Why Simple Flying's Headline, “Hydrogen vs. Electric vs. SAF” Made Me Cringe

Commentary from Danielle McLean of HYSKY Society

A recent Simple Flying feature by Joshua Eyre does a strong job surveying aviation’s decarbonization options—hydrogen, electric, and sustainable aviation fuel (SAF). It name‑checks efforts from Airbus, H2FLY, and ZeroAvia. It’s informative and timely.

https://simpleflying.com/hydrogen-electric-saf-fuel-lead-commercial-aviation-into-2030s/

Where the otherwise excellent article stumbles is framing. The headline says Hydrogen vs. Electric vs. SAF,” and the “Electric” discussion reads as if batteries are the only electric pathway. That’s misleading. Hydrogen fuel cells are electric, too.

H₂ Combustion or H₂ Fuel Cells: Don’t Lump Them Together

H₂ Fuel Cells = Electric

Hydrogen fuel cells convert hydrogen and oxygen into electricity and water. That electricity drives electric motors—the same propulsion architecture used by battery‑electric aircraft. In other words, hydrogen‑electric (fuel cells) and battery‑electric are both electric aviation. The difference is the source of electricity (generated onboard by fuel cells vs. stored onboard in batteries), not the motors or the airframe’s propulsion architecture.

H₂ Combustion ≠ Electric

Hydrogen can also be combusted in turbine engines and emits water vapor and can generate nitrogen oxides (NOx) due to high‑temperature reactions with atmospheric nitrogen—so it is not a "zero‑emission" pathway and it is not electric propulsion. The article briefly notes “turbine combustion or fuel cells” in a table, but most of the narrative focuses on fuel cells. That’s precisely why the umbrella term “hydrogen” juxtaposed against “electric” confuses readers.

Consider the following:

Propulsion Type	Energy Source	Output	Electric?	Emissions
Batteries	Stored electricity (batteries)	Electric motor	✅ Yes	None
Hydrogen Fuel Cells	H₂ + O₂ → Electricity + H₂O	Electric motor	✅ Yes	Water vapor
Hydrogen Combustion	H₂ burned in turbine	Turbine thrust	❌ No	Water vapor + NOx
SAF Combustion	Hydrocarbon fuel (bio/synthetic)	Turbine thrust	❌ No	CO₂

Clearer framing for hydrogen:

• If the topic is electric flight, say “Hydrogen fuel cells vs. batteries.”

• If the topic is hydrogen fuel cells vs. batteries vs. SAF - which is what I believe Mr. Eyre was comparing - then it should read, “Hydrogen fuel cells vs. batteries vs. SAF.”

You can’t lump H₂ combustion and H₂ fuel cells together and then compare them to “electric.” One of those hydrogen options is electric.

Battery‑Electric & Hybrid‑Electric: Key Near‑Term Roles in AAM/eVTOL & Regional Aviation

The article rightly highlights battery‑electric propulsion’s strengths like >90% motor efficiency, quiet operations, lower maintenance. Many early demos are focusing on regional and advanced air mobility (AAM) missions.

Crucially: battery‑electric isn’t the only electric pathway—fuel cells are electric, too.

SAF: Drop‑In, Scalable Today—But Not Zero‑Emission

The article’s SAF section is on point: drop‑in compatibility with today’s aircraft and infrastructure; potential lifecycle CO₂ reductions (feedstock and process dependent, often cited up to ~80%); but current production is <1% of demand and needs policy, long‑term offtakes, and projects from providers like Honeywell to scale. SAF is essential for the existing fleet now, but it still burns and thus is not a zero‑emission end state.

What the Article Gets Right

• Surfaces the right companies and programs: H2FLY, ZeroAvia, etc.

• Accurately outlines hydrogen infrastructure and cryogenic storage challenges.

• Sensibly positions battery‑electric for regional and Urban Air Mobility (UAM) missions.

• Explains why SAF is the fastest lever for reducing (not removing) today’s emissions.

Where the Framing Needs a Tune‑Up

• Headline implies hydrogen and electric are opposites.

