The overall yearly supply-demand balance for the PCI/PMI hydrogen infrastructure level in 2040 is presented in Table 23. As detailed in Table 23, the overall hydrogen demand triples compared to the 2030 hydrogen demand level, leading to a yearly hydrogen demand of 1936 TWh/y in Europe. Electrolytic hydrogen production remains the main source of hydrogen in Europe, satisfying 56 % of the yearly hydrogen demand of Europe.

Despite i) the infrastructure development foreseen in the PCI/PMI hydrogen infrastructure level for 2040 (see section 1.1), ii) the increase of extra-EU supply potentials via terminals and pipelines, and iii) the significant increase of electrolytic hydrogen production (by approximately 246 %), this is not sufficient to satisfy the hydrogen demand in many European countries. Therefore, overall hydrogen demand curtailment rises compared to the 2030 values leading to an average hydrogen curtailment rate of 15 % in Europe.

Figure 21 shows the hydrogen production via electrolysis in the different European countries for the PCI/PMI hydrogen infrastructure level in the 2040 assessment. European electrolytic production significantly increased compared to 2030 in most European countries. The countries with the highest electrolytic hydrogen production are: Spain, ­Germany, Finland, France and Sweden.

Some countries have more than one source of electrolytic hydrogen production. This is related to the intra-country assumptions that are detailed in the description of the reference weather year in section 3.1.1.

Figure 22 shows the distribution of hydrogen production from natural gas in 2040. There is a reduction in hydrogen production from natural gas compared to 2030 as presented in Table 23.

This reduction is explained by i) the 50 % reduction in the installed capacities for hydrogen production from natural gas as defined in the TYNDP 2024 NT+ scenario, ii) the higher electrolytic production as well as iii) the availability of new hydrogen supplies through imports from North Africa, Norway, Ukraine, and via terminals.

Considering the supply and demand distribution presented in Table 24, the intra-EU transport corridors that already emerged in 2030, connecting the electrolytic hydrogen supply produced in the Iberian Peninsula and in the Nordic countries with the main European hydrogen hub in Germany, are even more needed in the 2040 PCI/PMI assessment due to the increase of hydrogen demand between 2030 and 2040. The Iberian corridor is thereby supported by imports from Morocco.

In addition, as presented in Figure 23, other intra-EU transport corridors emerge, mainly driven by the availability of extra-EU supplies in the 2040 assessment. Namely, the new corridors identified for 2040 are:

In the 2040 PCI/PMI hydrogen infrastructure level assessment for the reference weather year, countries can be grouped in four different categories according to their supply-demand balance on a yearly basis:

While on a yearly basis some countries are net exporters and some countries are net importers, net exporters may be relying on net imports during certain shorter periods of time and net importers may be providing net exports during certain shorter periods of time. This can result in bidirectional flows at interconnections. This situation is caused by the seasonality of electrolytic hydrogen production and to some extent by the seasonality of hydrogen demand.

The overall yearly supply-demand balance for the PCI/PMI hydrogen infrastructure level in 2040 for the stressful weather year is presented in Table 25. As detailed in Table 25, electrolytic hydrogen production is the main source of hydrogen in Europe but it is reduced in comparison with the reference weather year. To compensate the reduction of electrolytic hydrogen production, hydrogen import sources, both via ship and pipeline, increase in comparison with the reference weather year.

The imports via terminals increase by 15 %. The consideration of a stressful weather year leads to an approximate rate of 18 % of hydrogen demand curtailment at European level. This represents an increase by 3 % in comparison with the reference weather year.

Figure 24 shows the distribution of hydrogen production via electrolysis in the different European countries for the PCI/PMI hydrogen infrastructure level in the 2040 assessment under stressful weather conditions. Despite the overall reduction of electrolytic hydrogen production, under stressful weather conditions the countries with the highest electrolytic hydrogen production follow the same distribution as in the PCI/PMI 2040 assessment for the reference weather year (see Figure 21).

