Despite the promising outlook, many hydrogen projects are still in the early stages. Moreover, some face delays or cancellations due to these barriers, including permitting challenges.
Electrolyzer Expansion: Powering the Future of Green Hydrogen
Analysts from S&P Global Commodity Insights report that 1.2 GW of electrolyzer capacity is operational globally, and 2.1 GW began construction in Q2 2024, with 1.5 GW of this growth happening in China.
The country accounts for over 40% of recent FIDs and is home to 60% of global electrolyzer manufacturing capacity, which currently stands at 25 GW annually.
The IEA projects that by 2030, electrolysis-based hydrogen production in China could be cheaper than hydrogen from coal. This is assuming that the global project pipeline is realized.

IEA Executive Director Fatih Birol emphasized the need for stronger demand-side incentives, warning that current demand targets lag far behind government production goals.
The report calls for policies such as carbon contracts for differences and sustainable fuel quotas to stimulate demand. It also warns that the progress made in the hydrogen sector so far is insufficient to meet climate goals, citing stalled cost reductions due to high raw material and energy prices.
Hydrogen production costs could potentially halve to between $2/kg and $9/kg by 2030 under the IEA’s Net-Zero Emissions by 2050 scenario, closing the price gap with “gray” hydrogen. However, under existing policies, the cost is expected to drop by just 30%.
Global hydrogen demand rose to 97 million metric tons in 2023, mostly in refining and chemicals. However, only 1 million metric tons came from low-emission sources.
The IEA estimates that low-carbon hydrogen production could reach 49 MMt/y by 2030. Yet, achieving this would require an unprecedented annual growth rate of over 90%, a rate even higher than solar power’s fastest growth phase.
Various challenges like financing, regulatory issues, and permitting delays continue to put the project pipeline at risk. Amid these hydrogen production challenges and projections, a big player in the industry continues to show impressive growth.
Nikola’s Hydrogen Trucks Hit the Road Amid Industry Challenges
Nikola, a leader in producing zero-emissions hydrogen fuel cell trucks with its HYLA brand, saw a 22% increase in wholesale deliveries of its hydrogen-powered electric trucks during the third quarter. This achievement signals steady demand for the company’s Class 8 hydrogen fuel cell trucks.
The company delivered 88 trucks to dealers, a record sales quarter, meeting its target of 80 to 100 units. However, it fell short of the 80% surge in deliveries seen in the second quarter.
The Phoenix, Arizona-based company continues to see demand for its hydrogen-powered trucks. As of the 3rd quarter, Nikola has delivered 200 hydrogen fuel cell trucks in 2024, aiming to meet its full-year target of 300 to 350 trucks.
Since launching sales in the 4th quarter of 2023, the company has sold a total of 235 trucks. Nikola remains on track to complete the rollout of revamped battery-electric trucks by the end of the year.
Nikola CEO Steve Girsky highlighted the importance of this achievement, saying:
“Despite overall market headwinds, Nikola remains focused on our mission to pioneer solutions for a zero-emission world, and we’re doing it one truck at a time.”
Economic Setbacks and Project Delays
While the hydrogen fuel cell company strives through market turmoil, some major developers have scaled back or canceled their green hydrogen projects due to economic hurdles.
Origin Energy, for example, scrapped a hydrogen project in Australia, citing slow market development and high input costs. CEO Frank Calabria explained that technological advancements are still needed to make the investment viable.
Similarly, Norway’s Nel ASA saw a large U.S. order canceled by Hy Stor Energy, reflecting broader industry hesitation. Michael Liebreich, an industry analyst and investor, sees this as a healthy shift, with unfeasible projects being abandoned to focus on more economically sound ventures.
Despite the setbacks, clean hydrogen production is expected to grow by over 40% in 2024, though it will still account for just 1% of global hydrogen demand. While the long-term potential remains, the industry is recalibrating expectations as it faces significant financial and technological challenges.
What’s The Road Ahead for Green Hydrogen?
The hesitation around green hydrogen is partly due to uncertainty regarding the U.S. Treasury’s rules for the 45V hydrogen production tax credits. These credits were created under the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) to incentivize clean hydrogen production. Developers have delayed their commitments to green hydrogen until these rules are finalized.
Initially, green hydrogen advocates saw the IRA as a significant opportunity, believing that its clean fuel tax credits would make electrolysis-based hydrogen production cheaper than conventional methods. Yet, nearly all of today’s hydrogen supply is derived from natural gas without carbon capture technology, highlighting the slow transition to green hydrogen.

A study by McKinsey & Co., commissioned by the Hydrogen Council, found that 85% of committed hydrogen production capacity in North America through 2030 is tied to carbon capture projects.
While the 45V tax credit is technology-neutral, analysts have noted that incentives for electrolysis are more attractive than those for carbon capture. However, developers of blue hydrogen projects have benefited from carbon capture tax credits under the expanded 45Q program. It offers up to $85 per metric ton of CO2 captured.
While blue hydrogen is gaining ground, the global pipeline for green hydrogen is also expanding, particularly outside the U.S.
