A 164-page study by the eFuel Alliance, developed with Porsche Consulting, has just quantified the industrial market potential of eFuels in Europe through 2050. The headline finding: even if the electrification of road mobility falls behind schedule – and much suggests it will – Europe can still meet its climate targets, provided the eFuel ramp-up is accelerated from 2030 onwards. For Switzerland, this matters on two levels.

The study “The Market Potential of eFuels – Climate Contribution and Success Factors of the Ramp-Up” comes from an industry association, and we name that openly. But its underlying methodology – a bottleneck analysis covering 27 industrial factors, three comparative scenarios, and a lifecycle CO₂ balance – provides a quantitative foundation that has so far been missing from the Swiss policy and investment debate in this form.

The three scenarios at a glance

The study models three pathways for EU mobility through 2050:

“EU Ambition” corresponds to Scenario 3 of the European Commission’s 2024 Impact Assessment: minus 90 percent CO₂ by 2040, climate neutrality by 2050. For road transport, this translates into a BEV share of 80 percent in the passenger car fleet and 48 percent in the truck and bus fleet by 2050. The prerequisite: BEV new registrations for passenger cars would have to grow fivefold by 2030, while trucks and buses would need a sevenfold increase.

“Bottleneck-adjusted” works through what happens if these targets run into industrial bottlenecks. In the battery supply chain, the study identifies deficits of around 30 percent for lithium and 20 percent for nickel through 2044. It also sees systemic constraints in renewable electricity, grid infrastructure, and hydrogen transport through 2035. The consequence: the BEV share of the passenger car fleet reaches only 64 percent by 2050 instead of the planned 80. Combustion vehicles and plug-in hybrids stay in the fleet longer. Cumulative demand for liquid fuels runs 14 percent above the EU plan through 2050, and in road transport even 23 percent above.

“Industrial eFuel Potential” answers the central question: can this excess demand be met with eFuels? The study concludes that the eFuel ramp-up from 2030 onwards could reach three times the volume assumed in the EU Ambition scenario. By 2045, up to 200 billion litres of gasoline equivalent per year would be feasible.

The CO₂ balance – and where it gets tight

Swiss and European climate policy effectively operates within a CO₂ residual budget. The study allocates around 19 Gt CO₂ to EU mobility from 2025 onwards to keep the 1.75 °C threshold within a 50 percent probability.

The arithmetic looks like this:

  • EU Ambition: narrowly meets the budget (provided climate neutrality is achieved by 2050).
  • Bottleneck-adjusted: exceeds the budget by 1.7 Gt CO₂ – the target would be missed.
  • Industrial eFuel Potential (built on the delayed scenario): compensates for the additional emissions and even undershoots the budget by 2.7 Gt CO₂.

Translated: within this model, eFuels are not the desirable add-on alongside electrification, but the only modelled option that saves the climate target if the battery supply chain fails to scale at EU pace. This is the model’s conclusion – it does not replace the political debate about alternative pathways. But it makes the trade-off quantitatively tangible.

Switzerland becomes a reference case in the study

One passage in the study’s recommendations deserves particular attention. Addressing how demand for eFuels can be strengthened beyond shipping and aviation, the authors write verbatim: recognising eFuels in CO₂ standards for road transport – “as already implemented in Switzerland” – would drive economies of scale, lower investment costs, and reduce investment and offtake risks through cross-industry risk sharing.

With Article 11a of the revised CO₂ Act, Switzerland has therefore already introduced precisely the instrument the study identifies as a key lever for the European ramp-up. This is both a locational advantage and a locational responsibility: the legal framework exists – now the projects that make the instrument economically viable need to follow.

Where the ramp-up stands today

The study draws on a tracker of more than 500 globally announced eFuel projects. Three findings are central for the Swiss discussion:

First, eMethanol dominates with 82 percent of the capacity announced for 2030. It can subsequently be converted into eGasoline or eSAF, making it currently the most pragmatic platform fuel. eSAF, eGasoline/eNaphtha, and eMethane each account for around 5 percent, while eDiesel is barely prioritised.

Second, the supply side is highly fragmented: more than 120 companies are pursuing scaling plans through 2030. HIF Global leads with around 12 percent of global capacity, followed by Chinese players in Inner Mongolia (a combined 18 percent) and Denmark-based European Energy.

Third – and this is the central bottleneck – financing is secured for only 6 percent of the capacity announced for 2030. 94 percent have yet to reach Final Investment Decision (FID), and 76 percent remain in the concept or feasibility stage. Since construction and commissioning can take up to four years, these FIDs will effectively be decided in the coming months.

What this means for SPIN and Swiss defossilisation

The study quantitatively validates what we at SPIN have been contributing to the strategic debate for years: combustion engines are not the problem – fossil energy carriers are. Climate neutrality is decided at the energy input, not at the drivetrain. This logic carries through every segment of the study: passenger cars, trucks, buses, shipping, and aviation.

For Swiss stakeholders, three concrete entry points emerge:

  • Shipping and aviation: the study confirms that combustion engines will still account for over 80 percent of the fleet in 2040 in these segments. eSAF and eMethanol are not an option here, but a necessity.
  • Road mobility: the eFuel crediting already established in Switzerland is, according to the study, the mechanism that generates cross-industry demand. This is where political work is needed – the quota must be made concrete and reliable over the long term.
  • Industrial bottlenecks: those who wait, lose options. The FID wave of the next 18 months will determine which sites and which companies become part of the European ramp-up.

Context and caveats

The study comes from an industry association. Its methodology is transparent, its model assumptions documented, the Porsche Consulting data traceable. Three points should still be kept in view: first, the study explicitly excludes regulatory disruption, geopolitical shocks, and questions of social acceptance from its model. Second, the Industrial eFuel Potential rests on project announcements – a share of which will never be realised. Third, sustainable biofuels play a role in the modelling that the study itself calls “not depicted here” – which qualifies the exclusivity of the eFuel solution.

What remains is a soundly constructed quantitative basis showing that eFuels are not merely a niche fuel for aviation and shipping, but – provided the financing gap is closed – can form the industrial backbone of a climate-neutral mobility system.

For Switzerland, that means: we already hold the right regulatory tool in our hands. What comes next is the projects, the investments – and the next FID.

The full study is available here (eFuel Alliance e.V., March 2026, 164 pages).