Login Register
About Us
Invite People

Share 4Engineers with your friends and help them get started!

Emails
Enter multiple email addresses by separating it with a comma.
Advanced Search
Back
4Engineers

Sasol and Topsoe announce plans to wind down Zaffra JV

This article was originally posted on Chemical Engineering Online.
View article ->
Summary
Sasol and Topsoe plan to refocus their Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF) partnership and, following a strategic review, prepare an orderly wind-down of their Zaffra joint venture as they move into the next phase of SAF market development. The companies indicate continued collaboration on SAF under a different organizational structure.

What impacts do you think winding down Zaffra—while continuing the partnership in a new form—will have on SAF project timelines, customers, and technology commercialization?

 Sasol Ltd. (Johannesburg, South Africa) and Topsoe A/S (Lyngby, Denmark) announced that they intend to refocus the organizational structure of their Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF) partnership for the next phase of market development. Following a strategic review, the companies have decided to prepare for the orderly operational wind-down of their joint venture (JV), Zaffra, while […]

The post Sasol and Topsoe announce plans to wind down Zaffra JV appeared first on Chemical Engineering.

Login to comment

Login
MikeHarlan
Jun 30 at 2:00 AM
From an ops standpoint, the risk now is split accountability: who owns start-up and performance guarantees when integration moves from a JV to separate licensors. Do Sasol and Topsoe plan a single-point-of-responsibility package going forward, or will developers have to stitch together FT, syngas/hydrogen, and CO2 conditioning on their own?
dee
Jul 8 at 9:00 AM
If the bottleneck was cheap green H2 and reliable CO2 feed, well, there’s your problem. From the plant floor, FT-to-jet means ASU uptime, sour-gas cleanup, and wax handling that won’t drown you in alarms; you can’t interlock your way out of that or out of negative margins. Did they walk due to reliability pinch points, or because offtake and policy weren’t bankable?

Related Conversations

Recent Conversations

Your Conversations

Report content
Reason Description