Picture courtesy of Reganosa

14 Single Largest Capacity Disruption (SLCD) – Hydrogen

This section investigates the impact of the Single Largest Capacity Disription (SLCD) of a country during a Peak day. The SLCD measures the curtailed demand following the disruption of this capacity in a given country (including storage and national production). For each country, the Single Largest Capacity depends on the year and the infrastructure level.

The table with the Single Largest Capacity considered for each country can be found in Annex D. The results presented correspond to the possible additional curtailment for a country in case of disruption of its Single Largest Capacity, and its impact on other countries, compared to the climatic stress in peak day. The demand curtailment in Peak Day without any disruption is not represented in this chapter (see Climatic Stress chapter).

SLCD is not calculated in Best Estimate scenario because in 2025 there is not hydrogen infrastructure. In National Trends scenario, H₂ infrastructure level 1, there is no impact on the methane side as there is no hydrogen production using methane (no link between the 2 infrastructures).

14.1 Existing Infrastructure level (Methane Results)

H₂ Infrastructure Level 1

In H₂ Infrastructure level 1, only Sweden shows 4 % demand curtailment in Global Ambition scenario, due to infrastructure limitations between Denmark and Sweden and hydrogen production using methane.

2030

H₂ Infrastructure Level 2

In Infrastructure H₂ level 2 National Trends scenario, due to higher hydrogen production using methane, some countries show now 1 % demand curtailment (2 % in the Netherlands).

In Distributed Energy scenario, situation remains unchanged (without demand curtailment).

In H₂ Infrastructure level 2 Global Ambition scenario, most of the countries show no impact (no demand curtailment). Serbia, North Macedonia, Bulgaria and Romania show now 3 % demand curtailment due to higher hydrogen production and bottlenecks on the methane infrastructure. Sweden shows 6 % demand curtailment in Global Ambition scenario, due to infrastructure limitations between Denmark and Sweden and hydrogen production using methane.

2040

H₂ Infrastructure Level 2

In National Trends scenario, some countries show now demand curtailment (3 %) due to hydrogen production using methane and infrastructure limitations.

In Distributed Energy and Global Ambition scenarios, situation remains unchanged (without demand curtailment).

2050

H₂ Infrastructure Level 2

In Distributed Energy and Global Ambition scenarios, situation remains unchanged (without demand curtailment).

SLCD Methane Results in CH₄ Existing Infrastructure – H₂ Infrastructure Level 1

Figure 14.1: Methane SLCD Results for Peak Demand in Existing CH₄ Infrastructure with H₂ Level 1

SLCD Methane Results in CH₄ Existing Infrastructure – H₂ Infrastructure Level 2

Figure 14.2: Methane SLCD Results for Peak Demand in Existing CH₄ Infrastructure with H₂ Level 2

14.2 Advanced Infrastructure Level (Methane)

H₂ Infrastructure Level 1

In H₂ Infrastructure level 1, situation remains unchanged compared to Existing Infrastructure.

H₂ Infrastructure Level 2

In H₂ Infrastructure level 2, demand curtailment is fully mitigated in all scenarios and years (except for in Global Ambition scenario, in 2030) compared to infrastructure level 1 Existing infrastructure level due to increase flexibility on the methane side. In 2030, Global Ambition scenario, Sweden shows 5 % demand curtailment due to infrastructure limitations between Denmark and Sweden and higher hydrogen production using methane.

14.3 PCI infrastructure level (Methane Results)

H₂ Infrastructure Level 1

In H₂ Infrastructure level 1, situation remains unchanged compared to Existing Infrastructure.

2030

H₂ Infrastructure Level 2

In H₂ Infrastructure level 2 National Trends scenario, most of the countries fully mitigate demand curtailment due to additional flexibility on the methane infrastructure. Belgium, the Netherlands, Denmark and Sweden still show 1 % demand curtailment.

In Distributed Energy scenario, situation remains unchanged (no demand curtailment).

In Global Ambition scenario, curtailed countries in the east fully mitigate their demand curtailment and Sweden decrease its demand curtailment by 1 %.

2040

H₂ Infrastructure Level 2

In National Trends scenario, all curtailed countries decrease their demand curtailment by 1 % due to additional flexibility in PCI Infrastructure level. Luxembourg increased its demand curtailment rate to 12 % due to repurposed infrastructure and a bottleneck with Germany.