• “Electric” is treated as batteries‑only, overlooking that fuel cells are electric.

• Table mentions H₂ combustion and fuel cells together, while the emissions row lists “water vapor” (true for fuel cells; H₂ combustion can also create NOx).

• Readers shouldn’t have to infer which hydrogen pathway is being discussed.

HYSKY’s Style Guide for Clear Headlines

• If comparing fuel cells to batteries to SAF is the focus: Hydrogen fuel cells vs. batteries vs. SAF

• If hydrogen combustion and hydrogen fuel cells are compared to batteries and SAF: Hydrogen combustion vs. Hydrogen electric fuel cells vs. batteries vs. SAF

• If contrasting architectures: Fuel‑based turbines vs. electric propulsion (fuel cells & batteries)

FAQ — Hydrogen Aviation, Electric Propulsion, AAM/eVTOL & SAF

1. Are hydrogen fuel cell aircraft electric?

   1. Yes. Fuel cells generate electricity to power electric motors; there is no combustion.

2. Is “electric” synonymous with batteries?

   1. No. Electric includes battery‑electric and hydrogen‑electric (fuel cells); both use electric motors.

3. How does hydrogen combustion differ from fuel cells?

   1. Combustion burns H₂ in turbines (emits water and can produce NOx); fuel cells create electricity electrochemically (water only).

4. Why is “Hydrogen vs. Electric” misleading?

   1. Because one major hydrogen pathway—fuel cells—is electric. The proper comparison is fuel cells vs. batteries (both electric) or H₂ combustion vs. electric vs. SAF.

5. Where will battery‑electric shine first?

   1. Regional routes and AAM/eVTOL, thanks to high motor efficiency and evolving batteries; range remains constrained by energy density.

6. Why pursue hydrogen fuel cells for larger aircraft?

   1. Hydrogen has excellent energy‑to‑weight, enabling longer ranges once cryogenic tanks and integration are solved.

7. What about contrails and non‑CO₂ effects?

   1. Fuel cells emit water; at altitude this can form contrails under certain conditions. Combustion adds NOx to the climate impact profile.

8. How soon could hydrogen‑electric enter service?

   1. Demonstrators exist today; major OEMs like Airbus target mid‑2030s for first commercial entrants (contingent on infrastructure and certification).

9. Is SAF zero‑emission?

   1. No. SAF can cut lifecycle CO₂ substantially yet still emits CO₂ at the engine. It’s the best near‑term lever for the current fleet.

10. Who are key players?

    1. Beyond Aero, Joby Aviation, H2FLY, ZeroAvia, Heart Aerospace, Honeywell, Amprius, Air Canada, Loganair, with analysis from ICCT.

11. What should journalists and policymakers say?

    1. Use precise labels: Hydrogen fuel cells (electric), Hydrogen combustion (turbine), Battery‑electric. Avoid “Hydrogen vs. Electric.”

12. Why does precision matter economically?

    1. It guides the right infrastructure (chargers vs. LH₂), de‑risks capital allocation, and aligns policy with real propulsion pathways.

---

HYSKY Society is a leading organization advancing hydrogen aviation through education, industry collaboration, and events like FLYING HY 2025.

For the latest news, insights, and content regarding hydrogen aviation, please join the following HYSKY Society channels: YouTube, X, and LinkedIn.

Join HYSKY Connect: The Hub for Hydrogen Aviation Leaders

HYSKY Connect is a premier membership network for professionals, innovators, and companies driving the hydrogen aviation revolution. It's more than a membership—it's a gateway to exclusive benefits, strategic visibility, and meaningful collaboration within the hydrogen aviation ecosystem.

HYSKY Connect VIP Membership Includes:

• Complimentary sponsorship of FLYING HY 2025

• Company listing in the HYSKY Connect member database

• Discounts on HYSKY summits and educational programs

• Direct messaging access to other members

• Complimentary legal and technical consultations

• Ongoing visibility across HYSKY media, events, and website

To become a HYSKY Connect VIP: https://connect.hysky.org/