From arithmetic to ambition: How to use hydrogen emissions data to reduce its environmental impact
By 
By With hydrogen high on the political agenda, hydrogen producers are under pressure to measure and report on their environmental impacts. How can they do so effectively? And more importantly: how can they use this knowledge to reduce emissions? Calculators have limits — ambition must be added separately for the numbers to have any use.
Calculating emissions is the first step towards reducing them — we cannot reduce what we don’t know about. This is the case for every industry, including those frequently put on an environmental pedestal, like hydrogen.
Yes, despite the hype, hydrogen is no silver bullet against the climate crisis. Hydrogen can be produced in different ways, with variations in how much greenhouse gas is emitted in the process. From steam methane reforming (SMR), electrolysis, methane pyrolysis, and steam cracking, to gasification — there are many ways to make hydrogen.
Benefits of a consistent approach to reporting on hydrogen emissions
Comparing the environmental impacts of different hydrogen production pathways helps to track hydrogen’s role in emissions and enable clearer comparisons. It also provides data that can underpin informed decision-making when regulating the hydrogen industry. With the right political direction, this can help to safeguard and promote climate goals.
In the EU, thresholds and methodologies for calculating greenhouse gas emissions for hydrogen production are already in place. These rules determine whether a certain type of hydrogen can qualify as ‘renewable’ or ‘low-carbon’.
However, hydrogen is a global industry, and many countries outside the EU lack such legislation. The benefits of a consistent approach to reporting on hydrogen emissions cannot be fully unlocked until all hydrogen producers are guided by the same rules.
The role of standards in calculating emissions
Until all regions have a legislative framework to shape how greenhouse gas emissions from hydrogen are calculated, reported, and understood, voluntary standards have an important role to play. One such standard, ISO 19870-1, is under development.
This new standard will assign an emissions value to a variety of different ways of making hydrogen, helping to facilitate trade with consistent reporting. However, compliance with the standard will not by itself guarantee the sustainability of a company’s hydrogen because the emissions calculated could be high or low. How this data is used will be the real measure of success when it comes to the environment.
Part of a larger series that will eventually cover the entire hydrogen value chain, this standard has the potential to help demystify the subject of emissions in hydrogen production and guide policymakers when regulating the hydrogen industry.
For ISO 19870-1 to be an effective reporting tool, it should:
- Ensure accurate reporting of methane emissions in fossil fuel-based hydrogen production.
- Include additionality, temporal, and geographical correlation to ensure a full lifecycle analysis.
- Consider the indirect global warming impacts of hydrogen.
- Prevent underreporting, ensure the trustworthiness of the data used, and align with more ambitious frameworks to deliver on transparency.
This new standard should also be able to peacefully co-exist with the EU’s approach to calculating hydrogen’s greenhouse gas emissions — which sets a good precedent. Differences between legislation and standards could cause confusion and misinterpretation of emissions reporting. New international tools should align with the most ambitious frameworks, such as the EU’s. This would inspire progressive policy approaches globally — instead of potentially worse results.
From calculation to reduction
Once calculation methods are in place (whether via standards or policy), the next step is for hydrogen producers to use the data to lower emissions — a crucial phase that every calculation and reporting tool should lay the basis for.
Lowering the environmental impacts of hydrogen production is a task for producers, and those who regulate them can help. Policymakers can introduce the right methods and scientific thresholds. They should also distinguish between hydrogen production pathways that are relevant to the clean energy transition, and those that are not (for example, if they are fossil-based or rely on carbon capture and storage).
Voluntary tools like standards can also help — but only if the constraints of such tools are acknowledged. Calculating and reporting on emissions should always be a means to an end, not the solution itself.
Let’s keep hydrogen decarbonisation in our sights.
