In the energy sector, phrases like green hydrogen replacing coal or hydrogen as the main energy vector are already common talking points. Ambitious projects aim to decarbonize industrial processes using hydrogen produced by electrolysis powered by clean energy sources such as sun and wind. In Asturias, HyDeal stands out with plans to supply ArcelorMittal and Fertiberia with electricity from the EDP initiatives for Aboño and Soto de Ribera. The first phase is set to begin by late 2025. Gijón is also proposed to join a future distribution network linked to the H2Med gas pipeline between Barcelona and Marseille. Across the Principality, a portfolio of 25 projects targets producing 170,000 tons of hydrogen annually by 2030 with clean origins.
Yet the path toward hydrogen as a reliable energy source carries significant uncertainties. A recent report from the International Energy Agency highlights that hydrogen can play a meaningful role in decarbonizing heavy industry and long-distance transport, but its potential remains far from fully realized. The IEA notes that demand today is still concentrated in a few traditional applications and that most hydrogen production relies on fossil fuels. Low-emission hydrogen production is in a very early stage.
Among the 1,200 new renewable gas projects announced worldwide, only a small fraction have committed to firm investments. The agency points to three main bottlenecks: uncertain future demand, insufficient infrastructure to move hydrogen to users, and a lack of clear regulation and certification. This last element is emphasized, with the IEA arguing that inconsistent terminology hampers investment and trade, and that an internationally accepted method for calculating emissions could lower costs, improve clarity, and encourage investors, enabling greater economies of scale.
The IEA notes that the terms gray, blue, pink, and green have entered the discussion as labels for different energy mixes aligned with hydrogen. There is no universal agreement on what these terms mean, and that ambiguity hinders the identification of emission levels. The report explains that many electrolyzers run on prime power, and emissions vary dramatically depending on how electricity is generated, yet no color labeling exists for this segment. In the case of blue hydrogen, emissions per kilogram can differ greatly based on technology and the amount of carbon captured.
International standards and regulatory alignment are crucial, the agency explains, because without a unified framework, compliance with market rules becomes inconsistent. The analysis confirms multiple routes to low-emission hydrogen exist globally and acknowledges that current costs are high but are expected to drop with technology advances and scale. Investors and buyers may hesitate if different routes fail to meet regional expectations, making uniform standards a strategic priority.
To move the market forward, the International Partnership for Hydrogen and Fuel Cells in the Economy has developed a methodology to standardize greenhouse gas emissions across various pathways. This approach aims to increase transparency and support market growth. ISO is evaluating the method with a planned publication by late 2024, after which both private operators and governments should implement it.
In the meantime, many countries and regulators are pursuing different certification schemes and regulatory structures. These systems vary in how they define supply chain stages, the emissions margins used, allowable technologies, and the role of fossil fuels in production. The IEA cautions that these differences can create barriers for project developers who must navigate multiple national markets and certification processes.
Colors
The IEA explains how the naming of hydrogen colors reflects energy sources used to generate electricity. Gray denotes hydrogen produced from natural gas without capturing emissions, blue includes some carbon capture, pink signals nuclear-powered production, and green comes from renewable energy. The agency points out that there is not yet a consensus on these terms, which complicates efforts to compare emissions across projects.
The report notes that many electrolyzers run on electricity that comes from various sources, which can cause emissions to vary widely. No color label currently applies to this mix. In blue hydrogen projects, emissions per kilogram hinge on the chosen technology and the level of carbon capture achieved.
Resistance to universal standards and international agreements can slow regulatory alignment and market adoption. Despite these hurdles, the IEA remains optimistic that multiple routes exist for low-emission hydrogen and that growth is likely as costs come down through innovation and larger scale. If buyers and regulators can align on emissions requirements across different routes and regions, investments may accelerate.
The IEA highlights a path forward through coordination with international bodies and industry groups. The International Association for Hydrogen and Fuel Cells in the Economy has laid out a framework to harmonize emissions accounting. This framework is under review by standardization bodies and is expected to be widely adopted in the near term, guiding private operators and government agencies alike.
Until a universal scheme is in place, many jurisdictions will continue to implement their own certification schemes and regulatory regimes. The IEA cautions that these varying approaches can create interoperability challenges, even as they offer entry points for developers. The focus remains on aligning supply chain stages, emissions margins, viable technologies, and the role of fossil fuels so projects can scale and operate across borders with confidence.