Norway’s New Industrial Coverage Pivots Away From Hydrogen For Vitality

Join day by day information updates from CleanTechnica on e mail. Or comply with us on Google Information!

In 2020, Norway jumped into hydrogen prefer it was the following North Sea oil rush. The federal government launched a nationwide hydrogen technique stuffed with ambitions and buzzwords, envisioning a rustic the place blue and inexperienced hydrogen would decarbonize ships, factories, possibly even houses. In 2021, they doubled down with a hydrogen roadmap that talked about creating home markets and positioning Norway as a serious European provider. They earmarked practically NOK 1 billion—about $100 million USD—for numerous hydrogen pilots and infrastructure investments. It wasn’t pocket change, however it additionally wasn’t remotely near what would have been wanted to make hydrogen power economically viable at scale. Nonetheless, the hydrogen hype cycle was in full spin, and Norway, like a lot of Europe, was alongside for the experience.

The issue, as all the time, was that physics and economics refused to learn the press releases. Hydrogen as an power vector is spectacularly inefficient. Inexperienced hydrogen eats up large volumes of unpolluted electrical energy, with two-thirds of the power disappearing between technology and last use. Blue hydrogen is rather less power-hungry however requires huge infrastructure and comes saddled with upstream methane leaks and a carbon seize system that by no means fairly captures what it guarantees. Norway, a rustic blessed with hydropower and an extended custom of engineering pragmatism, ought to have seen this coming. However the attract of exporting decarbonization in a tank was simply too seductive.

To be scrupulously truthful about Norway’s pure fuel, it is among the greatest engineered and most leak free extraction, processing and distribution programs on this planet, so it has fewer points concerning the full lifecycle greenhouse fuel emissions of blue hydrogen than many different geographies, notably the USA, whose fossil gas trade has the best methane emissions of any on this planet in each absolute and relative phrases by fairly a margin.

By 2024, the shine had worn off. Norway’s new industrial technique, Meld. St. 16, which a Norwegian contact flipped to me right now—thank FSM for web translation—didn’t kill hydrogen outright, however it positively stopped setting a spot for it on the grown-up desk. Useless-end maritime fuels like ammonia nonetheless bought a nod and a few funding from Enova—about $75 million USD throughout 5 initiatives—however the remainder of the hydrogen dream was quietly filed below “too arduous, too costly, too speculative.” The technique speaks in hushed tones about immature markets, poor cost-competitiveness, electrical energy constraints, and transport challenges. That’s bureaucrat-speak for “this isn’t going to work.” The grand visions of hydrogen hubs and European exports have given option to actuality: there’s no demand, no clients, and no monetary logic.

A part of the issue was that Norway’s premise was plentiful electrical energy, however Norway’s energy surplus isn’t what it was once. Demand is hovering because the nation electrifies every little thing from oil platforms to automotive chargers to knowledge facilities. In the meantime, hydropower—the historic spine—has maxed out. They’ve dammed most of what will be dammed, and local weather volatility isn’t serving to reservoir ranges. Wind energy? That stalled after NIMBYs realized 180-meter generators weren’t invisible. Add in export obligations by way of interconnectors to Germany and the UK, and also you’ve bought electrons flowing out simply when home industries are begging for extra. Even the place provide exists, the grid isn’t maintaining—factories are ready years for connections.

A few of Norway’s flagship hydrogen initiatives have been meant to be recreation changers. As a substitute, they turned cautionary tales. The deliberate Aukra blue hydrogen facility, backed by Shell, was scrapped when no consumers materialized. Billions in infrastructure, and no one needed the product. It was speculated to be a cornerstone of Norway’s hydrogen export desires. Seems, nobody in Europe needed to pay a premium for a molecule that loses half its power earlier than it even reaches a pipeline.

Then there was the Hellesylt Hydrogen Hub, pitched as a full-circle inexperienced power ecosystem: electrolysis, hydrogen storage, and zero-emissions ferries all powered by clear hydropower. The buzzwords have been robust, the diagrams slick. However after years of consultant-heavy studies and no critical off-take agreements, it too quietly evaporated. Like many of those initiatives, it collapsed not from opposition however from inaction—dying by silence.

To the notice about consultants, apparently Norway’s hydrogen trade has about 1,100 folks in it and a full 50% are consultants. That gravy practice has ended, so that they’ll need to search for actual jobs now.

I took a have a look at Norway’s maritime hydrogen push in my December 2024 piece “Extra Hydrogen Maritime Trials Floor from the Sargasso Sea.” What I discovered wasn’t fairly. Norway, a rustic with a globally revered shipbuilding trade—ranked sixth in Europe primarily based on income—and a few of the most electrified transport wherever, had poured a piece of its innovation capital right into a gas that by no means made sense for its use case.

The MF Hydra was speculated to be the crown jewel—the world’s first liquid hydrogen-powered ferry. However if you pull again the curtain, it’s a logistics nightmare and a local weather head pretend. The hydrogen is liquefied in Germany, trucked greater than 1,300 kilometers to Norway, can’t even undergo tunnels and has to get particular permission to take ferries at particular low-traffic occasions due to security restrictions. The top consequence? The MF Hydra emits about twice as a lot CO₂ full lifecycle because the diesel ferry it was supposed to interchange. Its power prices are roughly ten occasions increased, its emissions are 40 occasions increased and it travels slower than Norway’s well-proven battery-electric ferries.

And this isn’t a one-off glitch—it’s systemic. Norway thought hydrogen would give its shipbuilders a technological edge within the age of decarbonization. As a substitute, they ended up chasing a dead-end gas that’s outperformed by batteries in nearly each ferry route they function. I in contrast it to what British Columbia is doing in Canada: investing straight in battery-electric ferries and increasing shore energy. No unique gas. No costly infrastructure. Simply clear, quiet, quick vessels that work.

Equinor, for its half, learn the room. In late 2024, it scrapped plans to construct the world’s first offshore hydrogen pipeline to Germany. The $3 billion infrastructure mission collapsed below its personal weight, largely as a result of nobody needed the product on the different finish. Across the identical time, Equinor slashed its deliberate investments within the power transition by 50 % and walked again its clear power capability targets. It’s nonetheless claiming that it’s going to be web zero by 2050, however as a substitute of doing it by pivoting to renewables, it’s claiming it’s going to do it by lowering emissions from its fossil gas extraction, processing, refining and distribution and from burying CO2.  The retreat isn’t tactical—it’s a full-blown give up with a well mannered press launch.

Norway hasn’t utterly buried hydrogen, however the grave is dug, the coffin’s half-lowered, and somebody simply forgot the final shovelful of grime. The nationwide technique not positions hydrogen as the way forward for power. It’s a contingency plan at greatest, a backup dancer searching for a stage.

What’s most telling is that Norway isn’t framing this as a failure. It’s doing one thing way more Scandinavian: quietly altering course with out drawing consideration to the truth that the unique plan was flawed. The federal government nonetheless funds some hydrogen tech improvement and nonetheless talks about worth chains and innovation. Nevertheless it has stopped pretending that hydrogen will substitute electrons for heating, transportation, or grid-scale storage. And thank FSM for that.

Hydrogen for power is useless. Not wounded. Not stumbling. Useless. Norway has simply chosen a quiet funeral over a dramatic eulogy. Equinor’s pipeline cancellation, the shift in authorities messaging, and the collapse of early flagship initiatives all level in a single path: a know-how that promised every little thing and delivered nothing. Norway’s engineers, economists, and power planners are lastly aligning with the legal guidelines of physics. The one factor left is to say it out loud.