Europe’s hydrogen infrastructure: The gap between ambition and reality

Europe has set its sights high, aspiring to a future in which hydrogen flows seamlessly across the continent, powering industrial clusters, enabling deep decarbonization, and strengthening energy sovereignty. Over the past few years, this vision has crystallized into detailed long‑term plans of which the most prominent one is the European Hydrogen Backbone Initiative (EHB). The ambition of the EHB is to build a network of tens of thousands of kilometers of dedicated hydrogen pipelines across the continent, large-scale underground storage facilities, and cross‑border import corridors for clean (renewable and low-carbon) hydrogen.

While the ambition is vast, the reality on the ground tells a different story. Construction progress remains concentrated in just a few countries, early operational assets are limited in scale, and most of Europe’s proposed hydrogen terminals, storage sites, and backbone segments have progressed no further than early planning or exist solely as conceptual proposals.

Despite this slow progress, public perception paints a far more optimistic picture. Press releases and project announcements create the impression that companies are rapidly advancing toward a fully realized hydrogen backbone, as if Europe is already halfway there. Every incremental milestone in the project development process is celebrated and receives extensive publicity. In contrast, infrastructure projects that falter, face delays, or are quietly cancelled rarely receive the same attention. They tend to disappear from view without explanation or public discussion. This imbalance in communication means that the image presented to the media diverges significantly from the reality on the ground, reinforcing a sense of momentum that is not yet reflected in actual construction progress.

This report examines where Europe truly stands today. How is the hydrogen infrastructure build‑out really progressing? What assets are under construction or already operational? A note of caution is appropriate here. Monitoring the day‑to‑day progress of hydrogen infrastructure projects remains a challenge. Public updates are infrequent, and communication becomes increasingly opaque once schedules slip or projects encounter technical or financial obstacles.

Europe is laying the tracks for a hydrogen superhighway: the European Hydrogen Backbone (EHB), a pan‑European pipeline network, largely repurposed from today’s gas grid. It is designed to connect the future clean hydrogen supply centers and ports to the continent’s industrial demand centers, with the aim to create a competitive pan-European clean hydrogen market.

The plan foresees a staged rollout in which corridors will link emerging “hydrogen valleys” to import routes by early 2030. A Hydrogen Valley refers to a defined geographical area, such as a city, region, island, or industrial cluster with a hydrogen ecosystem that spans part of or the entire value chain, from hydrogen generation and storage to transport and final consumption across multiple sectors. After 2030, the EHB should scale to over 50,000 km of hydrogen grid by 2040, with even further expansion planned thereafter. Estimated capital investments amount to EUR 120bn by 2030.[1]

The creators of this ambitious hydrogen highway are over thirty European Transmission System Operators (TSOs) and infrastructure companies under the EHB banner coordinated by Gas Infrastructure Europe, the non-profit association representing gas infrastructure operators, covering the full spectrum of transmission networks, underground gas storage, and LNG terminals.

[1] Source: 1732103116_EHB-Boosting-EU-Resilience-and-Competitiveness-20-11-VF.pdf

Let’s turn away from ambition and focus on what is under construction or in operation today. Existing operational hydrogen infrastructure remains very limited to date and is concentrated in clusters in The Netherlands, Belgium, Germany, and France. The majority of hydrogen pipelines have been in operation for quite some time and don’t provide third party access. They are isolated privately owned networks that transport grey hydrogen and do not form part of the European Hydrogen Backbone (EHB).

The largest privately owned pipeline without third party access is owned by France’s Air Liquide, spanning some 1000 km across Rotterdam, Antwerpen, and Brussels. Air Liquide also owns and operates hydrogen infrastructure in and around Essen, Germany, and in the vicinity of France’s chemical and petrochemical plants. Linde, a large German chemicals company, owns a 135 km-hydrogen pipeline around Leuna, Germany. There are also a handful of other companies that own pieces of hydrogen infrastructure in northwest Europe and the UK. Again, this infrastructure is not part of the EHB.

As for the EHB, there are just two European countries that currently have segments of operational hydrogen infrastructure with third party access: the Hydrogen Core Network (HCN) in Germany and the Hydrogen Backbone in the Netherlands. Both have started construction and some trajectories are already in operation.

