article · Applied Energy
An assessment of green hydrogen production evaluates four primary electrolyser technologies across real-world deployments and published studies: alkaline water electrolysers, proton exchange membrane systems, solid oxide electrolyser cells, and anion exchange membrane systems. Alkaline water electrolysers provide the most cost-effective solution for steady, baseload operations. Proton exchange membrane units deliver superior dynamic response and gas purity, though at higher capital and operational expense. Solid oxide cells show high theoretical efficiency but suffer from material degradation and thermal cycling constraints, while anion exchange membranes show potential for decentralised, lower-cost output despite lower maturity. Across all systems, electricity represents over 64 percent of the levelised cost of hydrogen, requiring careful integration with hybrid or stable renewable sources like geothermal or wind-solar setups. Computational optimisation and local factors such as water availability strongly influence overall project feasibility.
Green hydrogen is critical for decarbonising energy systems, yet high production costs remain a substantial hurdle. Because electricity makes up the vast majority of hydrogen costs, selecting the right electrolyser technology and matching it to local renewable energy profiles, water supplies, and grid infrastructure is essential for creating viable, scalable clean energy projects.
The findings serve clean energy developers, investors, and policymakers planning hydrogen production facilities. The technologies range from mature, commercially deployed solutions like alkaline systems to earlier-stage options like anion exchange membranes and solid oxide cells. Applying genetic algorithms and geographic siting tools enables project planners to select suitable electrolysers and lower levelised production costs by aligning equipment choices with regional hybrid renewable resources and water infrastructure.
AI-generated from the published abstract. Always read the original work before citing.
This review provides a comprehensive techno-economic assessment of four leading electrolyzer technologies such as the Alkaline Water Electrolyzers (AWE), Proton Exchange Membrane (PEM) electrolyzers, Solid Oxide Electrolyzer Cells (SOEC), and Anion Exchange Membrane (AEM) systems for green hydrogen production. Drawing on more than 40 peer-reviewed studies and real-world deployment scenarios, the analysis compares performance indicators such as levelised cost of hydrogen (LCOH), capital expenditure (CAPEX), operating expenditure (OPEX), efficiency, stack durability, and water treatment requirements. AWE is identified as the most cost-effective option for baseload power contexts, while PEM offers superior dynamic response and gas purity at a higher cost. SOECs, despite their high theoretical efficiency, remain limited by thermal cycling and material degradation. AEMs, though less mature, hold promise for low-cost, decentralized hydrogen production. Cost of electricity is more than 64 % of LCOH in all technologies, so it is important to match electrolyzers with stable or hybrid renewable energy resources such as geothermal, wind-solar, or Concentrated Solar Power (CSP). Optimisation methods such as genetic algorithms and GIS-based siting also enhance system performance and economic value. The report also considers regional and policy dimensions of deployment, underlining the need for site-specific solutions in the context of local energy portfolios, water supply, and infrastructure readiness. Recommendations are provided for advancing membrane longevity, integrating smart control systems, and optimizing techno-economic assessment models. This study is a policy decision-making tool for policymakers, investors, and researchers who are interested in accelerating the global scale-up of green hydrogen using context-relevant and economically viable electrolyzer technologies. • Alkaline water electrolyzers are the most cost-effective option for base load power. • Proton exchange membrane electrolyzers offer gas purity at a higher cost. • Solid oxide electrolyzer cells remain limited by thermal cycling and material degradation. • Anion exchange membrane systems offer low cost and decentralized hydrogen production. • Cost of electricity is more than 60 % of levelized cost of hydrogen for all technologies.
This page summarises published work. The authoritative version sits with the publisher.
DOI: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2025.126515
Is something wrong with this record? Report it or request removal.
Discussion
Have you built on this work, tried to replicate it, or seen it applied in practice? Share what you know. Verified researchers and MARATTO™ domain experts can open a discussion, and any member can reply. Contributions are reviewed before they appear.
No discussion yet. Open the first thread.
New to MARATTO™? Create a free account.
