Sea Control - Sea Control 449 - Sustainable Aviation Fuel with David Alman

Episode Date: July 30, 2023

Links1. “Sustainable Aviation Fuel: Investing In the Future,” by David Alman, War on the Rocks, October 25, 2022.2. “Sea Control 394: Powering EABO,” with Walker Mills and Erik Limpaecher, CIMSEC, December 4, 2022.3. The Prize: The Epic Quest for Oil, Money & Power, by Daniel Yergin, Free Press, 2008.4. Oil & War: How the Deadly Struggle for Fuel in World War II Meant Victory or Defeat, by Robert Gorlaski and Russel W. Freeburg, Marine Corps University Press, 2021.5. “The Promise of Hydrogen: An Alternative Fuel at the Intersection of Climate Policy and Lethality,” by Walker Mills and Erik Limpaecher, Modern War Institute, December 27, 2021.6. “Need Fuel? Marines Should Make Moonshine Hydrogen,” by Walker Mills and Erik Limpaecher, USNI Proceedings, November 2021.

Hey folks, it's Jared Walker-Mills is back in the host chair again, and he's joined today by David Allman to discuss David's War on the Rocks article on sustainable aviation fuel. This episode was edited and produced by Joshua Gruber. We are rapidly approaching our 300th episode since relaunch, so to celebrate, we're going to attempt a little bit of a mailbag episode. If you have a question about the podcast that you'd like me to answer, quote unquote, on the air, please send it to seacontrol at simsec.org.

I'd like to pause here to highlight our local chapters, whether you're in South Korea, egypt singapore france new york india or the caribbean chances are there's a simsec local chapter near you you can find a full listing of our chapters and contact information on the website at simsec.org so if you're interested please reach out and get involved finally i want to take the opportunity to recommend our partners in the simsec podcast network the bilge pumps you can find alex jamie drack and a pile of iron brew bottles wherever you download your podcast And with that, Kimbersman. You're listening to Sea Control, hosted by the Center for International Maritime Security.

Welcome back aboard the Sea Control podcast from the Center for International Maritime Security. Today, we're talking with David Allman, an officer in the Air National Guard and author of Sustainable Aviation Fuel, Investing in the Future, that was recently published in War on the Rocks. David, welcome back. Some of our listeners might remember you from the episode we recorded about seaplanes or the episode that we did with you about your US&I general prize winning essay. You're practically a regular now. Yeah, thanks, Walker. It's great to be back. Thanks for inviting me on again. For the listener, my name is David Allman. As Walker mentioned, I'm an officer and a pilot in the Air National Guard. My civilian career, I work as a management consultant and I'm an aerospace engineer by training. and of relevance for this is I'm also pretty passionate about environmentalism and

environmentalist causes. And so to be totally transparent, especially given the topic of this essay, I believe sustainable aviation fuel is worth it for the nation, even without considering the national security benefits. My goal here, though, is to convince even a climate skeptic that Department of Defense investments in sustainable aviation fuel at least merit consideration. And before we start, I'd like to remind our listeners that the opinions presented here are solely our own and should not be taken as representative of any of the institutions that we're associated with. David, we're happy to have you back on the podcast and excited that you've taken this topic on for your most recent essay. Some of our listeners probably remember that

I've got a kick for operational energy stuff. I recently did a podcast with our own Jared Samuelson and Eric Lindpacker from MIT's Lincoln Laboratory about hydrogen and getting into some of the same stuff. So we're happy to talk about that. To start us out, can you kind of explain what sustainable aviation fuel is and some of the relevant history? Yeah, happy to. And I'd definitely be doing a disservice to folks like you and Eric Lindpacker and others if I didn't mention how a lot of the at least implicit inspiration for this piece has been reading some of your all's work on the topic. And so I think kind of broadly, there's a group of people out there who are seeing the utility and the potential impact of some of these more alternative

energy sources and how they can actually impact DOD and national security. And so this, I think it's just one small piece of that. And I know we have scheduled to kind of discuss later how hydrogen, how other things fit in. But, you know, given my background, given my interests, that's what kind of led me to sustainable aviation fuel. And so, you know, to kind of start to kind of frame synthetic aviation fuel, I think it's important to start with kind of synthetic fuel and energy more broadly. And so for me, the story kind of starts, you know, and I should note for the listener, you know, I am not an expert on energy. My background has led me to an interest in it is related to a lot of things I do. But, you know, I definitely recommend listening to

