Generally, when such press releases occur, that means the project is mostly spin; already being rejected.

I recall a new tire design from Michelin that did not use air. A prototype was demonstrated. That meant the tire would never be marketed. Eventually its faults were reported - too much vibration.

If biofuel was viable, then it would not be reported. Boeing is simply doing what any engineering company would do. Look at everything. If they see something worthy, then the Seattle Times will not report it until it is ready for market. But such stories are good for those who judge by emotion. "Boeing is an environmentally friendly company. They use pond scum."

Biofuels already exist. They refining processes are constantly being updated and improved. It is more a question of when at this point - not if. Do a simple google search before preaching outdated nothingness.

This was reported by Expedito Parente, not Boeing.

Your assumption that it came from a press release shows you don't understand the relationship between Boeing and the Seattle Times. The Times is constantly publishing in depth reports about Boeing, without permission or help from the company, often to Boeing's chagrin.

Boeing doesn't manufacture the engines, which would be the primary consideration for any move to biofuels. They do, however, have to consider the fuel storage and handling. This would be especially true of Boeing Business jets that compete with Embraer.

Boeing also frequently funds, and lends technical support, to start-ups that would enhance/support the airline industry.