The study evaluates the environmental performance of several hydrogen delivery options for a Dutch industrial site, comparing on‑site electrolysis powered by renewable electricity with the import of hydrogen in different carrier forms such as compressed gas, liquid hydrogen, ammonia, liquid organic hydrogen carriers (LOHC), methanol and synthetic natural gas (SNG). The functional unit is one kilogram of hydrogen delivered to the site, and the life‑cycle assessment covers all stages from electricity generation to final use, including losses during transport and conversion. The analysis is based on a detailed inventory that incorporates data from the ecoinvent database, adjusted to reflect projected 2030 conditions. For photovoltaic electricity in Portugal, the original dataset’s life‑cycle GHG emissions of 62 g CO₂e kWh⁻¹ were scaled down to 20 g CO₂e kWh⁻¹, a value derived from the Hydrogen Council’s 2021 estimate for hydrogen production via solar power. This scaling also proportionally reduced impacts in other environmental categories. The capacity factor for the Portuguese solar plants is conservatively set at 21 %, lower than the 24 % value reported for the Netherlands in 2020, but consistent with the dataset used. For onshore wind in the Netherlands, the study adopts a GHG emission factor of 10 g CO₂e kWh⁻¹, corresponding to a hydrogen carbon footprint of 0.5 kg CO₂e kg⁻¹ H₂, and a capacity factor of 27 % (2 400 h yr⁻¹) based on the Hydrogen Council’s 2030 projections. A turbine lifetime of 20 years is assumed. Electrolyser efficiency is a key variable; the model considers three main technologies—alkaline, proton exchange membrane (PEM) and solid oxide—each with distinct performance curves. Sensitivity analyses show that a 10 % increase in electrolyser efficiency can reduce the overall GHG intensity of on‑site hydrogen by up to 15 %. Hydrogen losses during handling and transport are treated as a 0.1 % reference loss per step, with an uncertainty range of ±10 %. The study also evaluates the impact of using freshwater versus seawater for electrolysis, the energy required for unpacking carriers, and the potential benefits of on‑site carbon capture and storage for steam‑reforming processes. Additional sensitivity tests examine the credit for hydrochloric acid co‑production in LOHC routes, the use of heat from direct air capture for methanol and SNG synthesis, and the effect of catalyst choice on SNG efficiency. The short‑term climate impact is assessed using the GWP20 metric, revealing that import routes with high‑efficiency carriers can achieve lower GWP20 values than on‑site production when renewable electricity is scarce. Overall, the results indicate that the lowest life‑cycle GHG emissions are achieved by importing hydrogen produced from onshore wind in the Netherlands, followed by solar‑powered electrolysis in Portugal, while carrier‑based routes such as LOHC and methanol offer competitive performance when coupled with high‑efficiency electrolyzers and low‑loss transport.

The project is a collaborative effort funded by the European Union under the Horizon 2020 framework, with the EU Science Hub in the Netherlands coordinating the consortium. Partners include Dutch research institutes specializing in renewable energy and hydrogen technology, Portuguese renewable electricity providers, and academic institutions in both countries. The consortium’s roles are distributed across data collection, model development, sensitivity analysis, and policy interpretation. The study was conducted over a multi‑year period, with the final report produced in 2025, reflecting the latest technological and policy developments in the European hydrogen market.