Companies like Air Products and CF Industries have proposed green hydrogen projects in the U.S. but have yet to make final investment decisions. Interestingly, Air Products supports the Biden administration’s proposed tax credit requirements, which mandate that hydrogen plants source electricity from new zero-carbon generation facilities. Nonetheless, the company has delayed its $4 billion green hydrogen project in Texas pending the final tax credit rules.
Despite the promising growth in electrolyzer capacity and hydrogen production, significant challenges like regulatory uncertainty and economic hurdles persist. While companies like Nikola are making progress, the road to large-scale green hydrogen adoption remains complex and uncertain. The future will depend on clearer policies and more competitive technologies.
- SEE MORE: Microsoft and ESB Launch Groundbreaking Green Hydrogen Pilot to Decarbonize Dublin Data Centers
The post Hydrogen’s Big Leap: Can Electrolyzers and Tax Credits Fuel the Green Revolution? appeared first on Carbon Credits.
Carbon Footprint
Finding Nature Based Solutions in Your Supply Chain
Carbon Footprint
How Climate Change Is Raising the Cost of Living
Americans are paying more for insurance, electricity, taxes, and home repairs every year. What many people may not realize is that climate change is already one of the drivers behind those rising costs.
For many households, climate change is no longer just an environmental issue. It is becoming a cost-of-living issue. While climate impacts like melting glaciers and shrinking polar ice can feel distant from everyday life, the financial effects are already showing up in monthly budgets across the country.
Today, a larger share of household income is consumed by fixed costs such as housing, insurance, utilities, and healthcare. (3) Climate change and climate inaction are adding pressure to many of those expenses through higher disaster recovery costs, rising energy demand, infrastructure repairs, and increased insurance risk.
The goal of this article is to help connect climate change to the everyday financial realities people already experience. Regardless of where someone stands on climate policy, it is important to recognize that climate change is already increasing costs for households, businesses, and taxpayers across the United States.
More conservative estimates indicate that the average household has experienced an increase of about $400 per year from observed climate change, while less conservative estimates suggest an increase of $900.(1) Those in more disaster-prone regions of the country face disproportionate costs, with some households experiencing climate-related costs averaging $1,300 per year.(1) Another study found that climate adaptation costs driven by climate change have already consumed over 3% of personal income in the U.S. since 2015.(9) By the end of the century, housing units could spend an additional $5,600 on adaptation costs.(1)
Whether we realize it or not, Americans are already paying for climate change through higher insurance premiums, energy costs, taxes, and infrastructure repairs. These growing expenses are often referred to as climate adaptation costs.
Without meaningful climate action, these costs are expected to continue rising. Choosing not to invest in climate action is also choosing to spend more on climate adaptation.
Here are a few ways climate change is already increasing the cost of living:
- Higher insurance costs from more frequent and severe storms
- Higher energy use during longer and hotter summers
- Higher electricity rates tied to storm recovery and grid upgrades
- Higher government spending and taxpayer-funded disaster recovery costs
The real debate is not whether climate change costs money. Americans are already paying for it. The question is where we want those costs to go. Should we invest more in climate action to help reduce future climate adaptation costs, or continue paying growing recovery and adaptation expenses in everyday life?
How Climate Change Is Increasing Insurance Costs
There is one industry that closely tracks the financial impact of natural disasters: insurance. Insurance companies are focused on assessing risk, estimating damages, and collecting enough revenue to cover losses and remain financially stable.
Comparing the 20-year periods 1980–1999 and 2000–2019, climate-related disasters increased 83% globally from 3,656 events to 6,681 events. The average time between billion-dollar disasters dropped from 82 days during the 1980s to 16 days during the last 10 years, and in 2025 the average time between disasters fell to just 10 days. (6)
According to the reinsurance firm Munich Re, total economic losses from natural disasters in 2024 exceeded $320 billion globally, nearly 40% higher than the decade-long annual average. Average annual inflation-adjusted costs more than quadrupled from $22.6 billion per year in the 1980s to $102 billion per year in the 2010s. Costs increased further to an average of $153.2 billion annually during 2020–2024, representing another 50% increase over the 2010s. (6)
In the United States, billion-dollar weather and climate disasters have also increased significantly. The average number of billion-dollar disasters per year has grown from roughly three annually during the 1980s to 19 annually over the last decade. In 2023 and 2024, the U.S. recorded 28 and 27 billion-dollar disasters respectively, both setting new records. (6)
The growing impact of climate change is one reason insurance costs continue to rise. “There are two things that drive insurance loss costs, which is the frequency of events and how much they cost,” said Robert Passmore, assistant vice president of personal lines at the Property Casualty Insurers Association of America. “So, as these events become more frequent, that’s definitely going to have an impact.” (8)
After adjusting for inflation, insurance costs have steadily increased over time. From 2000 to 2020, insurance costs consistently grew faster than the Consumer Price Index due to rising rebuilding costs and weather-related losses.(3) Between 2020 and 2023 alone, the average home insurance premium increased from $75 to $360 due to climate change impacts, with disaster-prone regions experiencing especially steep increases.(1) Since 2015, homeowners in some regions affected by more extreme weather have seen home insurance costs increased by nearly 57%.(1) Some insurers have also limited or stopped offering coverage in high-risk areas.(7)
For many families, rising insurance costs are no longer occasional financial burdens. They are becoming recurring monthly expenses tied directly to growing climate risk.
