Perhaps when producing hydrogen becomes the objective rather than producing something useful with hydrogen.
We often measure hydrogen projects by electrolyser capacity — 100 MW, 300 MW, 1 GW, or even larger.
But MW measures installed equipment. It does not measure economic value.
A hydrogen project can struggle when the electrolyser has low utilisation, renewable electricity is not available at the required cost, storage and transport become expensive, or there is no bankable long-term demand for the hydrogen produced.
There is another way to approach the problem.
Start with the useful product and work backwards.
If the objective is green iron, start with tonnes of iron.
If it is ammonia, start with tonnes of ammonia.
If it is firm electricity, start with MWh delivered.
If it is silicon, start with tonnes of silicon.
Then determine how much hydrogen is actually required, followed by the electrolyser capacity, renewable generation, storage and supporting infrastructure.
Hydrogen does not always have to be the final product.
It can be an intermediate carrier that transfers renewable energy into industrial processes, reducing gases, synthetic molecules and firm-energy systems.
Perhaps the more useful KPI for the hydrogen economy is therefore not simply:
How many kilograms of hydrogen can we produce?
But:
How much useful industrial output can we create from each kilogram of hydrogen and each MWh of renewable electricity?
That shift in thinking could help distinguish sustainable hydrogen projects from very large stranded assets.
