Kenya Airways’ recent Nairobi-Cape Town flight using sustainable aviation fuel highlights both the promise and the practical barriers facing African carriers attempting to decarbonise, and raises questions about whether symbolic gestures can substitute for systemic change.
The airline operated the route using what it describes as “50 per cent SAF attributes under a mass balance system”, industry terminology that warrants scrutiny. Under mass balance accounting, Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF) blended anywhere in a fuel supplier’s network can be attributed to specific flights, even if conventional jet fuel physically powers those aircraft. This accounting mechanism, whilst accepted under international carbon offset schemes, means the Nairobi-Cape Town flight likely burnt standard kerosene whilst claiming environmental credits generated elsewhere in the supply chain.
This distinction matters. Whilst Kenya Airways deserves recognition for participating in emerging carbon accounting frameworks, the flight itself produced roughly the same emissions as any conventional service. The airline achieved a paper reduction, not an operational one.
The economics don’t add up yet
The broader challenge is cost. SAF currently trades at two to four times the price of conventional jet fuel, according to industry analysts. Kenya Airways declined to disclose the premium paid for this flight’s fuel attributes, but the economics explain why African carriers, operating on thin margins in price-sensitive markets, have barely participated in SAF adoption despite the continent’s potential as a feedstock producer.
The airline’s SAF came from Hydroprocessed Esters and Fatty Acids (HEFA) derived from used cooking oil and waste materials. Whilst HEFA fuels can deliver up to 85 per cent emissions reductions compared to fossil jet fuel when measured on a lifecycle basis, Kenya currently produces no commercial-scale SAF. The airline sourced attributes from international suppliers, effectively exporting capital to fund sustainability infrastructure elsewhere.
This creates a strategic vulnerability. African airlines face mounting pressure from European and North American regulators implementing carbon border adjustments and SAF blending mandates. The EU’s ReFuelEU Aviation regulation will require 2 per cent SAF blending by 2025, escalating to 70 per cent by 2050, for all flights departing European airports. African carriers lacking domestic SAF supply chains will face structural cost disadvantages competing on lucrative long-haul routes.
Building local capacity
Kenya Airways states it’s collaborating with government agencies and partners to establish domestic SAF production by 2026. The timeline is ambitious given the infrastructure requirements. Commercial SAF production demands significant capital investment in processing facilities, reliable feedstock supply chains, and technical expertise, none of which Kenya currently possesses at scale.
The opportunity exists. East Africa generates substantial agricultural waste, used cooking oil from urban centres, and has discussed cultivating dedicated energy crops. Converting these feedstocks into jet fuel could create rural employment, reduce import dependence, and position Kenya as a regional SAF hub. But realising this potential requires coordinated policy frameworks, blending mandates that create domestic demand, and risk capital willing to fund first-mover infrastructure.
Current regulatory fragmentation across African aviation authorities complicates deployment. Unlike Europe’s coordinated approach or the United States’ tax credit system, African countries lack harmonised SAF certification standards or incentive structures. This policy vacuum leaves individual airlines conducting symbolic flights rather than driving systemic transformation.
Beyond fuel: The onboard theatre
Kenya Airways paired its SAF initiative with cabin sustainability measures: upcycled blanket bags, reusable cutlery, locally sourced Kenyan coffee, aluminium beverage cans replacing plastic bottles. These changes generate positive optics and modest waste reduction. They also distract from the fundamental issue: aviation’s climate impact stems overwhelmingly from fuel combustion, not single-use plastics.
An airline’s strategic focus should align resources with maximum impact. Whilst operational improvements matter, presenting blanket bags alongside SAF attributes in the same announcement risks conflating minor adjustments with substantive decarbonisation. Business travellers and corporate travel managers increasingly scrutinise such distinctions when selecting carriers.
Mapping the way ahead
Kenya Airways’ experiment demonstrates engagement with aviation’s sustainability challenge. But one flight using purchased carbon attributes doesn’t constitute a decarbonisation strategy. The airline needs to articulate clear commitments: specific SAF blending targets across its network, investment in domestic production infrastructure, and transparent reporting on actual emissions reductions versus accounting mechanisms.
African carriers face a choice. They can remain price-takers in global SAF markets, purchasing expensive attributes from producers in North America and Europe, or invest in becoming price-makers by developing regional production capacity. The latter requires patient capital, technical partnerships, and supportive policy, but offers genuine competitive advantage as carbon costs reshape aviation economics.
For Kenya Airways, the question isn’t whether this flight represents progress. It’s whether the airline can convert symbolic action into strategic transformation before regulatory pressure and competitor moves erode its market position. African aviation’s sustainability gap is widening. Closing it demands more than demonstration flights.
By Our Reporter
