The New Energy Economy: The US Airport That Put Sustainable Aviation
Fuel to the Test

Portland International Airport (PDX) wasn’t trying to make a statement about sustainable aviation fuel (SAF). It was trying to keep planes on schedule.

Due in part to fuel refining capacity reductions over several years, the US West Coast regional fuel market “has become increasingly complex”, with greater exposure to supply disruptions, import dependency and market volatility, according to Alaska Airlines, a major aircraft operator in the region.  

Complex supply chains and aging assets have led to situations where demand has outweighed the supply of jet fuel. This has led the US aviation industry to think more holistically about fuel supply resilience, including integrating SAF, which Portland could deliver.

Once blended with conventional jet fuel to approved specifications, SAF becomes a drop-in alternative fuel that can reduce well-to-wing greenhouse gas emissions by up to 80%* compared with conventional jet fuel, and it can be moved through existing airport fuel infrastructure.

Each link in PDX’s SAF chain had an important role. Montana Renewables supplied the SAF. Shell, the systems integrator, blended it to specification and delivered it through existing infrastructure. And Alaska Airlines took flight with it.

“Portland is an important market for Alaska [Airlines] and a growing gateway for the Pacific Northwest,” says Justin Neff, Vice President of Strategic Sourcing and Supply Chain Management at Alaska Airlines.

At a time when the aviation industry is working to scale up SAF, Portland has shown that rising fuel demand from airlines and efforts to integrate SAF do not have to pull in opposite directions.

“Growth and decarbonization can appear to be in opposition, but they have to be pursued in parallel to support the growth of aviation,” says Reema Bari, Shell’s Head of Aviation Americas. “Bold leaders understand they must exist together.”

Portland brings to life one of the central questions in Shell’s Aviation Energy Security Scenarios: How aviation can keep growing while building a more resilient, affordable and lower-carbon fuel system?

SAF is increasingly being judged not only by its emissions profile, but also by what it can add to the resilience of the aviation fuel system.

“Over the last several years, energy security has become just as important as price and operational reliability in our fuel strategy," says Neff.

Shell views fuel security as a shared focus throughout the system, including "where fuel is produced, how the supply chains are interlinked and how reliable the delivery is going to be over time,” says Bari.

The supply landscape has grown more complex in recent years due to geopolitics, logistical pressures and, in some regions, aging infrastructure.

“Managing volatility is no longer just about affordability,” says Bari. “It’s also about availability and reliability.”

SAF can help reduce aviation’s lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions, without waiting for new aircraft technology. It can support system flexibility, because SAF can be produced from diverse feedstock sources and widen the set of viable supply sources integrated into airport systems. In constrained markets, that can help absorb supply shocks.

Bruce Fleming, CEO of Montana Renewables, sees this dynamic from the production end. His plant in Great Falls, Mont. sits close to the West Coast markets it serves, and it produces SAF that can easily move into the aviation system using existing infrastructure.

“We did not have to go and replicate existing infrastructure that was already working just fine,” says Fleming.

Coexistence is a systems challenge. Scaling SAF is not only about building plants and reducing prices; it also requires integrating this new aviation fuel into the system, from blending and certification to storage, pipelines and airport tanks. SAF is typically blended and certified before it enters the airport fuel system to meet the required specifications.

Portland demonstrated how SAF can be effectively integrated into regional airport infrastructure, operations and aircraft. The shift from a constrained system to a more flexible supply model may influence how quickly aviation can expand the use of lower-carbon fuels.

“Conventional jet fuel has powered aviation for almost a century, and it’s going to be needed well into the mid-century, as SAF scales,” says Bari. The challenge is not ambition alone, she adds, but “it’s making the whole system ready: building dependable supply, creating long-term demand certainty and safely integrating SAF through blending, certification, logistics, storage and airport fuel infrastructure.”

Portland’s SAF story started with a challenge related to fuel supply. “And bringing in more conventional jet fuel didn’t seem to be viable from an affordability standpoint,” says Bari.

The solution emerged for partners committed to lower-carbon fuels. Blended with conventional jet fuel to certified specifications, SAF offers a practical route to lower lifecycle emissions while supporting state-level programs. Its inclusion in Portland’s fuel mix made commercial sense.

The fuel journey from Montana Renewables to PDX was a test of the system. SAF had to move from production into Shell’s supply chain, be blended to specification and then enter the airport fuel system without requiring bespoke facilities. The process involved multiple handoffs across companies and infrastructure.

“One of the most encouraging aspects of the Portland project is that it demonstrates that SAF can be integrated into existing airport fueling systems without fundamentally changing day-to-day airline operations,” says Neff. “Scalability in aviation depends on solutions that can work within today’s operational environment.”

The PDX example also points to a broader scaling challenge: SAF has to work not only at major aviation hubs, but also in the regional gateways where airlines are adding capacity and managing supply risk.

“The Portland project has shown that SAF deployment can become much more practical and repeatable,” says Neff.

What began as a one-time fix is now a standing option. Once blended to approved specifications, SAF moves into Portland through existing infrastructure, giving the region a second source of supply when the conventional system comes under strain.

“This only helps improve system flexibility,” says Bari.

Making Portland’s success repeatable means connecting production, supply and demand into an investable framework. The challenge involves both capital and coordination. SAF projects require multiyear financing, and also depend on stable, long-term regulations that give investors confidence in long-life assets. Investors are being asked to back capital-intensive projects whose returns depend on demand, infrastructure readiness and incentives that may evolve over time.

Long-term commitments across the aviation value chain can help, and Bari says policy has an important role in making collaborations easier to sustain. SAF use depends on coordination among governments, producers, integrators, infrastructure owners and airline customers.

“Whenever you have collaboration at this scale, with long supply chains and a complex ecosystem, it’s very difficult to achieve end-to-end transparency,” says Bari. This is where long-term commercial commitments become catalytic. ”By creating secure demand through offtake agreements, industry participants can help unlock financing, turning lower‑carbon fuel ambitions into investable projects,” she says.

Portland did not begin as a sustainability exercise. It began with a constrained fuel system that found a way to keep aircraft supplied. It showed how SAF and conventional jet fuel can work in tandem, adding supply optionality while supporting lower-carbon flights.

The challenge for aviation’s transition to lower-carbon energy is not only about fuel choices. It is also about the ability to secure, integrate and scale that energy supply and make it operational.

“Fuel strategy should be viewed as a strategic lever, not a procurement activity,” says Bari.

* Reduction in lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions in its neat form, compared with conventional jet aviation fuel. 

Disclaimer: In 2025, 80.85% of Shell’s global investments included oil & gas, 9.58% included low‑carbon energy solutions and 9.58% non‑energy products. Disclaimers: shell.com/disclaimer

The companies in which Shell plc directly and indirectly owns investments are separate legal entities. In this publication “Shell” is sometimes used for convenience where references are made to Shell plc and its subsidiaries in general.

When we refer to “low‑carbon fuels”, we mean fuels that demonstrate a lower lifecycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions intensity compared to their fossil‑fuel‑based equivalent.