folks like Eric Lindpacher, you know, reading the work of others. Here, I'm going to kind of reference, you know, Daniel Yergin's The Prize, both the documentary and the book, which kind of provides a great foundation on oil and leads to, in a lot of cases, a lot of the insights that, you know, I try to make about why sustainable aviation feels important. And so if you start this story with oil, you say, hey, you know, in the mid-late 1800s is where oil really takes off. And so people realize its usefulness in applications like lubrication and machinery and for lighting lamps. And the arrival of the internal combustion engine is where oil really starts to become a security issue. And so you have nations like Great Britain that say, hey,

my battleships are powered by oil. I need to ensure that I have access to oil. And this is what leads to a lot of involvement in the Middle East, because nations fundamentally need to ensure that they have access to the energy sources their armed forces need to fight. Without energy, a lot of these weapon systems, these very expensive and capable weapon systems, become useless, become targets. And so the arrival of aircraft dependent on aviation fuel only underscores this point. And for synthetic fuels in particular, we really start to see the interaction of this with national security in Germany. So Germany, and then especially Nazi Germany, lacked any significant domestic sources of oil for aviation. And this is seen as a big problem. And luckily for the

German war effort during the Second World War, two smart scientists in the 1920s by the name of Fischer and Tropes discovered a way to make oil out of coal. And this process is now known as Fischer-Tropes synthesis, and we'll come back to it a bit more later on. And I should note that there are other ways of making oil synthetically from coal and from other resources, but Fischer-Tropes was one of the bigger ones at the time and is still in use today. But the headline for the listener is, you can get to the chemical composition of oil and all the benefits of oil without needing to go and extract oil from the ground. And so what I think is just fascinating is that during World War II, something like 90% of the aviation fuel that the Luftwaffe uses comes from synthetic

sources. So the vaunted Luftwaffe, which a lot of folks don't really associate with green energy or environmentalism or anything, and rightfully so, is actually providing a lot of the basis for what we're doing today with sustainable fuels. And so the history goes on after the war. There's a lot of interest in synthetic fuel from kind of a scientific standpoint. And any time you have any sort of energy crisis, any time oil prices rise, interest in synthetic fuels goes up. And anytime oil is cheap, interest in synthetic fuels goes down. That is until you start to talk about global warming, environmentalism, and decarbonizing hard to abate sectors such as aviation. And so that brings us to your original question, which is, you know, what is sustainable fuel?

And so, you know, first off, sustainable aviation fuel is a synthetic fuel created by man to replicate the hydrocarbon chains, the chemical composition of fossil-based fuels. And so what makes it sustainable is that unlike a conventional fuel, sustainable fuel is created using carbon sources, which we term feedstocks, that are already present in the world using methods like Fisher-Tripp synthesis or a few others we can talk about later. But basically, you take these carbon sources that are already out there, you know, let's say a used cooking oil, human waste, et cetera, and you do some chemical engineering voodoo magic, and then out the other end after a bunch of heat, pressure, et cetera, you have oil, something that's chemically identical to

oil you would get from the ground. And then that can be farther refined into, you know, in aviation fuel, kerosene, and whatnot. And so, you know, to be clear, and I think this is commonly misunderstood, once the fuel is combusted in an engine, the level of pollution is basically roughly the same as with oil from the ground. There are some important caveats there, but sustainable aviation fuel is sustainable because instead of having to mine and refine oil, which leads to a large net increase in carbon. You take things like, you know, that cooking oil or waste, things that already existed due to other processes, and you use them productively to create aviation fuel. And so you're going back to some of those caveats, right? So once the fuel is

combusted in the engine, roughly the same as, you know, non-sustainable fuel. However, because you can tweak and design the sustainable aviation fuel, the synthetic aviation fuel, you can do things to help make it better. And I'll kind of put a caveat out there that a lot of this research is still ongoing. Humankind has a century of experience with oil that comes from the ground. We don't have the equivalent experience with sustainable aviation fuel, but research has shown that you can potentially have the synthetic fuel burn cleaner, resulting in some efficiency improvements and less emissions. And you can also do things where you have less particulate emissions, which results in less contrails, which, you know, is good for the environment

and also can be a significant tactical advantage for military aircraft. Instead of seeing, you know, an enemy conning 50 miles away, they're now much harder to detect. And so, you know, In summary, sustainable aviation fuel is a synthetic fuel made from sustainable sources. And I'll kind of pause there to let you tee up any other questions that come out of that. Yeah. So first, I would just say, you know, it's a great summary of some of the history. And I would recommend to any of the listeners that are interested in especially the Second World War and the relationship there with oil. There's a great book. It's from the 1980s, so it's a little dated now, but Oil and War. And you can definitely recommend it because you can find it for free on the Marine Corps University website to download.

