Aviation Energy Reference

Energy density by carrier

Quoting either column alone misleads, and hydrogen is why. It carries 2.79× Jet A’s energy per kilogram and only 0.25× per litre — roughly four times the tank volume for the same energy, which is why hydrogen aircraft concepts cannot put fuel in the wings. A battery loses on both counts at once: 0.02× by mass.

Fuel and CO₂ on a 5550 km sector

Per-passenger efficiency is not monotonic in aircraft size. On this route the narrowbody burns 95.6 kg per passenger against the widebody’s 138.8— because efficiency per passenger is seats divided by burn, and seat count and route fit matter more than aircraft class. CO₂ is simply the fuel mass times 3.16, which no engine improvement changes.

Cruise averages at full load. A real flight adds taxi, climb, descent and reserves, so short-sector figures in particular are a floor.

SAF blends on 20000 kg of fuel, at a 70% lifecycle reduction

The saving is simply the blend multiplied by the lifecycle reduction, which is why a 2% blend saves 1.4% and even a 100% blend saves 70%, not everything. Current certification generally caps blends at half, so today’s fleet cannot reach the bottom row whatever the supply.

Range from 10000 kg of carrier, on an aircraft needing 3 MJ/km

The efficiency column is working forthe battery here — an electric drivetrain delivers 90% of stored energy against a turbine’s 40% — and it still reaches 2700 km against 57333. That is the gap, and it is why electric flight is a short-range technology rather than a narrowbody one. A battery also weighs the same when empty, so the aircraft never gets lighter as it flies.