Europe’s plan to scale up clean hydrogen—targeting 10 million tonnes of domestic production and 10 million tonnes of imports by 2030—faces fresh uncertainty as two senior European People’s Party (EPP) MEPs label the Commission’s draft “low-carbon” hydrogen criteria “restrictive and unworkable.”
Restrictive Definition of Risks in Investment
Under the delegated act circulated to member states in late April, hydrogen produced from non-renewable sources must achieve a minimum 70 percent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions compared to conventional fossil-fuel methods to qualify as “low-carbon.” By excluding nuclear-derived electricity and imposing tighter methane-based production rules, the draft effectively sidelines established producers and deters new entrants, say Christian Ehler and Andrea Wechsler in their 13 May letter to Commissioner Dan Jørgensen. They warn this will jeopardize Europe’s industrial resilience, climate goals, and strategic autonomy.
Additionality Clause Sparks Controversy
The absence of any 2028 cut-off for key certification of nuclear power purchase agreements (PPAs) underscores Brussels’ reluctance to embrace low-emission baseload options. Ehler and Wechsler insist that hydrogen producers must be allowed to draw electricity “from all zero- or low-emission sources,” explicitly including nuclear and “non-additional” renewables—thereby overturning strict additionality requirements that mandate new renewable capacity be built solely for hydrogen production. Without this flexibility, they argue, investment hurdles and grid constraints will stymie hydrogen uptake.
Methane Reporting Exemptions and Trade Impacts
German MEPs also challenge the draft’s alignment with the EU Methane Regulation, which demands detailed emissions reporting for methane-based hydrogen producers. Ehler and Wechsler propose exempting projects whose final investment decisions occur before 1 August 2028, fearing that retrospective reporting obligations will chill financing and harm imports from key partners. By attributing a default higher carbon footprint to natural gas, the Commission risks jeopardizing imports critical to Europe’s supply security and market diversity.
Discrimination Against Carbon Capture Routes
The draft further embeds preferences for electrolytic hydrogen over routes involving methane pyrolysis, industrial off-gases, and carbon capture and storage (CCS). EPP leaders deem this neither scientifically justified nor politically acceptable, pointing to the importance of CCS and industrial gas streams in decarbonizing heavy-industry clusters where electrolyser scale-up remains nascent. They urge Brussels to recalibrate the criteria to reflect the full suite of transitional technologies.
No Consensus Yet in Council
Despite last Monday’s Council working party meeting on the draft, no definitive positions emerged among national representatives. A diplomatic source noted that the absence of outright rejection brings the act closer to rapid adoption, but with the EPP united in its opposition, the act faces a high-stakes vote in both Parliament and Council during the upcoming scrutiny period.
Navigating the Path Forward
As the EU races to meet its 2030 hydrogen targets and bolster strategic autonomy, balancing stringent environmental ambitions with pragmatic industrial policy will prove critical. The resolution of this delegated act will signal whether Europe opts for an inclusive, technology-neutral framework or a narrowly defined regime that may delay market formation and deter investment. With billions in public and private capital at stake, Brussels now must ensure that its low-carbon label accelerates rather than impedes the hydrogen economy.
