Hydrogen Where It Works

Hydrogen is often presented as a universal clean fuel. It is not. Hydrogen makes sense only where direct electrification is physically impossible or prohibitively impractical. For most energy uses, batteries and heat pumps are 2-4x more efficient than the hydrogen pathway.

Five sectors genuinely need hydrogen. Steel: Replacing coal-based blast furnaces with hydrogen-based direct reduction eliminates the largest industrial emission source. Ammonia/fertilizer: Already uses grey hydrogen as feedstock; switching to green hydrogen decarbonizes without process changes. Seasonal energy storage: Hydrogen can be stored in salt caverns for months, bridging seasonal renewable gaps that batteries cannot. Shipping: Long-distance container ships need energy-dense fuels; ammonia (made from hydrogen) is the leading candidate. Aviation synthetic fuels: Kerosene substitutes synthesized from hydrogen and captured CO2 may be the only viable path for long-haul flights.

Identify where hydrogen does NOT work. Passenger cars: a hydrogen fuel cell car uses 2-3x more renewable electricity per mile than a battery EV. Home heating: a hydrogen boiler consumes 5-6x more electricity (via electrolysis) than a heat pump serving the same house. The efficiency penalty makes hydrogen absurd for end uses where electrical alternatives exist.

Why do some governments promote hydrogen for heating and cars despite the efficiency penalty?

Incumbent interests. Gas utilities can repurpose existing pipeline infrastructure for hydrogen, preserving their business model. Automakers with fuel cell investments promote hydrogen cars. These are economic incentives for the supplier, not efficiency arguments for the consumer.

---