India selects winners for second electrolyser tender
India has selected the winners of its second round of subsidy tenders to support 1.5 GW/yr of electrolyser manufacturing capacity, according to government sources.
Out of the 23 companies that bid, India selected 13 to receive support (see table). But these results are still tentative and may change, a government source told Argus. The final list is likely to be published on the Solar Energy Corporation of India (SECI) website by next week.
This round follows a similar structure to the first, with incentives starting at 4,440 rupees/kW ($53/kW) in the first year and decreasing annually. But India introduced a new category for smaller indigenously developed units. All categories in this round were oversubscribed, with the category for smaller indigenously developed units attracting the most interest. Some 13 companies bid for a combined capacity of 295 MW/yr but Indian only offered support for 100 MW/yr. Four companies won bids in this category. Conglomerate Adani, Eastern Electrolysers, and start-up Newtrace will each get subsidies for 30 MW/yr, the maximum capacity available for an individual firm.
In the "any stack technologies" category, seven companies will share subsidies for 1.1 GW/yr of production. This category was also oversubscribed, with bids totalling over 2 GW/yr. Mumbai-based Waaree Energies and a consortium of engineering firms Gensol and Matrix Gas Renewables will receive the largest support in terms of production capacity. Waaree will receive subsidies for 300 MW/yr, the maximum support available for an individual company in this category. The Gensol and Matrix Gas consortium will receive subsidies for 237 MW/yr, followed by Advait Infratech, which secured support for 200 MW/yr.
In the large "indigenously developed units" category, India only selected two firms. Newage Green Electro will receive support for 228.5 MW/yr, while Adani will receive support for 71.5 MW/yr.
Several firms that won subsidies in the first round also participated in the second round. Adani Enterprises submitted bids across all three categories, totalling 233 MW/yr. In the previous round, its subsidiary, Adani New Industries, received subsidies for 198 MW/yr in the indigenously developed stack technology category. But the tender stipulates that the maximum capacity allocated to a bidder, including parent or affiliate companies, is limited to 300 MW/yr across all tranches and categories of India's production-linked incentive scheme, meaning Adani could not have won its full bid amount. US-based Ohmium and Gujarat-based Advait Infratech also submitted bids for extra subsidies in this round after winning in the first round. Renewable energy firm Avaada succeeded this time, securing support for 49.5 MW/yr after an unsuccessful bid in the last tender.
Mixed results for India's other tenders
India is expected to delay the deadline for its second round 450,000t/yr hydrogen production plant tender for 10-15 days, the official said.
The government had previously asked for bids by 23 August, but this looks likely to push into September.
Separately, SECI received around 500 queries from companies about for India's first renewable ammonia supply tender after the government last month set out details for its proposals for 10-year subsidy contracts, the official added. This tender has already faced delays and it could potentially need more time and work to resolve doubts and questions from the private sector.
