“Designed to run on up to 100%” says nothing about what percentage it will in practice operate on in service.

I am capable of running on a sustainable diet of 100% nutrient balanced meals and a strictly controlled daily calorie intake. In practice, I’m operating on a mixture of pizza and Oreos right now.

SAF is a good investment - it allows us to use the current airplanes while we transition the shorter distances to electrics. It also allows for a gradual infrastructure transition, because you can run a jet engine with any mix of kerosene and SAF.

And even if it runs on 100% sustainable air fuel 100% of the time, that fuel is better used powering more efficient planes.

It’s not as if we’re having surplus production of sustainable air fuel, or will have it any time soon.

> not as if we’re having surplus production of sustainable air fuel

You want to spur an industry by rationing its customers?

If SAFs are to be economically viable at all, they'll almost certainly need to be able to run in existing, unmodified engines. So: all engines will be able to run on some amount of SAFs anywhere for 0% to 100%, as will this new engine. This statement has no information content whatsoever.