Some countries have more than one source of electrolytic hydrogen production. This is related to the intra-country assumptions that are detailed in the description of the reference weather year in section 3.1.1.

The distribution of hydrogen production produced from natural gas in the different European countries for the PCI/PMI hydrogen infrastructure level in the 2040 assessment under stressful weather conditions is presented in Figure 25.

No significant change was observed in comparison to the reference weather year presented in Figure 22.

As presented in Figure 26 and Table 26 the flows through the two corridors connecting electrolytic supply with German and European demand reduced in the stressful weather year assessment, driven by the overall reduction of available RES.

This affects the Iberian and the Nordic corridor. The flows through intra-EU transport corridors that are supplied by Norway, North Africa and Ukraine therefore increase if possible.

When comparing Figure 26 with Figure 23, most European countries show the same behaviour in terms of being a net exporter, a net importer or a transit country for the stressful as for the reference weather year. As expected under stressful climatic conditions, corridors based mainly on electrolytic production will see their exporting role slightly reduced due to the lower availability of RES (i. e., Iberian and Nordic corridors).

Consequently, also the transit through countries along these routes is reduced (e. g., transit through Baltic countries). On the contrary, both liquid imports and import corridors via pipeline, will maximize their flows to compensate the reduction on European electrolytic supplies.

The increase of hydrogen demand considered in the 2040 assessment leads to a general increase of average hydrogen market clearing prices in Europe when compared to the 2030 assessment, as represented in Figure 27. This increase is connected to the higher rates of curtailed demand across Europe, and to a lesser extent to the use of more expensive hydrogen import sources to satisfy the hydrogen demand in the different European countries. In South-Eastern Europe, where most of the countries have limited connection to the European hydrogen network and rely on the local hydrogen production, the increase of hydrogen prices is more pronounced. This steep increase is explained by the increase of demand curtailment, as well as the use of more expensive hydrogen sources to satisfy hydrogen demand in order to avoid curtailment. As presented in Figure 27, this is particularly important as these countries are isolated in the PCI/PMI hydrogen infrastructure level. In addition, the cost of hydrogen production from natural gas increases significantly in the 2040 assessment due to the increase of the ETS price as stipulated in the TYNDP 2024 NT+ scenario.

Despite the increase of hydrogen market clearing prices in many countries in the 2040 assessment, there are other countries or areas where the average hydrogen market clearing price decreases compared to 2030:

The price formation in the DHEM is based on the merit order of hydrogen production (see section 1.2.1). Several price groups stand out, while a signification correlation is understood here as a correlation above 0.7:

The price correlations listed above are enabled by the infrastructure projects already considered in this hydrogen infrastructure level. However, price differences that led to the identification of the groups listed above are not necessarily describing an infrastructure gap. For this identification of infrastructure gaps, the thresholds of IGI indicator 1 are used.

The IGI indicator 1 reveals in the 2040 assessment of the PCI/PMI hydrogen infrastructure level an increase of the price spreads at many European borders when compared to the 2030 assessment.

At the following borders, IGI indicator 1 identified additional significant price spreads in comparison with the 2030 assessment due to bottlenecks:

In the 2040 PCI/PMI assessment, there are some borders where the price spread has decreased compared to the 2030 assessment. At the following borders, the IGI indicator 1 therefore does not identify a significant price spread anymore:

Countries and regions that are isolated in 2040 in the PCI/PMI hydrogen infrastructure level, such as Hungary, Romania, cluster Greece-Bulgaria, Slovenia, Croatia, Luxembourg, Poland South, France South West, Ireland, the United Kingdom, Malta and Cyprus, remain showing significant price spreads with their neighbouring countries and regions, as identified by IGI indicator 1 in Table 27.

As explained in section 1.2.2, this IGI indicator assesses infrastructure gaps by quantifying hydrogen demand curtailments at individual nodes ­during the reference weather year, assuming no disruptions of infrastructures or of supply sources. It involves a multi-step simulation process integrating DHEM and DGM² outputs to evaluate the combined curtailments across nodes. The assessment is performed for the PCI/PMI hydrogen infrastructure level in 2040, showing the effects of matured infrastructure in 2040.