| Winners of electrolyser manufacturing tender | |
| Manufacturing capacity in MW/yr | |
| Bucket 1: all stack technologies | |
| Avaada Electrolyser | 50 |
| Newage Green Electro | 72 |
| Waaree Energies | 300 |
| Gensol, Matrix Gas and Renewables | 237 |
| Advait Infratech | 200 |
| Ohmium Operations | 137 |
| GH2 Solar | 105 |
| Total bids | 1100 |
| Bucket 2A : indigenously developed stack technology | |
| Newage Green Electro | 228 |
| Adani Enterprises | 71.5 |
| Total bids | 300 |
| Bucket 2B : indigenously developed stack technology - smaller units | |
| Adani Enterprises | 30 |
| Eastern Electrolyser | 30 |
| Newtrace | 30 |
| Suryaashish KA1 Solar Park | 10 |
| Total bids | 100 |
| government sources | |
Related news posts
Green projects struggle to access €724bn EU funds
Green projects struggle to access €724bn EU funds
Brussels, 2 September (Argus) — EU auditors today raised concerns about the ability of member states to make full use of the €724bn pot allocated to climate-related objectives under the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) — designed to mitigate the economic impact of the Covid pandemic — by the 31 August 2026 deadline. Auditors also highlighted significant compliance challenges facing hydrogen and renewable energy projects. Romania, for instance, had to remove a sub-measure for a hydrogen-ready and renewable gas distribution network, as it became evident the project would not be completed within the RRF's tight timeline. And Italy withdrew a project for offshore electricity generation infrastructure, including wave-based energy, over deadline concerns. "We are flagging risks, as EU countries had drawn down less than a third of the planned funds at the halfway point and made less than 30pc progress towards reaching their predefined milestones and targets," European Court of Auditors (ECA) member Ivana Maletic said. Maletic told Argus that no specific data are available yet on the progress of green deal, as opposed to other RRF projects, such as digitalisation. By the end of 2023, the ECA calculates that the European Commission had disbursed just €213bn, including €56.5bn in pre-financing. Beyond the challenge of meeting the 31 August 2026 completion deadline, some countries' administrative bottlenecks have also hindered progress. For example, Romania's failure to submit contracts for projects with a combined generation capacity of at least 300MW led to the partial suspension of a measure for combined heat and power generation in district heating systems. Another obstacle for projects is the 'do no significant harm' principle — a key component of EU sustainable finance legislation. The principle imposes strict criteria, typically excluding funding for companies deriving 1pc or more of their revenues from hard coal and lignite, 10pc from oil fuels, or 50pc from natural gas. Companies generating more than 50pc of their revenue from power generation with a greenhouse gas intensity exceeding 100g of CO2 equivalent/kWh would also normally be excluded from funding. By Dafydd ab Iago Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
CCUS, hydrogen manage expectations ahead of Cop 29
CCUS, hydrogen manage expectations ahead of Cop 29
London, 2 September (Argus) — The final text from last year's UN Cop 28 climate summit in Dubai included a nod to carbon capture, use and storage (CCUS) and "low-carbon hydrogen" production — a first mention for both in Cop outcome texts and rare specificity. But these developing technologies have made little tangible progress since the conference, with few new commercial CCUS projects announced, while investment in hydrogen has slowed. Hydrogen industry participants are not predicting immediate strides forward for the sector at Cop 29, scheduled to take place in Baku, Azerbaijan, in November — industry association Hydrogen Europe is managing expectations for the event, and is already pinning hopes on next year's Cop 30, in Brazil. But it may benefit indirectly from the summit's higher-level initiatives, such as boosting energy transition finance and spurring bilateral carbon credit trading, they say. Baku may struggle to meet the high bar set at last year's Cop, which was described as a "historical moment" by industry group the Hydrogen Council. Perhaps in tacit recognition that hydrogen will be out of the limelight in Azerbaijan — which lacks robust ambitions for the technology — Hydrogen Europe has its hopes pinned on broader initiatives to give the sector a leg-up. Azerbaijan's aim to set up a climate fund bankrolled by fossil fuel companies and oil-producing country governments would be welcome, Hydrogen Europe chief executive Jorgo Chatzimarkakis says. Details of the potential fund are not clear, but it could back renewables, as well as supporting countries struggling to adapt to climate change. Progress at Cop 29 in finalising the details of the Paris Agreement's Article 6 — which allows countries to transfer carbon credits earned from cutting greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to help other countries meet their climate targets — would "benefit hydrogen big time", Chatzimarkakis adds. It could help to unlock projects in hydrogen-hopeful countries such as Namibia and Mauritania, which have plentiful sun, wind and space but lack straightforward access to finance, he says. For African countries, securing finance is the "single most critical challenge" in sustainable