Both Distributed Energy and Global Ambition scenarios remain without demand curtailment.

2050

H₂ Infrastructure Level 2

Both Distributed Energy and Global Ambition scenarios remain without demand curtailment.

14.4 Existing Infrastructure level (Hydrogen Results)

2030

H₂ Infrastructure Level 1

In National Trends scenario, without any hydrogen production using methane, some countries show demand curtailment.

Ireland shows 2 % demand curtailment as SLCD is national production and there are no interconnections with neighbouring countries.
Luxembourg shows 3 % demand curtailment as SLCD is national production and there are no interconnections with neighbouring countries.
Spain shows 3 % demand curtailment, SLCD is the interconnection with France and there is a bottleneck with Portugal.
United Kingdom shows 9 % demand curtailment as SLCD is national production and there are no interconnections with neighbouring countries.
The rest of the countries show 14 % to 15 % curtailment rate due to SLCD but good cooperation sharing demand curtailment.

In Distributed Energy scenario, most of the countries are impacted by SLCD. Sweden, Finland, Slovenia, Germany, Portugal, Spain, Slovakia, Denmark, Czech Republic, Austria, France and Belgium show 9 % demand curtailment. Greece, United Kingdom and Bulgaria show 16 % demand curtailment. The Netherlands, Poland, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania and Croatia show 20 % to 23 % demand curtailment. Luxembourg shows 26 % demand curtailment and Romania and Hungary show 29 % demand curtailment. Italy and Ireland show respectively 34 % and 38 % demand curtailment. For each SLCD, infrastructure limitations or no interconnections due to SLCD or not interconnected countries do not allow to mitigate more the curtailment rates.

In Global Ambition scenario, most of the countries are impacted by SLCD. Croatia and Slovenia show 3 % and 6 % demand curtailment. Sweden, Finland, Germany, Spain, Czech Republic, France, Austria and Slovakia show 9 % demand curtailment. Poland, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Greece, Denmark, United Kingdom, and Bulgaria show 13 % demand curtailment. The Netherlands, Belgium, Portugal and Luxembourg show respectively 17 %, 19 %, 27 % and 29 %curtailment. Italy, Romania, Hungary and Ireland show respectively 32 %, 36 %, 37 % and 39 %. Infrastructure limitations, or no interconnections due to SLCD, or not interconnected countries do not allow to mitigate more demand curtailments.

H₂ Infrastructure Level 2

In National Trends scenario, most of the countries mitigate their demand curtailment to 1 – 2 % due to additional hydrogen production using methane and better cooperation in H₂ Infrastructure level 2. Slovenia and Luxembourg keep their demand curtailment due to infrastructure limitations with neighbouring countries. Some countries (The Netherlands and Greece) show now demand curtailment due to more cooperation in H₂ Infrastructure level 2.

In Distributed Energy scenario, most of the countries reduce their demand curtailment to 1 – 3 % (11 % in The Netherlands) due to additional hydrogen production using methane and more flexibility in H₂ Infrastructure level 2. Some countries increase their demand curtailment (from 5 % to 10 %) due to more cooperation between countries in H₂ Infrastructure level 2.

In Global Ambition scenario, most of the countries reduce their demand curtailment to 1 – 3 % due to additional hydrogen production using methane and more flexibility in H₂ Infrastructure level 2. Some countries increase their demand curtailment (from 4 % to 15 %) due to more cooperation between countries in H₂ Infrastructure level 2.

SLCD Hydrogen Results in CH₄ Existing Infrastructure – H₂ Infrastructure Level 1

Figure 14.3: Hydrogen SLCD Results for Peak Demand in Existing CH₄ Infrastructure with H₂ Level 1

SLCD Hydrogen Results in CH₄ Existing Infrastructure – H₂ Infrastructure Level 2

Figure 14.4: Hydrogen SLCD Results for Peak Demand in Existing CH₄ Infrastructure with H₂ Level 2

2040

H₂ Infrastructure Level 1

In National Trends scenario, infrastructure limitations, or no interconnections due to SLCD, or not interconnected countries do not allow to mitigate demand curtailment. United Kingdom, Luxembourg and Ireland show 3 % to 7 % demand curtailment. Most of the countries show 19 % demand curtailment. Belgium shows 26 % demand curtailment.

