Hydrogen is often overrated as a climate solution. European import plans even threaten a renewed energy colonialism.
Hydrogen is currently experiencing a real hype. The "traffic light" coalition wants to double the 2030 expansion targets, which were only adopted in 2020 in the National Hydrogen Strategy. The EU is also accelerating its import plans in the wake of the war in Ukraine. A distinct color spectrum has long been projected onto the essentially colorless gas H2: gray hydrogen from natural gas, blue hydrogen from natural gas with CO2 capture, pink hydrogen from nuclear energy, green hydrogen from renewables, etc. Sports car enthusiasts, for example, want to preserve the roaring sound of combustion engines with hydrogen-based "e-fuels." These are inefficient and expensive compared to electric cars, but the FDP is not letting its clientele down.
Above all, the gas industry sees its chance of survival—not only through "grey" hydrogen, but also through repurposing its transport networks. According to the government, the LNG terminals planned along the coasts for liquefied natural gas imports are to be "H2-ready," meaning ready for a later conversion to hydrogen. However, there are no regulations for this. According to experts, a serious conversion beyond blending a few percent of hydrogen into the natural gas networks would be complex and expensive. Many recommend building new hydrogen networks that are geared to future hydrogen demand rather than current natural gas demand.
One thing is clear: only "green" hydrogen from renewable energies can ever be climate-friendly. The industry, on the other hand, likes to talk about "clean" or "low-carbon hydrogen," which is supposed to include everything from nuclear energy to fossil H2, including CO2 capture and storage (CCS), which is not yet market-ready. Even with CCS, however, a significant amount of climate-damaging methane would have escaped during production and transport. "Green" hydrogen, on the other hand, will remain scarce and expensive because it requires additional renewable electricity – in addition to a 100% renewable electricity mix that is still far from being achieved. Therefore, associations are calling for political prioritization of its areas of application, for example as energy storage or for certain industrial processes, but not in cars or heating systems that are more directly electrifiable. Also questionable are the aviation industry's plans to realize continued massive growth in air traffic through hydrogen technologies, which will take several decades to reach market maturity, would not neutralize all of the climate-damaging effects of flying, and would entail gigantic energy requirements.
All of this is scientifically relatively undisputed and significantly puts the "green" hydrogen hype into perspective. Those who rely too heavily on hydrogen will ultimately have to produce it directly or indirectly from fossil fuels or source it "grey" from the gas industry—exactly their calculation.
But the industry is also counting on a completely different factor: geoeconomic power.
Even with selective, purely "green" hydrogen use, it is assumed that a large portion of German and European demand would have to be imported. Besides Ukraine, which is now likely to be eliminated for the time being, the main export countries envisaged are North and West African states, where a large proportion of the population still has no access to electricity, let alone renewable energy. Now, with the support of government funding programs such as "H2Global," Western corporations are planning all sorts of megaprojects there to generate massive amounts of renewable electricity, convert it into hydrogen, and ship it to Europe. Another key ingredient is freshwater, which is already scarce in many of these regions. The alternative of seawater desalination, in turn, threatens subsequent ecological problems due to the leftover slag, which is usually dumped back into the sea. Large areas are required for energy production, including the most favorable locations for renewables – not for the food or energy supply of the local population, but so that EU industry can continue to grow with new fuel.
Europe naturally wants to continue to have access to the resources of the global South. Environmental organizations and even the National Hydrogen Council have drawn up lists of criteria for fair imports, but given the current power dynamics, these threaten, as so often happens, to end up as mere ornaments. Hydrogen imports will hardly be feasible as small-scale fair trade projects, even in terms of infrastructure – and keeping them as cheap as possible is the starting point of the project.
Hydrogen is a relevant building block, but not the magic energy and climate solution. It is just as unsuitable as a justification for new fossil gas plants as it is as a key to a sudden, solidarity-based North-South cooperation—or for the technical circumvention of long-overdue social changes. From a climate justice perspective, the demand arises: degrowth first, hydrogen second. Limited, targeted use with strict import criteria is essential.
Another version of this text appeared in nd on July 15, 2022.
You can learn more about these connections and the possibilities for action for social movements in our dossier Hydrogen and Climate Justice.