development, the African Climate Foundation says. The continent receives less than 3pc of global renewables investment and its governments will make a "concerted push" for more access to financing at Cop 29, the foundation's energy access and transitions programme manager, Sahele Fekede, says. Hydrogen's bubble deflating? But access to finance is only part of the battle, as several hydrogen-focused investment funds were already established at previous Cops, and governments have earmarked generous subsidy schemes for the sector. The biggest bottleneck this year appears to be commercially viable projects with confirmed customers. The industry has experienced sluggish progress over the past 12-18 months — far from the frenzy of projects and partnerships announced at Cop 27 in 2022, when hydrogen optimism ran high. Firms and governments have pulled back on hydrogen targets recently, but Cop 29 could see some new announcements. And a recent rise in hydrogen investment decisions in Europe, India and Canada, worth billions of dollars collectively, may mean the industry is turning a corner. Cop 29 offers the chance for "material advancements" for hydrogen in global technical standards and certification solutions, Hydrogen Council chief executive Ivana Jemelkova says. But 39 governments pledged to support mutual recognition of hydrogen certificates at Cop 28, so it is doubtful if anything more could be presented on this front in Baku. Key governments also endorsed the first set of technical standards to measure the CO2 footprint of different hydrogen plants at Cop 28 — a vital step to underpin certification. But work to expand this CO2 methodology to cover the midstream section is not expected until 2025-26. Implementing clear "demand drivers" must be the other "critical" talking point, Jemelkova says. Market participants see a lack of willingness to pay for clean hydrogen stifling investment decisions. In contrast, demand within the CCUS industry appears strong, with significant numbers of industrial emitters committing to capture CO2, and setting up pilot projects, while most oil and gas producers are diversifying to some extent into CO2 storage. But subsidy schemes are still under development in many countries and the sector's evolution is often hampered by logistical challenges — getting the capture, storage and transport elements ready simultaneously. The vast majority of CCUS and carbon capture and storage (CCS) facilities are at the planning stage, and many have not yet started construction. Of the almost 840 CCS facilities mapped by energy watchdog the IEA, just 51 are operational. Of these, 10 sequester the CO2 in dedicated storage, while the CO2 from a further six will be used. These 16 plants have announced a combined maximum capacity of 12.7mn t/yr CO2, IEA data show. Carbon capture controversy CCUS and CCS projects frequently attract criticism. They are used to justify continued fossil fuel use and delay action on cutting GHG emissions, non-governmental organisations (NGOs) say. The technology, while cautiously backed by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's overarching climate science reports, is not fully proven at scale for climate purposes, and can be energy-intensive. Oil-producing countries often cite the technology at climate talks, arguing the need to reduce emissions from oil and gas use rather than removing the source of those emissions. The specific language on CCUS in the Cop 28 outcome text is likely to have been included to mollify fossil fuel-producing countries. The EU was clear ahead of Cop 28, setting a firm position that CCS or CCUS should play a minor role in tackling climate change. Use of fossil fuels with CCUS should only be an option for "specific hard-to-abate sectors", EU climate commis sioner Wopke Hoekstra said. He doubled down during the summit, telling delegates that "we cannot CCS ourselves out of the space" to address climate change. But the bloc has since released a proposed carbon management strategy that leans heavily on CCUS to hit ambitious climate goals — although work would have started on the plan well before Cop 28. The EU aims to map potential CO2 storage areas and wants carbon capture to cover all industrial process emissions by 2040. Europe — including non-EU members Norway, Iceland and the UK — is by far the region furthest ahead, with significant CO2 storage potential and the resources to drive a nascent industry. The past year has seen some new CO2 storage licences awarded, and incremental progress on subsidy frameworks, but a lack of commercial agreements and concrete decisions persists, while start dates for existing developments have been pushed back. Both CCUS and hydrogen are developing industries and need substantial investment — from the private sector, but also public funding to de-risk an emerging market. Just five jurisdictions — the US, EU, Canada, Norway and the Netherlands — are responsible for 95pc of public funding for CCS and "fossil hydrogen" to date, NGO Oil Change International says, putting subsidies for the technologies at $30bn in total. Finance will be the "centrepiece" of Cop 29, and given previous mention in a Cop text, CCUS and hydrogen are both well positioned to receive energy transition funding. But the industries also need mandates, subsidies and widely used regulatory frameworks to advance. By Georgia Gratton, Pamela Machado and Aidan Lea Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
