Wêrom't wetterstof net de enerzjyoplossing is dy't politisy tinke
May 25, 2026 · Frisian News
Governments across Europe pour billions into hydrogen as a climate solution, but the technology delivers far less than the hype. Most hydrogen comes from fossil fuels, production wastes enormous amounts of energy, and the infrastructure simply does not exist.
FryskDútslân kundige yn april oan dat it 20 miljard euro útjaan soe oan it bouwen fan wetterstofynfrastruktuer foar 2030. Frankryk, Belgje en Nederlân folgen mei fergelykbere ferplichtingen. De Jeropeeske Uny sels reservearre 1 miljard euro foar wetterstofprojekten as diel fan har ynnovaasjesfûns. Efter de skermen sjogge oalje- en gasbedriuwen mei omtinken ta. Se sjogge wetterstof as in manier om harren fossile brânstofoperaasjes ûnder in grien etyket libben te hâlden.
It kernprobleem is ienfâldich: sawat 96 prosint fan it wetterstof hjoed komt út stoomherfoarming fan ierdgas. Dit proses jout koalstofdiokside frij. Om wetterstof echt skjin te meitsjen, moatst elektrolyze brûke oandreaun troch fernijbere elektrisiteit, mar dat kostet twa oant trije kear mear. It resultaat is dat hast nimmen him muoite jout mei skjin wetterstof as goedkeap smoarch wetterstof dêr samar leit. Subsydzjes stypje in pear proefprojekten, mar se feroarje de basisekony net. De wetterstofbrânche sels jout ta dat griis wetterstof út fossile brânstoffen desennia lang dominearje sil.
Sels as it produksjeprobleem oplost is, kloppet de rekken net. Elektrisiteit omsette yn wetterstof en werom nei elektrisiteit ferliest 50 oant 60 prosint fan de oarspronklike enerzjy. Batterijen ferlieze mar 10 oant 20 prosint. Foar it ferwaarmen fan huzen of it oandriuwen fan auto's hat wetterstof spesjale pipeliedingen, opslachtanks en brânstofcellen nedich dy't de yndustry net boud hat en gjin echt plan hat om op skaal te bouwen. Dútslân, de wetterstof cheerleader, hat krekt 39 kilometer wetterstofpipeliedingen. In autofabrikant dy't wetterstoffertúgen ferkeapje wol, fynt hast gjin tankstasjes bûten in hânfol stêden.
Wêrom drukke politisy wetterstof sa hurd? Diels omdat de oalje- en gaslobby it ûndersyk finansiert en lûd sprekt yn Brussel en Berlyn. Diels omdat wetterstof as in wûndermiddel klinkt wêrmei regearingen beweare kinne aksje te ûndernimmen sûnder drege karren ôf te twingen lykas it belestjen fan koalstof of it ferbieden fan ferbaarningsmoatoren. It jout de yndruk wat te dwaan wylst it enerzjysysteem grûntendiels itselde bliuwt wurkjen. De farmasytyske yndustry neamt dizze praktyk 'fast follower strategie' wannear't in bedriuw it parseberjocht fan in konkurrint kopearret sûnder it produkt. Wetterstofbelied is fast follower strategie foar klimaataksje.
Underwilens hawwe elektrisiteitsnetwurken massive ynvestearringen nedich. Batterijopslachtechnology wurket en de kosten sakje elk jier. Sinne- en wynparken geane flugger omheech as koalsintrales slute. Dizze helpmiddelen dogge it wurk hjoed. Wetterstof bliuwt in takomstige technology dy't regearingen behandelje as in hjoedeiske oplossing, tiid en jild ferspilljend dat nei ynfrastruktuer gean kin dy't werklik funksjonearret.
Germany announced in April that it would spend 20 billion euros building hydrogen infrastructure by 2030. France, Belgium, and the Netherlands followed with similar commitments. The European Union itself allocated 1 billion euros to hydrogen projects as part of its innovation fund. Behind the scenes, oil and gas companies watch closely. They see hydrogen as a way to keep their fossil fuel operations alive under a green label.
The core problem is simple: roughly 96 percent of hydrogen today comes from steam reforming of natural gas. This process releases carbon dioxide. To make hydrogen truly clean, you need to use electrolysis powered by renewable electricity, but that costs two to three times more. The result is that almost no one bothers with clean hydrogen when cheap dirty hydrogen sits right there. Subsidies prop up a few pilot projects, but they do not change the basic economics. The hydrogen industry itself admits that grey hydrogen from fossil fuels will dominate for decades.
Even if you solve the production problem, the math does not work. Converting electricity to hydrogen and back to electricity loses 50 to 60 percent of the original energy. Batteries lose only 10 to 20 percent. For heating homes or powering cars, hydrogen needs special pipelines, storage tanks, and fuel cells that industry has not built and has no real plan to build at scale. Germany, the hydrogen cheerleader, has exactly 39 kilometers of hydrogen pipeline. A car maker wanting to sell hydrogen vehicles finds almost no refueling stations outside a handful of cities.
Why do politicians push hydrogen so hard? Partly because the oil and gas lobby funds the research and speaks loudly in Brussels and Berlin. Partly because hydrogen sounds like a silver bullet that lets governments claim action without forcing hard choices like taxing carbon or banning combustion engines. It gives the appearance of doing something while the energy system keeps working much as before. The pharmaceutical industry calls this practice 'fast follower strategy' when a company copies a competitor's press release without the product. Hydrogen policy is fast follower strategy for climate action.
Meanwhile, electricity grids need massive investment. Battery storage technology works and costs drop every year. Solar and wind farms go up faster than coal plants come down. These tools do the job today. Hydrogen remains a future technology that governments treat as present solution, burning time and money that could go toward infrastructure that actually functions.
Published May 25, 2026 · Frisian News · Ljouwert, Fryslân