The German Hydrogen Core Network

Germany is furthest ahead. In 2024, the plans for a 9,040 km Hydrogen Core Network (HCN) were approved by the German regulator. Set for completion by 2032, the network would connect key domestic clean hydrogen production and offtake clusters with relevant import and storage facilities across the country. The HCN is a collaborative effort by natural gas TSOs united under FNB Gas, the German association of supra-regional gas transmission operators. The total investment is estimated at EUR 18.9bn, to be fully privately financed and backed by EUR 3bn in government guarantees.

Approximately 56% of the future hydrogen network will consist of converted natural gas pipelines, which will help reduce costs, while the remaining 44% will be newly constructed infrastructure. Converted natural gas pipelines are much cheaper than newly built pipelines. The most expensive pipeline projects are offshore pipelines. This are subsea pipelines engineered to transport clean hydrogen.

The build‑out has begun with four initial pipeline segments currently under construction or already (partially) completed. The largest and most advanced project thus far is the Lubmin–Bobbau corridor. In 2025, GASCADE completed the natural gas-to-hydrogen conversion of the 400 km north-south pipeline from Lubmin to Bobbau, which has already entered service.

A second early-phase project is the Bad Lauchstädt–Leuna line in Saxony‑Anhalt, a 25 km conversion that became operational in 2025, operated by ONTRAS. A third example of early activity is the GET H2 initiative, a 50 km conversion pipeline between Lingen and Legden.[2] This was completed in 2025, operated by OGE. Along with it comes an 11 km newly built line that will link an underground hydrogen storage site to the grid by 2027.

While individual project costs for these four segments have not been published, the total costs of the HCN are estimated at EUR 18.9bn. A new regulatory framework aims to balance these costs and revenues until 2055. The Bundesnetzagentur has officially set the transport tariff at EUR 25 per kilowatt hour per hour per annum (kWh/h/a) in 2025. This means that a network user has the right to transport a certain amount of hydrogen in every hour of a year for that tariff. The tariff is applicable to all entry and exit points in the HCN and aims to ensure cost recovery for TSOs during the long ramp‑up period while remaining marketable for early users. It will be indexed annually for inflation, bringing the 2026 tariff to EUR 25.55/kWh/h/a.

The Dutch Hydrogen Backbone

Germany is not alone in its progress. The Netherlands is also moving from planning to execution, albeit at a different pace and scale. In The Netherlands, HyNetwork Services (HNS), a wholly owned subsidiary of Gasunie, is responsible for developing and operating the Dutch hydrogen transmission network. Hydrogen infrastructure development in the Netherlands is guided by ambitious plans to build a national backbone of roughly 1,200 km, initially targeted for completion by 2030, which was later revised to 2033. The total investment is estimated at EUR 3.8bn, supported by EUR 750m in government subsidies.

This network is intended to connect six industrial clusters within the Netherlands and includes connections with Germany and Belgium, consisting largely of repurposed existing natural gas pipelines. Approximately 63% of the hydrogen network will consist of converted natural gas pipelines, while the remaining 37% will be newly constructed infrastructure.

The first section, which is a 32 km pipeline in the Rotterdam port area, is scheduled to become operational soon. It has been fully welded and construction is nearly complete, but it is still in the testing and commissioning phase, with the first hydrogen flows expected in 2026. This will be followed by the phased connection of other industrial clusters between 2026 and 2033. Another standalone piece of infrastructure in the Netherlands is the Delta Rhine Corridor (DRC) which has been planned, but delays have postponed the final investment decision.

The initial cost of the Dutch hydrogen backbone was estimated at EUR 1.5 bn, but this number was revised up to EUR 3.8 bn last year. The government subsidy remained unchanged at EUR 750m. At the end of 2023, the transport tariff was set by the Autoriteit Consument en Markt (ACM) at EUR 42.27 per kW/year excluding VAT (this is a different notation than in Germany but it means the same). Tariffs will be indexed annually based on the consumer price index published by Statistics Netherlands (CBS). The indexed tariff for 2026 is EUR 48.71 per kW/year, ex VAT. No distinction is made between entry and exit.[3]

This comparison highlights a key point: although both countries aim to build national hydrogen backbones, the regulatory and financial frameworks behind them diverge considerably. The Dutch tariff is significantly higher than the German tariff. This is because hydrogen transport tariffs in the Netherlands and Germany have developed in distinct contexts of structurally different policies, cost‑allocation, and market‑design. The key difference is that German hydrogen tariffs are intentionally kept low in the ramp-up phase through a government‑backed ramp‑up mechanism that spreads cost recovery to 2055.

