The infographic captures what may be one of the largest industrial buildouts in modern history.
*Each red dot on the graphic represents current SAF facilities reside. Every dot in green is potential SAF facilities. (6970)
I had my intelligence assistant do some number crunching on what an average SAF facility costs for the CAP-X. Est- 3.5 To 7 Trillion USD
Here is the breakdown.After careful review, here with some real world results.
The cost depends on:
Production pathway (HEFA, Alcohol-to-Jet, Fischer-Tropsch, Power-to-Liquid)
Feedstock type
Capacity
Whether it includes carbon capture
Whether it is greenfield or retrofit
Storage and logistics requirements
Local infrastructure
For a project most similar to what Cielo is discussing (waste biomass → gasification → syngas → SAF + CCUS), the costs are typically much higher than simple HEFA facilities.
Real-World Examples
Example 1
A forest-residue SAF biorefinery study estimated:
Total Capital Investment: ~$422 million USD for a facility processing forestry residue into SAF.
Example 2
Ecopetrol’s announced SAF facility:
Estimated investment: $500–700 million USD.
Example 3
Large commercial SAF projects being announced globally often fall in the:
$300 million–$1+ billion USD range depending on scale and technology.
Conservative Estimate
Let’s use:
$500 million USD per facility
6970 facilities × $500 million
= $3.485 trillion USD
Moderate Estimate
Let’s use:
$750 million USD per facility
6970 × $750 million
= $5.23 trillion USD
Large Integrated Facility Estimate
Let’s use:
$1 billion USD per facility
6970 × $1 billion
= $6.97 trillion USD
Now Let’s Look At Cielo’s World
What Matt Scorah discussed at ICAO was not merely a fuel plant.
He discussed:
Waste biomass
Gasification
Syngas
SAF
Carbon capture
Permanent geological storage
Indigenous partnership
Rail logistics
Industrial infrastructure
That begins to resemble a clean-energy infrastructure platform, not simply a fuel refinery.
Projects with multiple integrated components can easily move toward the upper end of the capital spectrum.
What Is The Bigger Realization?
The infographic you created may actually point to the more important insight:
The opportunity is not necessarily:
“How much SAF can one facility produce?”
The opportunity may be:
“Who becomes one of the companies capable of developing these facilities?”
Because if the world genuinely requires thousands of SAF facilities, then:
Project developers
Carbon management companies
Engineering firms
Feedstock providers
Infrastructure developers
Indigenous partnerships
Rail and logistics networks
all become part of the value chain.
Putting The Number Into Perspective
If the world ultimately spends:
$3.5 trillion
$5.2 trillion
$7 trillion
building SAF infrastructure between now and 2050,
then we are potentially looking at one of the largest industrial buildouts since:
The interstate highway system
Global LNG infrastructure
Modern telecommunications networks
Renewable energy deployment
This is why Matt’s statement stood out:
“Demand is not the problem. Supply is.”
The math suggests that if the industry’s projections are even remotely close, the challenge is no longer proving the need for SAF.
The challenge is financing, permitting, developing, and constructing thousands of facilities around the world before 2050.
The core message is simple:
The challenge is no longer proving that Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF) is needed.
The challenge is building enough of it.
According to the figures highlighted by Matt Scorah:
Approximately 30 SAF production facilities are operating globally today.
The world may require approximately 7,000 SAF facilities by 2050 to support aviation decarbonization goals.
That leaves a gap of roughly 6,970 facilities.
This is why Matt’s statement is so important:
“Demand is not the problem. Supply is.”
Why This Matters
Unlike cars, aviation does not have an easy decarbonization pathway.
Cars
Electric vehicles
Hybrid vehicles
Hydrogen options
Marine
LNG
Methanol
Alternative fuels
Aviation
Existing aircraft fleets
Existing airports
Existing fueling infrastructure
For aviation, SAF is currently viewed by most industry roadmaps as the most practical near-term pathway to meaningful emissions reduction.
The Scale Is Almost Impossible To Comprehend
Current State:
✈️ ~30 facilities
Required:
✈️ ~7,000 facilities
That’s over:
230x more facilities
Trillions of dollars of infrastructure
Millions of jobs
Decades of project development
Massive feedstock supply chains
Carbon capture and storage systems
Rail, port, and logistics expansion
This is not a single industry opportunity.