And I will put that link in the show notes. But so, David, I wanted to kind of, you know, now that we have the history and the explanation, you know, What what do you perceive as the main advantages for the U.S. military from a security perspective and operational or tactical or even strategic advantages of sustainable aviation fuel? Yep. So kind of, you know, beat around the bush a little bit previously on some of the benefits. But I think kind of fundamentally you can break it down into four main buckets. The first is kind of price installation or market dynamics. And I'll come back to these in more detail. The second is in triplet a tactical, operational and potential strategic level advantage for national security. The third is allies and alliance politics. And the fourth is domestic politics.

So to the first point, price insulation and market dynamics. So even though the U.S. has massive petroleum reserves, oil prices are susceptible to global trends. So, for example, and I talk about this some in my essay, Russia's invasion of Ukraine and other inflationary pressures drove the DOD to spend $3 billion more than anticipated on fuel in 2022. Other historical events, such as the Iran-Iraq war or the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, resulted in similar price increases. So even though you might have good domestic sources, because those are private corporations and there's a spot market for oil, they're still susceptible to events worldwide, the prices are, and that can then have bearing on Department of Defense budgets. So if you're creating or you're shaping the sustainable aviation fuel industry, you can potentially use that as a hedge to help insulate yourself from some of those price pressures, some of those market pressures. The second point, we get into kind of tactical, operational, strategic level advantages, and we'll talk about each of those in turn. So tactically, I mentioned, you know, lack of contrails, potential cleaner burning fuel resulting in efficiency improvements.

This is allowing you to fly farther, faster, higher, potentially, with its corresponding benefits. operationally. If you can put sustainable aviation fuel refineries in places that are useful to you, let's say, you know, you build one in Manila or you build one in Hawaii, you've now eased the logistical burden for the force more holistically, thereby allowing you to reallocate those assets to other areas where you might need them. And then strategically, and this kind of gets more into the long term, if you are able to at least reduce your dependency on oil, well, now maybe you no longer have to have as robust of a force structure in areas like the Middle East, where you might primarily be there to, among other things, ensure oil market stability. That's not something that's

going to happen in the next decade. But when you start to think about more broadly, what are the the potential benefits of this, you can get in a really interesting and creative stuff. Moving on to the third bucket, allies. Many of our allies care deeply about environmentalism. And so any, you know, US effort, DOD effort to kind of show leadership or at least show interest in environmentalism has to have some non-zero positive impact on how our country, how our allies view the relationship with the United States. It's easier for them to rationalize to their people working with us if, you know, we show that we're aligned on common goals. And lastly, domestic politics. We can talk more about this later, but how I kind of think about

it is if you take the Venn diagram of, you know, quote, people who want more defense spending, unquote, and the other bubble of, quote, people who care about environmentalism, unquote, there's not a lot of overlap generally. Depending on the exact framing, you can get more or less overlap. But regardless, there's a significant area of non-overlap. And so generally what you have is you have a lot of liberals who are skeptical about spending on the military and a lot of conservatives who are skeptical about spending on environmentalism. And so investing in SAF is kind of an interesting synergy between the two. It's a way for policymakers to play both sides, if you will. So to liberals, it's a way to use defense dollars to help promote

environmentalism. And for conservatives, it's a way to use green environmentalism dollars to promote defense and national security. Kind of interesting way where regardless of which party is in office, which party is controlling the purse strings, it's a way for the DOD to make its case about why we should be investing in this for benefit. Yeah, so I think that's a really compelling case. And you know, and probably some of the listeners remember that I've made adjacent arguments about other investments in operational energy, more in line with hydrogen. And my hunch is that you would say that easily, it doesn't really matter that the United States is one of the world's largest extractors of petroleum, and we have significant