While EU hydrogen regulation allows all member states to spread cost recovery over time, the Netherlands has not yet implemented the necessary legal framework. ACM, the Dutch regulator, has noted that adopting such a mechanism is essential to keeping Dutch tariffs affordable, but this requires legislative action. ACM is currently in negotiations with the Dutch government to allow such cost recovery spread over time.

[2] Source: https://www.marketscreener.com/quote/stock/RWE-AG-436529/news/The-hydrogen-core-network-is-to-start-in-2025-with-525-kilometers-48684467/

[3] Source: Staatscourant 2025, 44652 | Overheid.nl > Officiële bekendmakingen

Importantly, pipelines alone cannot deliver a stable hydrogen supply, as fluctuations in production and demand would quickly lead to pressure drops, bottlenecks, or curtailment. Large‑scale storage facilities provide the buffer needed to stabilize flows and maintain system reliability.

Import terminals add another essential layer by opening access to global hydrogen markets, reducing reliance on domestic output and smoothing seasonal or regional shortages. Without them, pipelines risk operating below capacity or depending too heavily on variable local production. Together, storage and import capacity provide the flexibility and resilience required for a fully functioning hydrogen infrastructure.

Like the development of clean hydrogen pipelines, many ambitious plans for clean hydrogen storage infrastructure and clean import terminals have been announced. Yet the leap from PowerPoint to practice remains a substantial one. The main bottleneck is the absence of a steady, large‑scale flow of clean hydrogen to justify investment decisions and terminal conversions. The expected hydrogen volumes are far lower than initially projected, leaving infrastructure operators without the throughput required to make projects financially viable.

Underground large-scale storage

Hydrogen storage is particularly crucial because it underpins system flexibility. Without it, even a well‑developed pipeline network cannot operate reliably. Large-scale hydrogen storage in caverns plays a crucial balancing role in Europe’s developing hydrogen system. It would provide flexible and secure storage capacity, allowing hydrogen to be injected during periods of high production, such as when renewable electricity would be abundant, and withdrawn when hydrogen demand rises or supply tightens. This makes cavern storage essential for managing seasonal fluctuations, ensuring system reliability, and supporting industrial users that require continuous hydrogen supply.

Currently, progress remains concentrated in a small number of countries with suitable geology and active investment programs. The early projects now entering operation or advanced preparation phases provide important insights into scalability, system flexibility, and the likely role of cavern storage in balancing a future hydrogen economy. At this moment, underground hydrogen storage facilities are under development in Germany, the Netherlands, and France. These include pilots and large-scale storage facilities, collectively totaling 0.2 terawatt hour (TWh).

It is a far cry from what is needed, assuming storage levels of 10% to 20% of total hydrogen demand. Demand scenarios show great variability, but most are between 200TWh to 400TWh per year by 2030.[4] This would entail a requirement of 20TWh to 80TWh of storage capacity by 2030.

[4] Source: Scenarios for future hydrogen demand | European Hydrogen Observatory

Import terminals

However, domestic storage capacity can only stabilize what is already available. To meet demand in the long term, Europe will also need substantial volumes of imported hydrogen. Import terminals play a strategic gateway role in Europe’s emerging hydrogen economy. They will enable the continent to receive hydrogen or hydrogen carriers such as clean ammonia, clean methanol, clean or liquid hydrogen from global producers. This will help to bridge the gap between Europe’s future growing hydrogen demand and its limited domestic supply potential. If a hydrogen carrier such as ammonia is used, the ammonia must be cracked first into hydrogen and nitrogen before the hydrogen can be fed into the hydrogen backbone.

By providing the infrastructure to unload, store, and process imported hydrogen and feed it into national and cross‑border hydrogen backbones, these terminals will directly support energy diversification, enhance supply security, and position key European ports as central hubs in Europe’s future hydrogen market.

