Green Hydrogen for Process Steam:
5.40 ct/kWh in the model scenario vs. natural gas
A model scenario for industrial steam generation: the system and economic calculation shown here is not a measured HSG reference and not an installation record. It frames a move from natural gas to hydrogen-based steam using the stated assumptions.
Electrolysis capacity · assumed design
1,000 kW
Steam output · assumed design
1,200 kg/h
Difference vs. natural gas · calculated scenario
5.40 ct/kWh
IRR · stated model value, validation pending
16.22%
Process steam: the decision question
The model scenario assumes process steam generation fuelled by natural gas. It does not assess a specific client site; it asks how hydrogen-based steam could be economically classified under the stated energy, system and operating assumptions.
A real investment decision would require a site-specific review of load profiles, connections, existing boilers and burners, permits, contracts and the operating concept. That review and its findings are not part of this page.
Model-scenario system diagram: PV / PPA → electrolysis → H₂ storage → steam generator
Cost comparison as an assumed calculation
The values below are neither measured steam costs nor a market-price forecast. They are inputs stated in the model scenario or calculated comparison values derived from it. Whether options such as direct electrification, biomass or hydrogen suit a site depends on its technical and economic conditions.
Calculated comparison in the model scenario
From electricity to steam: model-scenario architecture
The scenario links photovoltaics and/or contractually procured green electricity with electrolysis, interim storage and an H₂ steam generator. It is a conceptual system assumption, not a statement about an installed plant, a burner replacement or secured availability at a particular site.
Electricity provision
PV and/or a green-power PPA are envisaged as electricity sources for electrolysis in the model scenario. Generation profiles and contract terms are assumptions, not operating data.
Hydrogen electrolysis
The stated 1,000 kW electrolysis capacity is an assumed system design. Waste-heat use is described as an option to be assessed, not as a proven effect.
Storage and steam generation
Interim storage and steam generation form the assumed process chain. The stated steam output is a scenario value, not a measured output.
Components as a starting point, not a delivery promise
The architecture shown is guided by the Alpha EL components named for schrand.energy in the model scenario. Suitability, sizing, safety concept and approvals must be reviewed for every site by the responsible specialist contractors and permitting authorities.
Electrolyser and peripherals
Model-scenario building blocks for water treatment, drying and power electronics.
H₂ storage and battery storage
Illustrative storage components; capacity, siting and grid effects require a site-specific review.
Energy management
Described as a model assumption for coordinating generation, electrolysis and steam demand; it is not operating evidence.
Safety and permitting
No certification or compliance assurance. Requirements arise only from planning, execution and authority review.
Technical illustration: Alpha EL system of the technology partner named in the model scenario
Calculated results under stated assumptions
The calculation uses the stated electrolysis capacity and 5,800 annual operating hours of the steam generator as assumptions. Cost values, the difference, internal rate of return and the 20-year value are calculated scenario results—not measurements, price forecasts, guaranteed savings or return commitments. For a site decision, TCO, IRR and DSCR would require separate review with the actual contracts, investments and financing conditions.
Calculation basis under review: 4,716,528 kWh of steam per year and a constant difference of 5.40 ct/kWh imply approximately €254,693 per year, or €5.09 million over 20 years before discounting and without other cash flows. The stated value of roughly €25 million, IRR and break-even cannot be derived from these inputs alone. The underlying cash-flow model must be reconciled.
Model-scenario assumptions
Scroll table sideways
| Electrolysis Capacity | 1.000 kWAssumption |
|---|---|
| Electricity Input | 6.000.000 kWh/aAssumption |
| Steam Output | 4.716.528 kWh/aAssumption |
| Steam Generator Operating Hours | 5.800 h/aAssumption |
Calculated scenario results
Scroll table sideways
| Natural Gas Steam Cost | 16,47 ct/kWhCalculated |
|---|---|
| H₂ Steam Cost | 11,07 ct/kWhCalculated |
| Savings per kWh | 5,40 ct/kWhCalculated |
| Internal Rate of Return (IRR) | 16,22 %Calculated |
| Break-Even | Year 3–4Calculated |
Stated 20-year model value – validation pending
approx. 25M EUR
Calculation basis to be reconciled; not a verified result
Illustrative advantage curve under the stated scenario assumptions; not a measurement series
What to assess before a site decision
Supply and resilience
Supply sources, the grid connection, storage strategy and a back-up concept need site-specific assessment. The model does not demonstrate autonomy or guarantee supply.
Emissions accounting
Electricity origin, its temporal availability and accounting boundaries determine the assessment. The scenario makes no blanket emissions or ESG commitment.
Funding and financing
Eligibility, terms and financing effects are not assessed in this model and must be verified separately when a decision is made.
Expansion stages
Modular expansion is shown as a technical option. It does not replace a review of space, permits, grids and actual steam demand.
Useful as a question framework, not a general result
The model scenario makes the relationships to be assessed visible. It does not replace technical planning or an economic calculation for a specific industrial operation.
The 5.40 ct/kWh cost difference and 16.22% IRR are results of this model scenario, not measured site values.
Whether existing steam infrastructure can continue to be used requires an on-site technical, safety and permitting assessment.
Whether and how electrolysis waste heat can be used depends on temperature, timing and the processes already in place.
Flexible operation requires matching load, generation and contract profiles; it is not a universally proven optimisation.
HSG classifies options economically at its own Innovation HUB; appointed specialist contractors are responsible for implementation and operation of specific industrial systems.
Technology partner named in the model scenario: schrand.energy
schrand.energy is named in the available model materials as a technology partner with an Alpha EL system reference. This case study records no order, planning, installation or operation by HSG.
Classify steam generation?
In a non-binding sparring session, let us clarify which technical and economic assumptions should be reviewed for your site before a decision is made.