The climate change debate continues.

[Siso]

No-one has ever really got green hydrogen right. Information is readily available that it is a lot harder then the lobbyist say it is. Someone dropped the ball.

[octave]

15 minutes ago, Siso said:

No-one has ever really got green hydrogen right.

Whilst it is true that green hydrogen is still in its infancy, it does not mean that it is a dead technology.  

 

Notable (and relatively successful) green hydrogen projects

🇸🇦 NEOM Green Hydrogen Project

One of the world’s largest projects (over 2 GW electrolyser capacity)

Backed by Air Products and ACWA Power

~90% constructed as of 2025–2026

Designed to produce hydrogen → ammonia for export

👉 Why it matters:
This is one of the first projects moving from hype to bankable, near-operational scale.

🇨🇳 Chifeng Net Zero Hydrogen-Ammonia Project

Developed by Envision Energy

Produces ~320,000 tonnes of green ammonia per year (already operating)

Powered by wind + solar

👉 Why it matters:
This is one of the few large projects already running, not just planned.

🇩🇪 Bad Lauchstädt Energy Park

~30 MW electrolyser using wind power

Supplies hydrogen to chemical industry (e.g. TotalEnergies)

👉 Why it matters:
A good example of industrial integration, not just production.

🇮🇳 Kandla Green Hydrogen Plant

Small (1–10 MW), but operational and locally used

Powers buses and port infrastructure

👉 Why it matters:
Shows hydrogen working in real transport and port use, not just theory.

🇨🇳 Large-scale wind-to-hydrogen hubs (Inner Mongolia)

Multi-billion-dollar developments combining renewables + hydrogen

China already exceeded ~220,000 tonnes/year capacity and scaling fast

👉 Why it matters:
China is arguably the only place doing this at real industrial scale today.

🏭 Companies that are actually delivering projects

These aren’t single projects but are consistently active (a good proxy for “success”):

Fortescue Future Industries

Adani Enterprises

TotalEnergies

Copenhagen Infrastructure Partners

They’re leading global capacity build-out and investing across dozens of projects .

 

⚖️ Reality check (important)

Even the “successful” ones share a few traits:

💸 Still expensive (often $3.5–6/kg vs cheaper fossil hydrogen)

🏗️ Heavy subsidies or government backing

📈 Success = scaling + proving viability, not big profits yet

⚡ Economics depend heavily on very cheap renewable electricity

Globally, there are 500+ projects and $110B+ committed, but only a fraction are fully operational .

 

[Siso]

But should state governments be putting money into it? They are funding a hydrogen department as well as putting money into the plant as well as having a HV switchyard built.(Nice and shiny as it glitters in the sun)

[octave]

2 minutes ago, Siso said:

But should state governments be putting money into it? They are funding a hydrogen department as well as putting money into the plant as well as having a HV switchyard built.(Nice and shiny as it glitters in the sun)

Governments have always invested in promising new technologies. Many may turn out to be dead ends but others winners.  Early aviation was able to flourish because of government subsides for early air postal services as well as passenger routes.

You are pro nuclear right? Would you have any objections to public money helping to kick start nuclear power plants in this country?

[octave]

Geelong leads nation with first hydrogen fuel station

 

Hydrogen from a 2.5-megawatt electrolizer powered by wind and solar. Just a small trial at the moment, but several buses and trucks are using hydrogen fuel cell tech on the streets of Geelong

[facthunter]

A battery with two  Negative Poles has no Potential. The cost of all things can be  determined by Careful assessment of what Tendering figures sexist in the real world for Contracting these things. and how Long they take to Build and what the cost Over runs are like.  Nev

[Siso]

16 hours ago, octave said:

Governments have always invested in promising new technologies. Many may turn out to be dead ends but others winners.  Early aviation was able to flourish because of government subsides for early air postal services as well as passenger routes.

You are pro nuclear right? Would you have any objections to public money helping to kick start nuclear power plants in this country?

Nuclear works!!! Well known that green h2 has a lot of challengers, not really a promising technology yet. Round trip efficiency is not that good either.  

[octave]

 

There are commercially successful projects happening right now.

 

proven / operational or pilot success

HYBRIT (Sweden)
→ Produced fossil-free steel using hydrogen instead of coal
→ Successfully demonstrated large-scale hydrogen storage and steelmaking

Fukushima Hydrogen Energy Research Field (Japan)
→ Operational facility producing hydrogen from solar power
→ One of the world’s largest working green hydrogen plants

 

Large-scale projects with strong commercial backing

NEOM Green Hydrogen Project
→ ~$8.4 billion investment, backed by 20+ banks
→ ~80%+ built and aiming for production around 2026–27
→ Long-term buyer already locked in (key sign of commercial viability)

🌏 Emerging industrial-scale success (often overlooked)

Chifeng Net Zero Hydrogen-Ammonia Project
→ One of the first fully operational, large-scale green hydrogen/ammonia plants
→ Producing hundreds of thousands of tonnes annually (industrial scale)

.