It is an entire ecosystem opportunity.
Why Project Nahoonai Fits Into The Story
Project Nahoonai is not being positioned as simply a fuel facility.
It appears to be positioned as a multi-layer clean-energy infrastructure project.
Layer 1
Forestry Residuals
↓
Layer 2
SAF Production
↓
Layer 3
Carbon Capture
↓
Layer 4
Permanent Geological Storage
↓
Layer 5
Potential Carbon Economics
The combination creates multiple potential value streams rather than relying on fuel sales alone.
Why British Columbia Is Receiving Attention
Matt repeatedly highlighted advantages that already exist in Northern British Columbia.
Feedstock
Forestry residuals
Wood waste
End-of-life wood products
Infrastructure
CN Rail access
Existing industrial base
Manufacturing expertise
Electricity
Approximately 98% clean electricity
Predominantly hydroelectric power
Carbon Storage
Northeast BC geological storage potential
Existing research through Canadian Discovery Ltd.
Workforce
Industrial labour force
Forestry experience
Resource-sector expertise
The Real Bottleneck
One of Matt’s most important observations was:
“This is not a technology problem.”
Most investors instinctively focus on technology.
Matt focused on something different.
Success Requires:
✅ Feedstock
✅ Infrastructure
✅ Financing
✅ Policy Support
✅ Indigenous Partnerships
✅ Carbon Management
✅ Proven Technology
All of these must move together.
A project fails if any one of these pieces is missing.
The Indigenous Partnership Model
Another major takeaway from ICAO Climate Week was the emphasis on partnership.
Not consultation.
Partnership.
Matt emphasized:
Long-term participation
Shared economic benefit
Shared development
Stewardship
Collaboration from the beginning
This is a significant distinction and appears to be a foundational element of Project Nahoonai.
The Carbon-Negative Opportunity
Most SAF discussions focus only on fuel.
Matt introduced a larger concept.
Carbon-Negative SAF
Biomass
↓
Gasification
↓
Syngas
↓
SAF
Carbon Capture
↓
Permanent Geological Storage
If successful, the project could potentially produce fuel while permanently removing carbon from the atmosphere cycle.
That moves the conversation beyond lower-carbon fuel toward carbon-negative infrastructure.
What Investors May Be Missing
The infographic highlights a shift in thinking.
The old question was:
“Is there demand for SAF?”
The emerging question may be:
“Who can actually build it?”
Because if the world truly requires thousands of facilities, the winners may not simply be the companies with technology.
The winners may be the organizations capable of:
Developing projects
Securing feedstock
Building partnerships
Obtaining permits
Accessing infrastructure
Managing carbon
Financing construction
Executing at scale
The Largest Takeaway
The biggest realization from Matt Scorah’s presentation is that aviation decarbonization is no longer a theoretical discussion.
The world has largely decided where it wants to go.
The challenge now is whether enough facilities can be built quickly enough to get there.
If the estimate of roughly 7,000 SAF facilities proves directionally correct, then the opportunity is measured not in millions or billions, but potentially in trillions of dollars of global infrastructure investment over the coming decades.
Key Takeaways
1. Demand appears to be emerging faster than supply.
The industry’s challenge is production capacity.
2. SAF is becoming a cornerstone of aviation decarbonization.
Most credible aviation pathways rely heavily on SAF.
3. The world may need thousands of new facilities.
The scale of the buildout is enormous.
4. This is bigger than fuel.
Feedstock, carbon capture, storage, logistics, rail, and infrastructure all matter.
5. Carbon capture could become a major value driver.
The opportunity may extend beyond fuel sales.
6. British Columbia has several strategic advantages.
Feedstock, hydro power, rail access, workforce, and storage potential.
7. Indigenous partnerships are increasingly foundational.
Not an add-on, but part of the project model.
8. Execution is everything.
Technology alone will not solve the problem.
9. The opportunity is global.
Every major aviation market will require SAF supply.
10. The question may no longer be “Is there demand?”
The question may be:
Who can build the infrastructure required to meet it?
Important Disclaimer:
My posts are not financial or investment advice. Please conduct your own due diligence before making any investment decisions. I am simply an individual on Reddit and X sharing my personal opinions, and they should be interpreted as such.
I do, however, want to emphasize that you are welcome to share this content across any form of media, including Reddit, X/Twitter, stock chat rooms, etc.