How Rising Temperatures Increase Household Energy Costs

The financial impacts of climate change extend beyond insurance. Rising temperatures are also changing how much energy Americans use and how utilities plan for future electricity demand.
Between 1950 and 2010, per capita electricity use increased 10-fold, though usage has flattened or slightly declined since 2012 due to more efficient appliances and LED lighting. (3) A significant share of increased energy demand comes from cooling needs associated with higher temperatures.
Over the last 20 years, the United States has experienced increasing Cooling Degree Days (CDD) and decreasing Heating Degree Days (HDD). Nearly all counties have become warmer over the past three decades, with some areas experiencing several hundred additional cooling degree days, equivalent to roughly one additional degree of warmth on most days. (1) This trend reflects a warming climate where air conditioning demand is increasing while heating demand generally declines. (4)
As temperatures continue rising, households are expected to spend more on cooling than they save on heating. The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) projects that by 2050, national Heating Degree Days will be 11% lower while Cooling Degree Days will be 28% higher than 2021 levels. Cooling demand is projected to rise 2.5 times faster than heating demand declines. (5)
These projections come from energy and infrastructure experts planning for future electricity demand and grid capacity needs. Utilities and grid operators are already preparing for higher peak summer electricity loads caused by rising temperatures. (5)
Longer and hotter summers also affect how homes and buildings are designed. Buildings constructed for past climate conditions may require upgrades such as larger air conditioning systems, stronger insulation, and improved ventilation to remain comfortable and energy efficient in the future. (10)
For many households, this means higher monthly utility bills and potentially higher long-term home improvement costs as temperatures continue to rise.
How Climate Change Affects Electricity Rates
On an inflation-adjusted basis, average U.S. residential electricity rates are slightly lower today than they were 50 years ago. (2) However, climate-related damage to utility infrastructure is creating new upward pressure on electricity costs.
Electric utilities rely heavily on above-ground poles, wires, transformers, and substations that can be damaged by hurricanes, storms, floods, and wildfires. Repairing and upgrading this infrastructure often requires substantial investment.
As a result, utilities are increasing electricity rates in response to wildfire and hurricane events to fund infrastructure repairs and future mitigation efforts. (1) The average cumulative increase in per-household electricity expenditures due to climate-related price changes is approximately $30. (1)
While this increase may appear modest today, utility costs are expected to rise further as climate-related infrastructure damage becomes more frequent and severe.
How Climate Disasters Increase Government Spending and Taxes
Extreme weather events also damage public infrastructure, including roads, schools, bridges, airports, water systems, and emergency services infrastructure. Recovery and rebuilding costs are often funded through taxpayer dollars at the federal, state, and local levels.
The average annual government cost tied to climate-related disaster recovery is estimated at nearly $142 per household. (1) States that frequently experience hurricanes, wildfires, tornadoes, or flooding can face even higher public recovery costs.
These expenses affect taxpayers whether they personally experience a disaster or not. Climate-related recovery spending can increase pressure on public budgets, emergency management systems, and infrastructure funding nationwide.
Reducing Climate Costs Through Climate Action
While this article focuses on the growing financial costs associated with climate change, the issue is not only about money for many people. It is also about recognizing our environmental impact and taking responsibility for reducing it in order to help preserve a healthy planet for future generations.
While individuals alone cannot solve climate change, collective action can help reduce future climate adaptation costs over time.
For those interested in taking action, there are three important steps:
- Estimate your carbon footprint to better understand the emissions connected to your lifestyle and activities.
- Create a plan to gradually reduce emissions through energy efficiency, cleaner technologies, and more sustainable choices.
- Address remaining emissions by supporting verified carbon reduction projects through carbon credits.
Carbon credits are one of the most cost-effective tools available for climate action because they help fund projects that generate verified emission reductions at scale. Supporting global emission reduction efforts can help reduce the long-term impacts and costs associated with climate change.
Visit Terrapass to learn more about carbon footprints, carbon credits, and climate action solutions.
The post How Climate Change Is Raising the Cost of Living appeared first on Terrapass.
Carbon Footprint
Carbon credit project stewardship: what happens after credit issuance
A carbon credit purchase is not a transaction that closes at issuance. The credit may be retired, the certificate filed, and the reporting box ticked. But on the ground, in the forest, in the field, and in the community, the work continues. It endures for years. In many cases, for decades.
![]()
-
Greenhouse Gases10 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Climate Change10 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases2 years ago嘉宾来稿:满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago嘉宾来稿:满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Bill Discounting Climate Change in Florida’s Energy Policy Awaits DeSantis’ Approval
-
Renewable Energy7 months agoSending Progressive Philanthropist George Soros to Prison?
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits
-
Greenhouse Gases10 months ago
嘉宾来稿:探究火山喷发如何影响气候预测