In Distributed Energy scenario, infrastructure limitations, or no interconnections due to SLCD, or not interconnected countries do not allow to mitigate demand curtailment. Most of the countries show 3 % to 6 % range of demand curtailment and some other countries show higher demand curtailment with 12 % to 14 % of SLCD impact. Greece, Bulgaria and Ireland show 32 % and Ireland 86 % demand curtailment.

In Global Ambition countries, infrastructure limitations, or no interconnections due to SLCD, or not interconnected countries do not allow to mitigate demand curtailment. Most of the countries show 2 % to 9 % range of demand curtailment and some other countries show higher demand curtailment with 12 % to 16 % of SLCD impact. Finally, Ireland shows 19 % demand curtailment.

H₂ Infrastructure Level 2

In National Trends scenario, most of the countries mitigate their demand curtailment due to the additional hydrogen production using methane. Some countries keep their demand curtailment values due to not enough flexibility on the methane infrastructure. Ireland, Luxembourg, The Netherlands, Serbia and United Kingdom, increased their demand curtailment due to more cooperation in H₂ Infrastructure level 2 and repurposed methane infrastructure.

In Distributed Energy scenario, most of the countries mitigate their demand curtailment due to the additional hydrogen production using methane. Some countries keep their demand curtailment values due to not enough flexibility on the methane infrastructure. Bulgaria, Estonia, Croatia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Latvia, Poland and Serbia, increase their demand curtailment due to more cooperation in H₂ Infrastructure level 2 and repurposed methane infrastructure.

In Global Ambition scenario, most of the countries mitigate their demand curtailment due to the additional hydrogen production using methane. Some countries keep their demand curtailment values due to not enough flexibility on the methane infrastructure. Bulgaria, Estonia, Greece, Croatia, Hungary, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Latvia, Poland, Romania, Serbia, Sweden, Slovakia and United Kingdom increase their demand curtailment due to more cooperation in H₂ Infrastructure level 2 and repurposed methane infrastructure.

2050

H₂ Infrastructure Level 1

In Distributed Energy scenario, infrastructure limitations, or no interconnections due to SLCD, or not interconnected countries do not allow to mitigate demand curtailment. Most of the countries show 5 % to 9 % demand curtailment. Portugal and Spain show 12 % and 17 % demand curtailment. Greece, Bulgaria and The Netherlands show 20 %, 21 % and 27 %. United Kingdom and Ireland show respectively 32 % and 92 % demand curtailment.

In Global Ambition scenario, infrastructure limitations, or no interconnections due to SLCD, or not interconnected countries do not allow to mitigate demand curtailment. Most of the countries show 4 % to 9 % demand curtailment. Italy, Switzerland, Portugal, Spain, Poland, Greece and Bulgaria show 12 % to 18 % demand curtailment. United Kingdom, The Netherlands and Ireland show respectively 20 %, 21 % and 31 % demand curtailment.

H₂ Infrastructure Level 2

In Distributed Energy scenario, most of the countries mitigate their demand curtailment. Bulgaria, Estonia, Greece, Croatia, Hungary, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Latvia, Poland, Romania, Serbia, Sweden, Slovakia and United Kingdom increase their demand curtailment rate due to more flexibility on the hydrogen infrastructure and higher cooperation.

In Global Ambition scenario, most of the countries mitigate their demand curtailment. Croatia, Hungary, Luxembourg, Romania, Serbia and Slovenia increase their demand curtailment rate due to more flexibility on the hydrogen infrastructure and higher cooperation.

14.5 Advanced Infrastructure level (Hydrogen Results)

2030

H₂ Infrastructure Level 1

In National Trends scenario, situation remains unchanged compared to Existing Infrastructure as there is no hydrogen production using methane in this scenario.

In Distributed Energy scenario, situation remains unchanged compared to Existing Infrastructure due to no more hydrogen production using methane available.

In Global Ambition scenario, situation remains unchanged compared to Existing Infrastructure due to no more hydrogen production using methane available.

H₂ Infrastructure Level 2

In National Trends scenario, most of the countries fully mitigate demand curtailment. Only Luxembourg and Slovenia results remain unchanged due to infrastructure limitations on the methane infrastructure.

In Distributed Energy scenario, situation remains unchanged. Countries show the same demand curtailment due to infrastructure limitations on the methane infrastructure.