domestic reserves. But that still strikes me as something that would be kind of an uneasy or primary criticism of this proposal is basically, you know, there's so much oil in the United States. We've got great oil infrastructure, which somewhat insulates us from energy price crunches elsewhere and also means that, you know, we don't have to worry in the way that a country like Germany in the Second World War, island nations like Japan or the Philippines have to worry about kind of existential energy crunches. But you think even with that in mind, this is still provides value worth pursuing these proposals. Yeah, yeah, definitely. And, you know, I think there is an argument to be made about global

markets. But as you rightly point out, you know, there's no scenario where or, you know, at least no imaginable scenario in the near term where global markets are going to do something so crazy that it's going to prohibit the DOD from buying oil, right? That's just not going to happen. And so the question is, what does sustainable aviation fuel then do for us in terms of the overall market? And one of the ways that I think about it is the DOD has a chance to shape an emerging industry for its benefit. So SAF, sustainable aviation fuel, is happening. Airlines are committing to buying it. The private sector is injecting capital into this. And so the DOD doesn't have to raise this industry from birth. The industry is coming. And so what DOD has an opportunity to do, though, is to use very minimal amounts of dollars and kind of strategically choose where to potentially inject capital or promise to buy fuels in order to shape the industry in a way that's beneficial to it.

So to give a practical example, let's say you have, you know, private sector investors who want to build a refinery. Great. That does benefit DOD, right, that you have domestic source of energy production of this fuel that's potentially useful, etc. But now what if the DOD could say, hey, we'll commit X million dollars if you build this refinery on the West Coast instead of the East Coast? Or let's say that you now build this refinery in Hawaii. Well, now, instead of that refinery being in Massachusetts or really practically in the Midwest, now maybe you have a refinery in Hawaii that's able to provide military forces there with fuel that they can use to fly, now easing the logistical burden of transporting fuel from the West Coast to Hawaii. And so the way I think about this, and this is where some

of Juergen's surprise comes in, but energy transitions don't happen that often. You have wood to coal, coal to oil, you have nuclear, you have a couple other things. But imagine if the Royal Navy, or Britain writ large could have said in 1900, that we'll spend a little bit of money to make sure that we discover a massive oil field in Scotland instead of the Middle East. And with sustainable aviation fuel, you have the chance in some ways to do that. Because it's being derived from things like cooking oil, from human waste, things that basically happen everywhere, you can then choose where you're going to quote discover unquote these sources of sustainable aviation fuel and so even though it's you know it's not going to change like the the u.s aviation

industry is not in the near term going to switch 100 to sustainable aviation fuel but you might be able to achieve in the next couple of years shifting a pacific air force's consumption of sustainable aviation fuel to 10% of its overall consumption, thereby giving those forces greater flexibility, reduced logistical requirements, et cetera. And oh, by the way, you're simultaneously complicating how your adversary has to think about your logistics. David, where is the DOD now with sustainable aviation fuel? I mean, do we have a good sense of if there's any movement in that space or even interest by the Air Force or other services? Yeah, so there is interest would be the short answer. The most recent NDAA had like a paragraph

in there about doing a pilot program of sustainable aviation fuels, where I think it was like two bases by 2025 were supposed to show and basically just prove that like, yeah, hey, the civilian sector has done it. We've done it in the past. We're going to prove again that there aren't any huge logistical barriers. It's pretty plug and play, et cetera. So there's movement out there. We've proven that the aircraft work with sustainable aviation fuel on the military side. The civilian sector has likewise proven it. But I think really what it comes down to is right now, the DOD is trying to be a good steward of taxpayer dollars and sustainable aviation fuel costs more. And so without some other rationale for why we should do it, which is one of the

points I try to make in this paper, it's just not a good use of taxpayer dollars. All else being equal, you should never buy sustainable aviation fuel over regular fuel because it costs more. Right. That makes sense. So what are some of the, now that you've talked about all the benefits and kind of sold us on it, what are some of the challenges facing sustainable aviation fuel? um so so at the end of the day it all comes down to cost and money really um the science works but it's it's simply right now just too costly really to rationalize doing unless you have some other reason to do it which is you know the point i try to make in this paper and so when you talk about cost there are a couple of dimensions to cost but basically without some sort of government

subsidy tax credit carbon tax etc then it is just not going to compete on a dollar basis with oil based aviation fuel. And this makes sense. We've had 100 plus years of government subsidies to figure out how to make natural aviation fuel. Government supported the infrastructure development, the refineries, the pipelines, et cetera. We gave tax credits back in the day for people who were going prospecting, et cetera. And so without explicit government support for SAF, it will never be cost competitive, at least not in our lifetime, probably. And I should note that a lot of private investors want to invest in this since they see it as a good way to both make money in the long term and support a better world, but they need some sort of demand signal. They need to know

