As the European Commission unveiled its hydrogen strategy on Wednesday 8 July, environmental NGOs and the Greens/EFA group in the European Parliament voiced serious reservations, criticising in particular the Commission's planned transitional role for hydrogen produced from fossil sources with carbon capture, also known as 'low-carbon hydrogen' or 'blue hydrogen'.
“The hydrogen strategy should have been a 100% green hydrogen strategy!”, reacted Damien Carême MEP (Greens/EFA, France).
For the NGO Friends of the Earth Europe, “The Commission has fallen for the fossil fuel industry’s hydrogen hype”, while the European Environmental Bureau (EEB) called the strategy “a gift to fossil fuel companies”.
In particular, environmentalists fear that by supporting investments in blue hydrogen, the strategy could lead to the creation of fixed gas assets, thereby tying the European Union to the burning of fossil gases for generations.
In this respect, Esther Bollendorff, EU gas policy coordinator at the NGO CAN Europe, deplored the fact that the strategy does not indicate a date for the phase-out of fossil gases.
Investing in fossil-based hydrogen also “risks making truly clean and fossil-free hydrogen uncompetitive for the EU market “, the EEB said.
According to all these players, rather than foreseeing a transitional role for blue hydrogen, the Commission should have focused its strategy (see EUROPE 12523/1) more on the massive deployment of renewable energies, in order to produce renewable hydrogen, also known as 'green hydrogen', by electrolysis of water.
“We must invest massively in renewables rather than supporting 'blue' hydrogen [...] or expensive carbon capture and storage technologies [CCS]”, said Mr Carême.
While regretting that energy efficiency and sufficiency are not at the heart of this new strategy, the MEP criticized the fact that the strategy does not exclude hydrogen produced from nuclear-generated electricity either.
In a counter-current statement, however, MEP Agnès Evren (EPP, France) expressed concern that the strategy does not clearly identify nuclear power as a non-carbon energy source capable of producing the electricity needed for low-cost electrolysis of water.
Industry is generally satisfied.
On the industry side, the hydrogen strategy was generally welcomed.
For Hydrogen Europe, an organisation representing the European hydrogen sector, the presentation of the strategy constitutes “a historic day for the hydrogen sector and the beginning of a new industrial era”.
In particular, the organisation welcomed the launch of the European Clean Hydrogen Alliance (see EUROPE 12524/5).
“Producing hydrogen from natural gas and fostering the uptake of hydrogen from renewable electricity will provide Europe a leading position in developing clean technologies [...] and create quality jobs”, said Eurogas, an organisation of European gas industry stakeholders.
Representing part of the European renewable energy industry, the organisations WindEurope and SolarPower Europe also welcomed the strategy, in particular the key role given to renewable hydrogen.
Nevertheless, they called on the Commission to give real priority to green hydrogen by putting in place an appropriate renewable energy policy.
“Renewable hydrogen will not exist without renewable energy”, warned Giles Dickson, CEO of WindEurope.
In addition, the origin of hydrogen produced in the EU must be traceable, he said, “by adding clear labels for all forms of hydrogen”, referring to the proposal to introduce comprehensive terminology and criteria for the certification of renewable and low-carbon hydrogen.
WindEurope also supports the idea of 'Carbon Contracts for Difference' which, according to Dickson, could encourage the purchase of renewable hydrogen. (Original version in French by Damien Genicot)