In Global Ambition scenario, most of the countries show the same results. Bulgaria, Greece, Hungary and Romania increase their demand curtailment due to more flexibility on the methane infrastructure allowing for a better cooperation.

2040

H₂ Infrastructure Level 1

In National Trends scenario, situation remains unchanged compared to Existing Infrastructure as there is no hydrogen production using methane in this scenario.

In Distributed Energy scenario, situation remains unchanged due to no more hydrogen production using methane available.

In Global Ambition scenario, situation remains unchanged due to no more hydrogen production using methane available.

H₂ Infrastructure Level 2

In National Trends scenario, most of the countries fully mitigate demand curtailment. Some countries (Romania, Serbia, Sweden, Slovenia, Slovakia and United Kingdom) increase demand curtailment due to more flexibility on the methane infrastructure allowing for a better cooperation.

In Distributed Energy scenario, most of the countries mitigate demand curtailment some countries increase demand curtailment due to more flexibility and better cooperation (Belgium, Finland, France, Hungary, Sweden, Slovenia and United Kingdom).

In Global Ambition scenario, most of the countries mitigate demand curtailment. Some countries (Belgium, Denmark, Finland, Hungary, Lithuania, Romania, Serbia, Sweden, Slovenia, Slovakia and United Kingdom) increase demand curtailment due to more flexibility on the methane infrastructure allowing for a better cooperation.

2050

H₂ Infrastructure Level 1

In Distributed Energy scenario, situation remains unchanged due to no more hydrogen production using methane available.

In Global Ambition scenario, situation remains unchanged due to no more hydrogen production using methane available.

H₂ Infrastructure Level 2

In Distributed Energy scenario, most of the countries mitigate demand curtailment due to the additional flexibility to increase hydrogen production with methane in the CH₄ Advanced level. Some countries increase their demand curtailment due to more flexibility on the methane infrastructure allowing for a better cooperation (Belgium, Denmark, Finland, Hungary, Lithuania, Romania, Serbia, Sweden, Slovenia, Slovakia and United Kingdom).

In Global Ambition scenario, most of the countries mitigate demand curtailment due to the additional flexibility to increase hydrogen production with methane in the CH₄ Advanced level. Some countries increase their demand curtailment due to more flexibility on the methane infrastructure allowing for a better cooperation (Denmark, Lithuania, Poland, Sweden, Slovenia and United Kingdom).

SLCD Hydrogen Results in CH₄ Advanced Infrastructure – H₂ Infrastructure Level 1

Figure 14.5: Hydrogen SLCD Results for Peak Demand in Advanced CH₄ Infrastructure with H₂ Level 1

SLCD Hydrogen Results in CH₄ Advanced Infrastructure – H₂ Infrastructure Level 2

Figure 14.6: Hydrogen SLCD Results for Peak Demand in Advanced CH₄ Infrastructure with H₂ Level 2

14.6 PCI infrastructure level (Hydrogen Results)

2030

H₂ Infrastructure Level 1

In National Trends scenario, situation remains unchanged compared to Existing infrastructure as there is no hydrogen production using methane in this scenario.

In Distributed Energy scenario, situation remains unchanged due to no more hydrogen production using methane available.

In Global Ambition scenario, situation remains unchanged due to no more hydrogen production using methane available.

H₂ Infrastructure Level 2

In National Trends scenario, all countries mitigate their demand curtailment.

In Distributed Energy scenario, situation remains unchanged due to no more hydrogen production using methane available.

In Global Ambition scenario, situation remains unchanged due to no more hydrogen production using methane available.

2040

H₂ Infrastructure Level 1

In National Trends scenario, situation remains unchanged compared to Existing infrastructure as there is no hydrogen production using methane in this scenario.

In Distributed Energy scenario, situation remains unchanged due to no more hydrogen production using methane available.

In Global Ambition scenario, situation remains unchanged due to no more hydrogen production using methane available.

H₂ Infrastructure Level 2

In National Trends scenario, some countries increase demand curtailment due to more flexibility on the hydrogen infrastructure which allows for higher cooperation (Belgium, Spain and The Netherlands).

In Distributed Energy scenario, situation remains unchanged due to no more hydrogen production using methane available.

In Global Ambition scenario, situation remains unchanged due to no more hydrogen production using methane available.