that people will buy it at the prices that it's currently at in order to rationalize that capital investment in order to get loans from banks, et cetera. And that's one of the ways that DOD can play a role is by giving that demand signal by showing we will buy at a certain level. And then whole of government, you can have these tax credits, carbon taxes, et cetera, whatever to support the industry. Another part of cost is feedstock availability. So, you know, Germany in World War Two was primarily a coal to oil. Right. Well, obviously converting coal to oil while it is a synthetic fuel is not a sustainable fuel. So when you think about sustainable fuels, you need those sustainable feedstocks, those sustainable building blocks, if you will. And so a lot of the feedstocks that we'd want to use, things like cooking oil, are widely scattered and not at present easy to get to.

So you might have a lot of cheap feedstock theoretically available, but going out and getting it then drives up the cost. And so there are a number of challenges, you know, with both getting the feedstock, refining it, you know, the end price, depending on tax credits, etc. But at the end of the day, it's a money problem. And so with unlimited money, it's easy, we can do it, but we don't have unlimited money. So there are a number of challenges. And so that's where really things like making a case from an operational perspective, when you start to think about, hey, what's the cost of getting gas from a KC-135 in the air? when you include the total life cycle cost of getting that fuel, well, now maybe sustainable aviation fuel in Hawaii or in the Philippines starts to become more cost competitive or has a tactical operational strategic level advantage where you deem the cost worth it. I think that last point is really, really key. And that was one of the, some of the data points that really started getting me interested in operational energy

is when you see that, you know, for sure the defense logistics agency pays, you know, two or three dollars uh a gallon for fuel somewhere but getting it to uh the end use consumer you know a lot of the examples were like deep in at a ford operating base in the mountains of afghanistan can cost hundreds or or even a thousand a thousand dollars a gallon so then it makes you you know really realize that this the majority of the cost is in the transportation enterprise and not necessarily creating the fuel right um and so we've mentioned a couple times that you know i have this kind of uh interest in hydrogen um and we've talked about it on the on the podcast before um and so i'm curious um how you think that this would compare you know as kind of uh if you want

to say a competing or a complementary um kind of uh potentially alternative uh sustainable fuel yep and um there's there's a great report that you know i'll send to you and so we can post it for the listener, but it was a McKinsey report called like Open Skies on decarbonizing the aviation sector more broadly. And so that report kind of lays out an interesting framework on how to think about things like electric, hydrogen, and then sustainable aviation fuel. And so it uses kind of four categories. It uses climate impact, aircraft design impact, aircraft operations impact, and then airport infrastructure. In this report, kind of the headline is that hydrogen has the potential to make significant reductions in carbon emissions from the aviation

sector, but it is not there yet. And it is not there yet for a couple of reasons. One is that the aircraft generally have to be designed to take advantage of it, and they currently aren't. And to do that would require significant capital. In terms of aircraft operations, it might require longer to fuel them since you're not, you know, plugging a nozzle into a wing, you're changing out a fuel cell or something of the like. And then on the airport infrastructure, the infrastructure is currently not there to support hydrogen, whereas sustainable aviation fuel, at the end of the day, it's fuel. So you can use all the same infrastructure, et cetera. And so I think when most people think about hydrogen and its impact on the aviation sector, it is definitely a case of, yes, we do expect it to have impact, but we expect it to have impact over a longer time horizon. And so if you're trying to do the quick wins, sustainable aviation fuel is kind of there. When you start to think about decarbonization, you know, if that's your objective, hydrogen starts to become a player farther out, you know, more towards the end of this decade, middle of next decade. however if your goal you know as i expect for most listeners this podcast is not necessarily environmentalism but is instead something else then you start to get into you know hey what are

some of the logistical trade-offs um can we do stuff like as you and and eric have written where you know we have aluminum and water things that might be more beneficial for like a fob once once you shift your goals it all just depends on on what you really value and what the the readiness technologically is for what you're trying to do. I think those are really, really good points about how, you know, as you're describing sustainable aviation fuel basically is, I guess you could say, plug and play, right? You don't need to overhaul the infrastructure. You don't need to change the storage. And am I correct in thinking that you also don't need to retool the engines? Correct. Yeah. And that's kind of one of the nice things is that

Once you've gone through the process of creating this synthetic fuel, it's chemically basically identical to what's already out there. And so there are some issues with like certification and what the FAA and what people will allow. But mostly that's from a safety perspective, a liability perspective. But basically any engine that's being designed today will 100 percent work with sustainable aviation fuel. And so when that engine is still flying in 30 years, it can be using sustainable aviation fuel with no change required. Right. And then it follows. I don't think we said this explicitly, but this also works just as well in ground vehicles. It would work for ships, you know, changing the exact fuel as you would. You wouldn't put aviation fuel and use it as bunker oil, but the same concept works for all different platforms.