South Korea to require use of SAF for flights from 2027
South Korea to require use of SAF for flights from 2027
Singapore, 30 August (Argus) — South Korea said it plans to require all international flights departing from its airports to use a mix of 1pc sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) from 2027. This comes as more countries are adopting SAF mandates in accordance with the Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation (CORSIA). Singapore earlier this year announced a 1pc SAF blending mandate from 2026 , with plans to increase to 3-5pc by 2030, subject to global developments and wider SAF availability and adoption. The Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy and the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport announced the 'SAF Expansion Strategy' on 30 August, which includes a target for South Korea to capture 30pc of the global blended SAF export market. While not explicitly stated in the statement, some South Korean refineries expect co-processed SAF to be allowed to meet the country's mandate, sources said. This is important as the country already produces small quantities of SAF via co-processing at existing refining facilities, with three of South Korea's four domestic refineries planning to produce SAF through co-processing by the end of this year . Key strategies The ministries outlined three key strategies to achieve the SAF consumption target — gradual expansion of domestic SAF demand, ensuring a stable domestic supply capacity, and establishing a SAF-friendly legal and institutional environment. Airlines can already refuel with SAF at Korean airports, making South Korea the 20th country to do so as part of their plan to increase domestic SAF demand. The country had tested six flights using 2-4pc imported blended SAF between South Korea and Los Angeles since August 2023. An incentive system is being developed to encourage public and private adoption of SAF, with benefits such as preferential allocation of transport rights, reduced airport facility usage fees and the introduction of airline carbon mileage system for passengers and other benefits. A mid- to long-term roadmap for the gradual expansion of domestic SAF demand will be prepared in early 2025, the ministries said. The country's strategy to secure stable domestic supply capabilities includes considering investment support for domestic SAF production such as tax credits. South Korea's four domestic refineries already plan to invest 4 trillion won ($3bn) in renewable fuels, including SAF by 2030, the ministries said. The government estimates a Hydrotreated Esters and Fatty Acids (HEFA) SAF plant with a production capacity of up to 250,000 t/yr will require an investment of approximately W1 trillion. The supply-side strategy also aims to ease regulations on waste recycling to increase the availability of domestic feedstocks for SAF production. Another strategy is to diversify feedstock and SAF production technology options, with pre-testing expected later this year. The government plans to explore alternative feedstock like microalgae and production pathways such as e-SAF, with a view to developing supply chains. South Korea plans to establish a national standard, certification and testing method for SAF with preparation planned for December 2024. By Deborah Sun Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
Sales abroad to soon surpass China business: Hygreen
Sales abroad to soon surpass China business: Hygreen
Hamburg, 28 August (Argus) — Chinese electrolyser maker Hygreen is increasingly making inroads abroad as it builds on 17 years of experience in China. The firm reached 2 GW/yr of manufacturing capacity at its factory in Shandong in 2023 and aims to expand to 5 GW/yr in 2025. The company primarily makes alkaline electrolysers, but is also developing proton exchange membrane (PEM) equipment and is in final preparations for commercialisation of anion exchange membrane (AEM) technology. Argus spoke to Hygreen's global marketing director Ethan Hugh about the firm's outlook and ambitions as well as questions of cost and reliability. Edited highlights follow: How do you see hydrogen developments in China and elsewhere? China has had quite a bit more development in the hydrogen sector, especially in the electrolyser space, over the past years. So in some ways, the world could be looking at China as a glimpse of what the future could look like in terms of next steps or how the industry develops. The rest of the world has really caught up in terms of knowing the importance of hydrogen as a key element of the clean energy transition and the economic potential it can have. At Hygreen, we're forecasting the business for our sales abroad to surpass our China business over the next year or two. When I look at our current database of customers and leads, I am seeing a very strong growth in some key markets around the world. A lot of that is focused on regions that have more advanced regulations or incentives that push adoption. Are there regions where you are finding it harder to break into? There are factors that make certain regions look like they're harder to get into. One is the project scale and others are financing and subsidy deadlines. Smaller projects can definitely move a lot faster. I've seen projects come to us and their first attempt is to go to a very, very large output level