Europe’s LNG terminals could eventually provide significant hydrogen import capacity, using either ammonia or synthetic methane, according to energy industry experts.

European countries are scrambling to build extra LNG import capacity as they diversify their gas supplies following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. At the same time, they are seeking to reduce gas consumption even faster than previously planned. This could rapidly lead to a substantial gas import overcapacity, says Brussels-based thinktank Bruegel.

Bruegel calculates an expected natural gas supply of 4,500TWh from 2026, up from 3,750TWh in 2023, as LNG terminals start to come online. Some will be temporary floating terminals, but the majority will be fixed onshore facilities. Meanwhile, demand could steadily drop to below 2,500TWh by 2030 from 4,000TWh in 2021 if the EU meets its RepowerEU targets.

Ammonia

Rather than simply allowing terminals to become stranded assets, operators may seek to import other gases.

Switching to liquid hydrogen would be difficult as hydrogen’s boiling point is -253°C—around 100°C lower than that of natural gas. A newly built liquefied hydrogen storage tank can be 50pc more expensive than an LNG tank for a comparable volume, and due to the lower volumetric density the energy stored would be almost 60pc lower, the IEA notes.

60pc – Proportion of global hydrogen projects that will initially use ammonia as a carrier

More feasible is a switch to ammonia imports, as ammonia’s boiling point is -33°C. Engineering firm BV estimates that converting an existing LNG terminal to import ammonia would cost c.11–20pc of the total expense of building a new facility. And new LNG terminals can be designed to be readily switchable to ammonia, adding just 6.5–11.5pc to the capex of projects, according to BV.

Ammonia is generally expected to be the main carrier of hydrogen due to its existing supply chain. According to the IEA’s Global Hydrogen Review 2022, 60pc of hydrogen-derived projects planned out to 2030 will produce ammonia.

Synthetic methane

But developers of LNG terminals in Europe are also eyeing a switch to synthetic methane made with hydrogen and CO₂.

This comes with the advantage of being compatible with existing natural gas infrastructure—requiring no upgrades to LNG terminals or gas pipelines.

However, it would need a significant investment in carbon capture and storage (CCS) infrastructure. “Depending on the CO₂ source, the production costs of synthetic methane can be 70–160pc higher than the costs of the used hydrogen input,” the IEA says.

The 8bn m³/yr LNG terminal planned for Brunsbuettel in Germany has a licence to import gas until 2041, but developer consortium German LNG says “all parties involved” want to realise a switch to lower-carbon energy sources as early as possible. The terminal will first look at synthetic gas but will consider importing hydrogen derivatives at a later stage.

Likewise, the Hanseatic Energy Hub, which is building a 13.3bn m³/yr terminal in Stade, Germany, says it plans to start with LNG but will have “an increasing share” of synthetic and bio-LNG before eventually importing hydrogen-based fuels, including ammonia, in a second phase.

And Belgium-based Tree Energy Solutions, which is building a 16 bn m³/yr LNG terminal in Wilhelmshaven, Germany, is making a big push for synthetic methane. It has already signed an agreement with Australia’s Fortescue Future Industries to jointly develop and invest in 300,000t/yr of green hydrogen supply to the terminal via “renewable natural gas”. The plan could see FID next year, with first deliveries arriving by 2026.

The terminal would import hydrogen molecules in the form of synthetic methane. The methane would then be converted back into hydrogen, with the CO₂ captured and transported back to the supply location—making it effectively a carrier in a closed loop system and bypassing the need for CCS infrastructure.

---

Author: Killian Staines