Skip to main content
You are viewing an older version of the ATB. The current content for ATB transportation is 2022.

Jet Fuel

Explore the fuel price and emissions intensity of jet fuel.

Jet Fuel

Fuel NameAlt JetConventional Jet
Fuel PathwayBiofuel (Jet)Conventional Jet Fuel
ScenarioFuture Model, High VolCurrent Market
Fuel Price
3.38 - 5.631.95
Fixed Capital Investment
365,000,000 - 521,000,000-
Fixed Operating Cost
15,600,000 - 26,100,000-
Mature Industry Feedstock Production Cost
56,300,000 - 69,800,000-
Other (non-feedstock) Variable Operating Cost
26,100,000 - 49,000,000-
Power Sales Revenue
Throughput Capacity
Total Product Yield
50.00 - 80.00-
Coproducts Sales Revenue
5,210,000 - 24,000,000-
CO2e Emissions (Well to Tank)
-55,900 - 5,28014,400
NOX Emissions (Well to Tank)
SOX Emissions (Well to Tank)
PM Emissions (Well to Tank)
CO2e Emissions (Well to Wake)
23,200 - 79,10091,400
NOX Emissions (Well to Wake)
SOX Emissions (Well to Wake)
PM Emissions (Well to Wake)

Key Assumptions

The data and estimates presented here are based on the following key assumptions:

  • The conventional jet fuel price is estimated from the 2018 transportation jet fuel price from Annual Energy Outlook 2019 (EIA, 2019). Prices are converted from dollars per gallon to dollars per gasoline gallon equivalent using the lower heating values of gasoline (112,194 Btu/gal) and petroleum ultra-low-sulfur jet (123,041 Btu/gal) from the GREET model (Argonne National Laboratory, 2018). The Transportation ATB does not provide plant metrics for conventional jet fuel because the price is based on current market values and not on modeled costs with specific plant design assumptions.
  • Fuel production estimates for alternative jet fuel are based on analysis from Tao et al. (Tao et al., 2017) and Zhang et al. (Zhang et al., 2018). These references describe pathways to alternative jet fuels that are approved for blending up to 50% of the final product (ASTM D7566-19b, 2019). Emissions estimates are based on the range pathways from Han et al. (Han et al., 2017), which assumesd corn and corn stover feedstock. Note that Han et al. (Han et al., 2017) only provide emissions estimates for CO2e emissions, so other air emission estimates are not provided here.
  • Emissions estimates for conventional jet fuel are from GREET 2018, using the petroleum ultra-low-sulfur jet pathways. The well-to-wake estimate assumes a single-aisle passenger aircraft (e.g., Boeing 737).
  • The biogenic carbon in a biofuel such as the alternative jet fuel pathway is considered carbon-neutral in the GREET model, as the biogenic carbon is assumed to be sourced from the atmosphere during biomass growth. Per GREET model convention, the biogenic carbon credit is allocated to the well-to-tank phase of the biofuel life cycle, which often results in a negative well-to-tank CO2e emissions value after taking into account greenhouse gas emissions associated with all upstream activities (e.g., farming, land use change, feedstock transportation, and biomass conversion to biofuel).
  • The data downloads include additional detail on assumptions and calculations for each metric.


For detailed definitions, see:

Alternative jet fuel

CO2e emissions

Conventional jet fuel

Coproducts sales revenue

Fixed capital investment

Fixed operating cost

Fuel price

Mature industry feedstock production cost

NOX emissions

Other (non-feedstock) variable operating cost

PM emissions

Power sales revenue


SOX emissions

Throughput capacity

Total product yield

Well-to-tank emissions

Well-to-wake emissions


The following references are specific to this page; for all references in this ATB, see References.

Argonne National Laboratory. GREET Model: The Greenhouse Gases, Regulated Emissions, and Energy Use in Transportation Model. Argonne, IL (United States): Argonne National Laboratory, 2018.

ASTM D7566-19b. “Standard Specification for Aviation Turbine Fuel Containing Synthesized Hydrocarbons.” West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM International, 2019.

Zhang, Yanan, Asad H. Sahir, Eric C. D. Tan, Michael S. Talmadge, Ryan Davis, Mary J. Biddy, and Ling Tao. “Economic and Environmental Potentials for Natural Gas to Enhance Biomass-to-Liquid Fuels Technologies.” Green Chemistry 20, no. 23 (2018): 5358–73.

Han, Jeongwoo, Ling Tao, and Michael Wang. “Well-to-Wake Analysis of Ethanol-to-Jet and Sugar-to-Jet Pathways.” Biotechnology for Biofuels 10, no. 1 (January 24, 2017): 21.

Tao, Ling, Jennifer N. Markham, Zia Haq, and Mary J. Biddy. “Techno-Economic Analysis for Upgrading the Biomass-Derived Ethanol-to-Jet Blendstocks.” Green Chemistry 19, no. 4 (2017): 1082–1101.

EIA. “Annual Energy Outlook 2019.” Washington, D.C.: U.S. Energy Information Administration, 2019.

Issue Type
Problem Text