Search Climate Insights Directory

South Africa holds approximately 80% of global Platinum Group Metals (PGMs), which are essential catalysts for PEM electrolysers and fuel cells used in green hydrogen production. While this provides a strategic opportunity for re-industrialisation and decarbonisation, the transition faces severe constraints, including an outdated electricity grid, water scarcity in high-resource areas, and a significant skills gap. The shift also threatens the coal and internal combustion engine automotive sectors, risking large-scale job losses in regions like Mpumalanga and the Eastern Cape. Geopolitically, South Africa must navigate competition between China and Western powers, particularly as the US has withdrawn support for the Just Energy Transition Partnership (JETP). The paper argues that for the transition to be 'just', the government must integrate mineral beneficiation with social safeguards, regional SADC integration, and comprehensive workforce reskilling.

The steel sector, responsible for 11% of global CO2 emissions, requires a significant increase in sustainable electricity to transition from coal-based production to electricity-intensive methods like green hydrogen-DRI and electric arc furnaces. However, the world's 65 largest banks continue to prioritize fossil fuel financing over sustainable power, with a financing ratio of 0.42:1 between 2021 and 2024, far below the IEA's Net Zero scenario. The document warns that insufficient investment in renewable energy risks a 'gas trap' where steelmakers remain locked into fossil gas instead of switching to green hydrogen. It specifically criticizes European banks for continuing to support coal-based steelmakers and met coal developers despite having decarbonization targets.

The report outlines the regulatory complexities of the energy transition toward low-emissions hydrogen, emphasizing the high uncertainty of future demand. It provides specific guidance for electricity and gas regulators on managing infrastructure investments, pricing, and safety risks. The authors argue that regulators must balance government policy goals with their mandate to ensure affordable and safe service, warning against 'stranded assets' if hydrogen investments are based on hype rather than economic reality. Key technical concerns include hydrogen's propensity for pipeline embrittlement, low roundtrip efficiency in power generation, and the necessity of high-integrity emissions accounting to avoid greenwashing.

The report analyzes the US synthetic nitrogen fertilizer market, which is highly centralized with 71% of capacity held by four producers. It evaluates seven ammonia production pathways, ranging from mature 'blue ammonia' (SMR with CCS) to lab-scale electrochemical and photochemical methods. The document identifies key barriers to green ammonia adoption, including high financing risks, lack of industrial standards, and the absence of long-term offtake agreements from farmers. It highlights state-level incentives in North Dakota, Minnesota, Illinois, New York, and Michigan, alongside federal support via the Inflation Reduction Act's 45V clean hydrogen production tax credit, which offers up to $3/kg of hydrogen.

The document outlines four pathways for low-carbon ammonia production: blue ammonia using carbon capture and storage (CCS), green ammonia via electrolysis, and novel methods including electrochemical and plasma-catalysis ammonia. It highlights that conventional ammonia production accounts for over 1 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions due to its reliance on steam-methane reforming (SMR) for hydrogen.

The Federal Hydrogen Hub Program aims to establish a national hydrogen network through seven regional hubs, with funding distributed across four phases over 8-12 years. While hubs claim local economic and environmental benefits, the guide notes that many proposed projects may increase pollution or waste energy. As of January 28, 2025, the DOE has instructed all recipients to cease activities related to Community Benefits Plans, pending further guidance.

The US chemical industry, specifically the production of hydrogen, ammonia, methanol, ethylene, propylene, and benzene, accounts for a significant portion of industrial emissions. RMI identifies 20 emissions reduction levers, 10 of which are commercially viable today and could reduce sector emissions by 34%. With additional policy and infrastructure support, this near-term reduction could reach 48%. The report emphasizes that while supply-side interventions like carbon capture and methane leak mitigation are critical, they must be paired with demand-side measures and long-term innovation in electrification and alternative feedstocks to achieve a net-zero sector by 2050.

The document introduces energy parks as a strategy to meet rising electricity demand by integrating wind, solar, and storage with co-located loads like hydrogen electrolyzers and data centers. It outlines the evolution from simple solar farms to complex hybrids and identifies key barriers, including interconnection queues and utility monopolies. The authors propose a 'digital resource' paradigm shift and new state legal frameworks to enable these projects.

The document examines the EPA's proposed use of hydrogen co-firing to set CO2 emission limits for fossil fuel-fired power plants under the Clean Air Act. It warns that unless the hydrogen used is 'low-GHG', the process could increase total emissions, as common production methods like steam methane reforming or fossil-fuel-powered electrolysis release significant greenhouse gases.

The policy brief examines how Low-Carbon Fuel Standards (LCFS) can complement federal hydrogen investments by directing clean hydrogen toward high-priority sectors. It analyzes existing programs in California, Oregon, and Washington, providing four lessons for other states: regulating intrastate aviation fuel to move beyond biogenic feedstocks, phasing in maritime fuel regulation, managing biogenic feedstock demand to prevent indirect land use change, and implementing rigorous emissions accounting to avoid loopholes for blue and grey hydrogen.

