Norway’s New Industrial Policy Pivots Away From Hydrogen For Energy

Join daily news updates from CleanTechnica on electronic mail. Or follow us on Google News!

In 2020, Norway jumped into hydrogen prefer it was the following North Sea oil rush. The federal government launched a nationwide hydrogen technique filled with ambitions and buzzwords, envisioning a rustic the place blue and inexperienced hydrogen would decarbonize ships, factories, perhaps even houses. In 2021, they doubled down with a hydrogen roadmap that talked about growing home markets and positioning Norway as a serious European provider. They earmarked almost NOK 1 billion—about $100 million USD—for varied hydrogen pilots and infrastructure investments. It wasn’t pocket change, but it surely 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 journey.

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 fresh electrical energy, with two-thirds of the power disappearing between technology and closing 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 likely one of the finest engineered and most leak free extraction, processing and distribution techniques on the planet, so it has fewer points in regards to the full lifecycle greenhouse fuel emissions of blue hydrogen than many different geographies, notably america, whose fossil gas business has the very best methane emissions of any on the 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. 16which a Norwegian contact flipped to me at present—thank FSM for web translation—didn’t kill hydrogen outright, but it surely undoubtedly stopped setting a spot for it on the grown-up desk. Lifeless-end maritime fuels like ammonia nonetheless acquired 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 hard, too expensive, 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 method to actuality: there’s no demand, no prospects, 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 all the pieces from oil platforms to automobile chargers to knowledge facilities. In the meantime, hydropower—the historic spine—has maxed out. They’ve dammed most of what could 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 interconnectors to Germany and the UK, and also you’ve acquired 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 sport changers. As an alternative, they grew to become cautionary tales. The deliberate Aukra blue hydrogen facility, backed by Shell, was scrapped when no patrons materialized. Billions in infrastructure, and no one needed the product. It was speculated to be a cornerstone of Norway’s hydrogen export goals. 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 sturdy, the diagrams slick. However after years of consultant-heavy experiences and no severe off-take agreements, it too quietly evaporated. Like many of those initiatives, it collapsed not from opposition however from inaction—loss of life by silence.

To the observe about consultants, apparently Norway’s hydrogen business has about 1,100 folks in it and a full 50% are consultants. That gravy prepare has ended, so that they’ll should search for actual jobs now.

I took a have a look at Norway’s maritime hydrogen push in my December 2024 piece “More Hydrogen Maritime Trials Surface from the Sargasso Sea.” What I discovered wasn’t fairly. Norway, a rustic with a globally revered shipbuilding business—ranked sixth in Europe based mostly on income—and among 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 whenever you pull again the curtain, it’s a logistics nightmare and a local weather head faux. 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 tip end result? The MF Hydra emits about twice as a lot CO₂ full lifecycle because the diesel ferry it was supposed to exchange. Its power prices are roughly ten occasions larger, its emissions are 40 occasions larger 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 an alternative, 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 instantly 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 challenge 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 internet 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 fully buried hydrogen, however the grave is dug, the coffin’s half-lowered, and somebody simply forgot the final shovelful of grime. The nationwide technique now not positions hydrogen as the way forward for power. It’s a contingency plan at finest, a backup dancer in search of 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 change electrons for heating, transportation, or grid-scale storage. And thank FSM for that.

Hydrogen for power is lifeless. Not wounded. Not stumbling. Lifeless. 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 expertise that promised all the pieces 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.