and I always think about how they're going to reach their financing and FID [final investment decision]. We can pick up smaller projects very quickly because the financing is easier. Projects that are reaching almost GW [gigawatts] levels are just not going to have aggressive timelines that we can believe in. If we have to make room for a very large project, that is a significant consideration from our side and for supply chain purposes. Are technical and safety standards an issue for overseas sales? It does take more time to get stamps, [but] that is just a little bit of a timeline difference issue. I don't think the certification is a barrier — not to Hygreen at least because we are able to be compliant globally for basically all markets. Compliance takes a very small amount of time compared with the entire project execution timeline, so it hasn't come up as more than a question. Of course, we have to show proof, we have to show a plan on how we get all of that. But it's not something that doesn't get us past to the next step. Our manufacturing plant in Shandong is able to make products that comply [with global standards]. It's not like we can't be nimble and just handle all those certifications from one location. Will manufacturing stay in China? Could parts like stack assembly move abroad? From a management perspective, we have transitioned ourselves to a much more global set-up. While the headquarters remain in Beijing, we have senior management across Europe and North America now. We have offices in Spain, Canada, Hong Kong and Dubai. Going forward, we're watching very closely regional customisations or regional policies, incentives and regulations on things such as local content. So that will drive decisions on assembly or manufacturing of some kind in different regions around the world. We have significant interest from potential partners around the world. What about after-sales and servicing? We already announced two after-sales agreements in Europe. That is part of our bigger strategy because localised after-sales and maintenance services or technical support [are] a very important part of our customers' purchase decisions. For many customers, it's a new technology and it's their first time doing implementation and commissioning. And it's not just their decision, it's the success of their projects. The localised support will create more confidence in the timeliness of support and in the level of communication. How do you decide on your capacity expansion plans? We are making decisions based on demand. We are looking at the number of customers that are interested in working with us and how they're moving through the process of procurement with us. Our capacity expansion is based on a projection and on confidence levels in our pipeline. So it's based on anticipation? There's more certainty than anticipation. When a customer places an order in 2023-24, it takes an X number of months to deliver depending on the size of the project. There are [orders for] projects placed in 2024 that we know are being executed and delivered for 2025-26. So from that regard, it's not anticipation because we know that these are coming. So it's based on firm orders to some extent? Yes, exactly. What gives Chinese manufacturers an edge over others in terms of costs? One is experience and scale. And for Hygreen specifically, we're able to achieve lower costs with automation. Our manufacturing facility is strategically in the right location in China. Shandong is a manufacturing hub, so with everything from labour all the way to automation, we're able to drive manufacturing efficiency and that in turn drives down our cost. We [also] have strong supply chain relationships. Some say that Chinese kit is less reliable and durable. What do you say to that? Hygreen has a clean record and we don't experience the reliability question maybe as much as it seems. Hygreen has executed more than 300 projects, so for us our reliability is from the proof that we have so many projects executed and them performing well. As for our manufacturing capabilities, automation is a very key indicator of the fact that we can achieve the highest reliability. Because what removes human error more than automation? So you've not had issues with durability so far? We actually design our products quite conservatively. What I mean by that is what we put on our specification sheets are very confident numbers that have stood the test of time. We have learned for over 17 years and from more than 300 projects and we continue to evolve and design our products so that they are more high-performing, more efficient and more durable. And Hygreen is not just a stack manufacturer. We also manufacture a lot of our BOP [balance-of-plant] components ourselves and we can design the integration and engineering for the whole system using our own products. We're not reliant on external supplier quality. Selected countries with Hygreen electrolyser deliveries Argentina Australia Belarus Cambodia Chile China Germany Indonesia Malaysia Pakistan Peru Russia Spain Turkey UAE Uzbekistan Yemen ― Hygreen Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.
Business intelligence reports
Get concise, trustworthy and unbiased analysis of the latest trends and developments in oil and energy markets. These reports are specially created for decision makers who don’t have time to track markets day-by-day, minute-by-minute.
Learn more