The document argues that clean hydrogen should be treated as a 'precious molecule' and prioritised for 'no regrets' hard-to-abate industrial sectors rather than being deployed indiscriminately. It recommends that EU Member States move beyond a sole focus on renewable ('green') hydrogen to include other low-carbon pathways, such as nuclear ('pink') and natural gas with carbon capture ('blue'), to avoid resource constraints. The guide emphasises locating production close to end-users to minimise transport inefficiencies and suggests that hydrogen in transport be limited to heavy-duty trucking, aviation, and shipping, while light-duty vehicles should prioritise electrification. Finally, it advises leveraging EU and national support mechanisms to fund 'champion' projects across the entire value chain.

The analysis demonstrates that ships built or retrofitted with dual-fuel capacity for ammonia can meet or exceed EU marine sector decarbonization targets at costs equal to or lower than conventional heavy fuel oil (HFO) ships when carbon pricing is applied. A new build fully powered by ammonia can reduce lifetime emissions by 77% with a lifetime fuel cost equivalent to an HFO ship, while retrofits can reduce emissions by 41-52% at a lower overall cost. The report highlights that ammonia's viability depends on the availability of varying carbon intensities—from 'moderate CI' produced via natural gas with carbon capture to 'very low CI' produced via electrolysis—and notes that while ammonia is already handled globally, its toxicity requires purpose-built ship systems and ongoing safety validation by the IMO.

The Clean Air Task Force (CATF) advocates for the adoption of three specific accounting standards—new supply, hourly matching, and deliverability—for the Section 45V Clean Hydrogen Production Tax Credit. CATF warns that without these 'Three Pillars,' electrolytic hydrogen could result in consequential emissions twice as high as conventional 'gray' hydrogen by diverting clean power from the grid and forcing a reliance on fossil fuel generation. While the organization suggests these strict standards are essential for long-term deployment funding under 45V and EPA rules, it notes they may be less critical for short-term demonstration programs like the Regional Clean Hydrogen Hubs Program.

The document analyzes hydrogen production methods, contrasting the high carbon intensity of fossil fuel-based routes—even those using carbon capture (CCUS)—with the lower impact of water-based electrolysis. It highlights a significant gap between current electrolyser manufacturing capacity and the targets required for the IEA's Net Zero Emissions by 2050 scenario. Reclaim Finance argues that financial support should be restricted to electrolytic hydrogen and prioritized for hard-to-abate sectors like ironmaking and shipping, rather than power storage or heating.

The Clean Air Task Force (CATF) argues that low-carbon hydrogen is essential for decarbonizing hard-to-electrify sectors like heavy industry and long-haul transport. In Pennsylvania, the MACH2 and ARCH2 hubs represent diverse production strategies—renewable/nuclear and natural gas reforming, respectively. CATF emphasizes that for hydrogen to be truly climate-beneficial, electrolytic production must follow 'three pillars' of additionality, geography-matching, and temporal-matching, while fossil-based production requires high carbon capture rates and minimized methane leaks. The document highlights Pennsylvania's significant geologic storage potential for carbon capture but notes a lack of public subsurface data. It recommends greater transparency, inter-hub coordination, and deeper community engagement to maximize the program's climate and social benefits.

Friends of the Earth International positions hydrogen as a dangerous distraction from real climate action, asserting that most production relies on fossil fuels and that even 'green' hydrogen is inefficient and risks perpetuating neocolonial extractivism. The document critiques various 'colors' of hydrogen, warns against carbon capture and storage (CCS) as an unproven patch, and calls for a systemic shift toward energy sovereignty and community-led renewables instead of industrial hydrogen projects.

The document critiques the promotion of hydrogen as a clean energy alternative, asserting that the vast majority of global production relies on fossil fuels. It categorizes different 'colors' of hydrogen, arguing that grey, blue, black/brown, and turquoise versions perpetuate fossil fuel dependency, while green hydrogen is inefficient and risks replicating neocolonial extractivism. The paper highlights the high water and energy requirements of electrolysis and the unproven nature of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS). It concludes that hydrogen serves as a distraction from deep systemic change and recommends a coordinated phase-out of fossil fuels and a transition to community-owned renewable energy.

The Clean Air Task Force (CATF) recommends that the EU prioritise 'no regrets' industrial sectors for hydrogen deployment, utilize all clean production pathways (including 'blue' hydrogen), and site production close to consumption to minimize transport inefficiencies. The report emphasizes that public funding should be matched to projects that provide socio-economic benefits to local communities and that a comprehensive EU database should be established to ensure transparency and collaboration.

The report argues that scaling green hydrogen for a 1.5°C-aligned future will not severely impact global freshwater supplies, as its water consumption is comparable to or lower than fossil-fuel-based hydrogen and other energy production methods. It estimates that meeting 2050 hydrogen demand targets would require only 0.33% of current global freshwater. To mitigate local water stress, the document recommends using non-freshwater sources like desalinated seawater or treated wastewater, intentional project siting, and revising water pricing structures to incentivize efficiency.

The Climate Bonds Initiative's Hydrogen Criteria define the technical and environmental benchmarks required for hydrogen-related financial instruments to be certified as green. The framework focuses on carbon intensity thresholds, decarbonisation measures, and adaptation and resilience requirements across the hydrogen value chain, from production to storage and delivery.