively slow one. More in detail, the culprit of the acceleration was the non-regulated part of the energy basket (+26.7% YoY from 18.9% in March), helped by recreational services and personal care. Once again, the driver was energy inflation, this time pushing up the headline measure due to an unfavourable base effect, which we had undervalued. ![]() The harmonised measure reached 8.8% YoY from 8.1% in March. After posting four consecutive declines, headline inflation surprisingly increased in April to 8.3% year-on-year (from 7.6% in March), according to the preliminary estimate released by Istat.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |