A new report from the Green Hydrogen Catapult, co-authored by RMI, raises a crucial concern: weak emissions accounting could undermine hydrogen’s role in global decarbonization.
As policymakers worldwide seek to position hydrogen as a clean fuel alternative, this report highlights that hydrogen could fail to deliver on its promise of deep carbon reductions without robust tracking of emissions across the entire value chain.
The Emissions Problem with Blue Hydrogen
One of the key findings is that blue hydrogen, derived from natural gas with carbon capture, could contribute more to emissions than expected. The report specifically flags blue hydrogen imports into Europe, such as those from the U.S. Gulf Coast, as a significant concern. Despite ambitious plans to utilize blue hydrogen as a “clean” energy source, real-world methane leakage rates and suboptimal carbon capture efficiencies mean that blue hydrogen could have an emissions profile worse than burning coal or liquefied natural gas (LNG). For instance, with a methane leakage rate of 9.4%—a regional figure for the U.S. Permian Basin—the life-cycle emissions intensity for blue hydrogen can be as high as 14.03 kgCO2e/kgH2, far exceeding the EU’s threshold for low-carbon hydrogen at 3.38 kgCO2e/kgH2.
Even with a best-case scenario of 85% carbon capture rates, blue hydrogen still struggles to meet these limits, raising questions about its long-term viability as a decarbonization tool.
Underestimating Upstream Emissions
Another major concern is that many existing hydrogen frameworks fail to account for upstream methane leakage. Methane, a potent greenhouse gas, is often underreported or ignored in emissions accounting. Countries like Japan and South Korea are at particular risk of underestimating emissions by as much as 50%. For instance, the report illustrates that blue ammonia imports from Australia to Japan for power generation could have lifecycle emissions nearly as high as combusting natural gas, when true methane leakage rates are factored in.
These omissions open the door to hydrogen products being falsely labeled as “clean” or “low-carbon,” when in fact their emissions could rival or exceed those of traditional fossil fuels.
The Importance of Life-Cycle Emissions Accounting
The report calls for full life-cycle emissions accounting to ensure hydrogen is genuinely clean. This involves tracking emissions from natural gas extraction and transportation, hydrogen production, storage, and transportation, all the way to its final use. Current frameworks, particularly in the U.S. and Japan, often fail to measure emissions throughout the entire value chain. For example, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) national methane leakage rate of 1.4% significantly underestimates real leakage rates, especially when compared to regional-specific values like 9.4% for the Permian Basin.
Without accurate accounting, hydrogen’s potential to contribute to global decarbonization efforts is severely compromised. It could also lead to a misallocation of public funds, as hydrogen products qualifying for subsidies under weak standards might fail to deliver genuine emissions reductions.
Diverging Standards Across Markets
The inconsistency in hydrogen standards across global markets is another issue. The EU, the U.S., and Japan have all developed their own frameworks for assessing the carbon intensity of hydrogen, but these frameworks differ in their treatment of emissions and definitions of “clean” hydrogen. For example, the EU’s threshold for low-carbon hydrogen is stricter than that of the U.S., where the Clean Hydrogen Production Standard sets a limit of 4.0 kgCO2/kgH2—significantly higher than the EU’s 3.38 kgCO2/kgH2 standard.
These divergences could lead to inefficiencies in hydrogen trade, increased certification costs, and confusion over which hydrogen products can be considered “clean” or “renewable” across different markets.
Recommendations for Policymakers
To avoid undermining hydrogen’s potential in global decarbonization, the report outlines several urgent recommendations for policymakers:
- Adopt Full Life-Cycle Emissions Accounting: Governments need to ensure that hydrogen standards account for emissions at every stage of the value chain, including methane leakage, hydrogen transportation, and CO2 sequestration.
- Harmonize Global Standards: Aligning definitions and standards across markets—particularly in the EU, U.S., Japan, and South Korea—will be critical for creating a global hydrogen economy that truly supports decarbonization.
- Strengthen Methane Leakage Reporting: Methane leakage, particularly upstream emissions, must be accurately measured and reported. Policymakers should move away from national average figures and rely on more localized data.
- Third-Party Verification: Independent, third-party verification should be mandatory for hydrogen emissions accounting to ensure transparency and accountability.
Securing Hydrogen’s Role in a Net-Zero Future
Hydrogen has immense potential to help decarbonize heavy industries and transportation, but only if its emissions are carefully tracked and managed. Weak emissions standards risk allowing hydrogen products with high lifecycle emissions to slip through the cracks, undermining global climate goals. For hydrogen to be a true game-changer, robust international standards must be put in place to ensure it genuinely reduces emissions compared to the fossil fuels it seeks to replace.
