Phrases like “green hydrogen is the new coal” or “hydrogen is the biggest energy vector of the future” are already commonplace in industry. And there is no doubt There are ambitious projects to decarbonize production processes with this gas, which is produced by electrolysis (separation of hydrogen and oxygen molecules from water) produced with clean energy such as sun or wind.. In Asturias, HyDeal stands out, aiming to feed the ArcelorMittal and Fertiberia factories with its EDP projects for Aboño and Soto de Ribera (the first phase is scheduled to begin at the end of 2025). Likewise, Gijón is proposed to form part of the Spanish distribution network connected to the future H2Med gas pipeline between Barcelona and Marseille. In total, it’s on the table in the Principality 25 initiatives to produce 170,000 tons of hydrogen annually Clean origin in the 2030 horizon.
However, the path to this energy source is still full of uncertainties. This is stated in a recent report by the International Energy Agency (IEA), a Paris-based organization aimed at coordinating the energy policies of major developed countries. Although the business acknowledges that “hydrogen can play an important role in decarbonizing sectors such as heavy industry and long-distance transport, it is still far from reaching its potential”. The IEA warns that “hydrogen demand is still largely reduced to a few traditional applications” and that “most current hydrogen production is based on fossil fuels, while low-emission hydrogen production is still at a very early stage.”
Report, Of the 1,200 new renewable gas projects announced worldwide to date, only 5% have “made firm investment decisions”The agency highlights three main reasons for the “significant bottlenecks” these initiatives are facing: uncertainties about future demand, “inadequate” infrastructure to get hydrogen to customers, and “lack of clarity” in regulation and certification.
The analysis stops at this last point, emphasizing that “the lack of a unified terminology is a major barrier to investment and potential trade” and that “an internationally accepted methodology for calculating emissions can lower financial costs, offer greater clarity and encourage investors.” greater economies of scale”.
Colors
Therefore, the IEA includes “gray” (generated with natural gas), “blue” (carbon capture), “pink” (nuclear energy) or “green” (renewable energy) from the words “sustainable” or “clean”. The agency notes that “there is no consensus on the definition of these terms, which does not help identify different levels of potential emissions.”
To explain the problem, the report states: “many electrolyzers run on prime power, whose emissions can vary wildly depending on how the electricity is generated, but no color is assigned to it”. Likewise, in the case of specific blue hydrogen, the Agency argues that “emissions per kilogram of hydrogen produced can vary greatly depending on the technology used and the amount of carbon dioxide captured.”
Along these lines, the IEA emphasizes that the lack of universal standards or international agreements “prevents compliance with regulatory and market requirements.” Because while the document confirms that there are already multiple routes to low-emission hydrogen worldwide and that its current high costs are “expected to drop significantly” thanks to technological innovations and economies of scale, “if potential investors and consumers can meet the different emissions requirements of a particular route country or region, If they are not sure that it will not meet their expectations, they may be hesitant to carry out their projects.”
In this context, the Agency recalls that the International Association of Hydrogen and Fuel Cells in the Economy (IPHE) has developed a methodology to standardize greenhouse gas emissions along different pathways that can “increase transparency and facilitate market development”. This methodology is being evaluated by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) and is expected to be published by the end of 2024. It must then be handled by private operators and governments.
Until then, many countries and regulatory bodies are implementing different certification systems and regulatory frameworks, according to the IEA. However, they “differ in ways that may limit interoperability, even though they offer junction points”. For example, what stages of the supply chain are involved, the emissions margin they are considering, the type of technology that can be used, or whether fossil fuels are viable at some point in production. “These differences can create barriers for project developers who have to face certification processes for each of the national markets they want to access”He warns the agency.