Figure 28 and Table 28 show yearly average curtailment rates of hydrogen demand in the Zone 2 nodes of different European countries. For countries where the hydrogen market is divided into several sub-zones (i. e., nodes), the curtailment rate in the different sub-zones is presented. The yearly average hydrogen curtailment rates are thereby ­colour-coded in the map to indicate levels relative to the set threshold: blue signifies curtailment above the threshold, while green represents rates that are not above it.

All European countries and regions overshoot the threshold of 0 % of IGI indicator 2.1 in the PCI/PMI hydrogen infrastructure level in 2040. However, differences in the hydrogen curtailment rates between nodes are related to the level of infrastructure development and supply availability. In comparison with IGI indicator 1, this IGI indicator focusses on the availability of supplies.

As detailed in Table 28, (regions of) countries can be aggregated in different groups according to their average yearly hydrogen demand curtailment rates:

Without the infrastructure already considered in the hydrogen infrastructure level, the overall hydrogen demand curtailment would be higher.

Even though the threshold has been surpassed, countries and regions of group 1 exhibit hydrogen demand curtailment rates below 5 % average yearly curtailment rate, meaning that for a large share of the year their demand is fully covered. Portugal, Slovakia and the United Kingdom show decreased curtailment rates compared to the PCI/PMI hydrogen infrastructure level assessment for 2030. This is particularly evident for Slovakia due to its connection to the European backbone and to Ukrainian hydrogen supplies in 2040. For the other countries and regions in this group, hydrogen curtailment rates increase with the general trend of increased hydrogen curtailment rates in 2040. The primary driver behind this increase is the rising demand for hydrogen within these individual countries, which surpasses the current capacity of available infrastructure. Despite advancements in PCI/PMI hydrogen infrastructure level, the rapid growth in hydrogen consumption highlights the need for further investment and development to meet the increasing demand. This trend underlines the evolving challenges of balancing infrastructure enhancements with accelerating demand.

Group 2 of countries and regions also contains those that show decreased hydrogen curtailment rates, i. e., Austria, the Belgium-Mons region, Czechia, the France-Southwest region, Ireland, Lithuania, and Latvia. Additionally, countries such as Lithuania and France not only benefit from improved import infrastructure but also experience increased their electrolytic production in 2040, which further mitigates curtailment rates. These developments highlight the effectiveness of infrastructure expansion and technological advancements in reducing hydrogen demand curtailment. At the same time, there is slight increases of hydrogen curtailment rates in Germany, Finland and France caused by increases of hydrogen demand in 2040.

Group 3, comprising Bulgaria, Denmark, Greece and Croatia, shows demand curtailments greater than 20 % but below 50 %. Within this category, curtailment rates are observed to rise from 2030 to 2040, driven by the increase of hydrogen demand in these countries and limited cross-border interconnections. The growing demand outpaces infrastructure improvements, leaving national markets unable to fully satisfy their hydrogen demand.

Group 4, experiencing hydrogen demand curtailment rates exceeding 50 % but remaining below 100 %, includes Slovenia and Romania, which have managed to reduce their hydrogen curtailment rates compared to 2030 while remaining isolated. Slovenia achieves a notable reduction from 76.6 % to 54.9 %, whereas Romania shows only a marginal reduction of 0.2 %. Conversely, the Poland-North region, the Poland-South region and Hungary experience increases in hydrogen demand curtailment rates, as significant growth in national demand outstrips the available capacity of the PCI/PMI hydrogen infrastructure as well as hydrogen production options in 2040. Luxembourg remains as isolated in 2040 as in 2030 in the PCI/PMI hydrogen infrastructure level.