So this isn't necessarily an aviation specific idea, you know, work across the force, though aviation is, I think, by far the largest consumer of petroleum in the in the DoD. Yeah, yeah, it's exactly right. And, you know, it's interesting to think about because you've written a lot on hydrogen. This is on sustainable aviation fuel. There are a number of different ways to go about getting to each of these kind of end states of energy. And so really, it ultimately comes down to, you know, what problem are you trying to solve? And then from there, you can look at the list of available technologies to figure out what will work. And so the example that I always think of is like, hey, you know, an electric car with a 30 mile range is great for going to the grocery store. Do I need to have some hydrogen powered vehicle or, you know, some like crazy exotic solution? Probably not, because this electric-powered car works just fine. If, however, I want to fly across the ocean, well, now battery-powered aircraft are going to be prohibitively heavy, and I probably need something with, in the near-term, sustainable aviation fuel, and the long-term, maybe hydrogen.

And so, you know, similarly, when you all write, when you're thinking about, hey, what are the energy requirements of a littoral regiment on an island, there are a very specific set of energy requirements that exist. Some of those needs are probably best solved with batteries. Some of them are probably solved by hydrogen. Some of them are probably solved by, you know, just raw fuel that you transport through, you know, kind of classic logistical means. And I think broadly, kind of the common theme to a lot of this, the work that Eric Lindpacher and yourself have done, you know, the work that a lot of like DoD energy folks have done, this sustainable aviation field piece, is not that any of these are a panacea, more so that we are shifting our operations. We are

operating in new ways, in new environs. Let us step back and consider how might some of these emerging technologies enable us to solve the energy problems of the force. And regardless of whether or not you care about the environmentalism lens to it or the environmentalism angle, these technologies at least merit consideration because they have the potential to save lives, save time, save resources, enable the force to be more lethal, which is, you know, at the end of day, what the Department of Defense is for and what it's trying to do. I think that's a great place to end. And I think really the key question, you know, with all these different proposals is kind

of how do we generate, you know, how does the Joint Force and the DOD generate advantage in the 21st century? You know, and we talk so much about other emerging technologies and not so much about energy, even though energy underpins all of those other things. I mean, something that I think about is, you know, every time we talk about we want more computing power or we want distributed operations or we want directed energy weapons we want more mobility more mechanization longer range those those also have energy components to all of those um and i think that we've been uh a little bit spoiled um perhaps in the past

with how we do energy and and and there's uh immense opportunities to do it um more cheaply and more effectively and also have, you know, climate and sustainable benefits as well. So unfortunately, we're just about out of time for today. But before we go, David, you know how this goes. I want to ask you what you're working on and where our listeners can find you online. Yeah, so in terms of what I'm working on, it's probably trying to read more than I currently am and do finish my Christmas and holiday shopping. um but a lot of my current readings has been on maritime strategy um so you're kind of going back

the old international security reader on the topic kind of debating the maritime strategy has been my uh my bedside companion um and other than that um you can kind of look for more stuff on on sustainability the the intersection of sustainability and defense um just because it's a nice break from thinking about just tactics and whatnot. Um, but you know, usual suspects, Twitter, LinkedIn, uh, we'll see if Twitter's around by the time this podcast airs. Um, but otherwise the global, for those of you in the, in the system, uh, always happy to discuss with people and answer questions and get criticism and talk about the issues that, uh, that are important to our nation. Awesome. I'd like to thank my guest, David Allman for joining us today

to talk about his recent essay about sustainable aviation fuel. Take care. A porter, oh, and a porter, you know Where have they put it in the alley? A porter of wine, both white and red, oh Put it out the chamber now Oh, help me, oh, I'm putting it in the alley Where have they put it in the alley?

Help me, oh, I'm putting it in the alley Put it out the chamber now