Against that backdrop, Europe today only has one operational clean hydrogen‑import asset, located in Germany and primarily focused on ammonia. This is Yara's hydrogen import terminal in Brunsbüttel. Meanwhile, the majority of proposed import terminals are still stuck in the pre-final investment decision (pre-FID) phase or front-end engineering design phase (FEED). This means that they have not taken the decision to start construction. This underscores that Europe’s hydrogen‑import build‑out remains at a very early stage of development. What’s problematic here is the lack of certainty about predictable hydrogen flows.

Despite these ambitions, much of the infrastructure remains in early development stages. Many projects look promising on paper but struggle to reach final investment decisions (FID) in practice. Projects that are approaching their FID can appear deceptively similar to those in earlier phases such as pre‑FID or FEED, especially when progress slows or information is sparse. Some projects sit just short of FID, yet are highly likely to move forward soon, often because commercial discussions are nearly concluded, permitting is advanced, or key stakeholders are aligned.

However, other projects remain technically in pre‑FID or FEED but show almost no visible progress for months, sometimes due to unresolved offtake negotiations, regulatory uncertainty, or financing constraints. From the outside, it can be difficult to distinguish between a project that is temporarily paused but will continue to advance, and one that is quietly stagnating altogether.

The challenge is compounded by the fact that not all developers release consistent or transparent updates, leaving observers to interpret incomplete signals. As a result, assessing true project maturity often requires piecing together fragmented information.

Some countries are beginning to break this pattern. A closer look at two examples illustrates how political commitment and clearer roadmaps can accelerate progress. Denmark, for example, has been working hard in recent years on realizing its hydrogen sector. There is strong political commitment. Large Danish infrastructure and storage‑related energy projects appear to be nearing FID, even if developers have not yet formally announced it. The Danish hydrogen backbone is such a project, for which Energinet is already preparing the first major pipeline section from Esbjerg to Veerst and repurposing an existing gas pipeline toward the German border.

Another good example is in Spain, where Enagás is working on the Spanish hydrogen backbone and storage in salt caverns.[5] The political commitment is strong. Two FIDs for clean hydrogen production have been taken by Repsol in the last six months,[6] underpinning the clean hydrogen economy is taking shape.

There are certainly more examples in Europe. However, distinguishing between genuinely near‑FID projects and those that are still in early FEED or pre‑FID with slow progress remains difficult, as developers do not consistently disclose updated milestones, and the visibility of commercial negotiations, permitting, and infrastructure‑connection decisions is often limited.

[5] Source: https://www.enagas.es/en/energy-transition/hydrogen-network/hydrogen-infrastructure-spain/

[6] Source: https://www.repsol.com/en/press-room/press-releases/2026/repsol-installs-second-100-MW-electrolyzer-petronor/index.cshtml

Taken together, these observations reveal a consistent pattern across Europe’s hydrogen infrastructure development. As Europe moves from hydrogen ambitions to hydrogen reality, we can conclude that the continent stands at the threshold of a fundamental energy‑system transformation. But progress remains sluggish, uneven, and heavily front‑loaded in just a handful of countries. The gap between the long‑term vision represented by the EHB and today’s small, mostly disconnected infrastructure projects highlights both the scale of the task ahead and the modest pace at which the build‑out is actually unfolding.

Germany and the Netherlands are emerging as pioneers, with the first operational pipeline segments now providing concrete proof that a cross‑border hydrogen network is technically and politically feasible. Other countries,such as Denmark and Spain, show strong policy momentum, with credible projects progressing through pre‑FID development. But the wider European system of pipelines, storage sites, and import terminals is still in an embryonic phase, held back by regulatory uncertainty, lengthy permitting procedures, and the challenge of designing large‑scale infrastructure for what will be very small physical flows in the early years.

A persistent chicken‑and‑egg dilemma continues to weigh on investment decisions. Producers are hesitant to make commitments without guaranteed transport capacity, while infrastructure developers are reluctant to break ground without assured hydrogen volumes. Europe therefore needs a clear circuit breaker to unlock simultaneous action on both sides. Accelerating the construction of core hydrogen infrastructure could play that role, but doing so will require substantial public subsidies and a sustained, credible political commitment to de‑risk early‑stage investments across the value chain.