Finally, Malta and Cyprus, due to their geographically isolated locations, continue to experience a demand curtailment of 100 % at the PCI/PMI hydrogen infrastructure level in 2040. The absence of connections with broader European hydrogen infrastructure underscores the challenges faced by island nations in integrating into the continental hydrogen network.

In the Poland-North Region, France and Czechia, on top of the curtailments observed in Zone 2 nodes as described in the paragraphs above, hydrogen demand curtailments can be observed in Zone 1 that increase during the winter months.

Figure 29 and Table 29 show the yearly average hydrogen demand curtailment rates in the Zone 2 nodes of various European countries for 2040, simulated under a stressful weather year. This weather scenario assumes adverse conditions, such as reduced wind and solar energy availability, which directly impacts hydrogen production.

For countries with hydrogen markets divided into multiple sub-zones (i. e., nodes), curtailment rates are depicted individually for each sub-zone on the map. The yearly average hydrogen curtailment rates are thereby colour-coded to indicate levels relative to the set threshold 1: blue signifies curtailment above the threshold, while green represents rates that are not.

Countries are grouped into five categories based on their average yearly hydrogen demand curtailment rates:

Countries and regions with hydrogen curtailment rates below 3 % in 2040 include Italy, Spain, Slovakia East Region. These countries and regions demonstrate remarkable resilience even under stressful weather conditions. For instance, Spain achieves a low curtailment rate of 2.5 %, owing to its robust hydrogen production and storage ­system.

The Slovakia-East region, at 2.5 %, benefits from enhanced import capabilities from Ukraine that effectively mitigates supply disruptions during adverse weather.

Group 2 includes the Belgium, Slovakia-West region, Portugal, Sweden, Ireland, Finland, Estonia, the Netherlands, Austria, Czechia, Lithuania, France, France-North region, France-South region, France-Southwest region, Latvia. Their curtailment rates exceed the 3 % threshold but remain below 20 %. Slovakia-West, for example, reports a curtailment rate of 3.7 %, reflecting its reliance on imports to bridge domestic production gaps. Similarly, Finland’s regions show slight variations, driven by reduced wind and hydropower outputs during the stressful weather year.

Belgium-Mons region, Greece, Denmark, Croatia, Germany, Bulgaria are part of group 3, exhibiting more significant curtailment challenges. Greece, with a curtailment rate of 46.1 %, struggles due to its limited domestic production and dependency on solar energy, which is significantly affected by the stressful weather year. The Belgium-Mons region, at 20.4 %, reflects the localised nature of its hydrogen supply challenges, as this region operates as a distinct hydrogen cluster. Germany, with a hydrogen demand curtailment rate of 21.4 %, faces increasing hydrogen demand in its industrial and ­transportation sectors, exacerbated by reduced renewable output in a stressful weather year.

Countries in group 4 experience severe curtailment challenges under adverse weather conditions. Slovenia’s hydrogen demand curtailment rate improves slightly from 76.6 % in 2030 to 62.7 % in 2040 but remains high due to inadequate infrastructure and limited renewable energy supply. Poland shows a clear regional disparity, with the Southern region exhibiting a higher curtailment rate (73 %) compared to the Northern region (55.2 %). Hungary, at 76.2 %, faces significant constraints driven by its growing hydrogen demand and insufficient cross-border capacity to meet needs during stressful weather periods. Luxembourg’s hydrogen demand curtailment rate of 95.9 % underscores its continued need for connection and lack of domestic production, which are further impacted during adverse weather.

Malta and Cyprus experience full curtailment of 100 % in 2040, as these countries remain entirely isolated and have no hydrogen production assets.

The overall yearly supply-demand balance for the advanced hydrogen infrastructure level in 2040 is presented in Table 30. As detailed in Table 30, overall hydrogen demand more than triples compared to the 2030 hydrogen demand level, leading to a yearly hydrogen demand of 1936 TWh/y in Europe.

Whereas the overall foreseen hydrogen demand does not vary between the analysed infrastructure levels, there are significant differences between them in terms of i) hydrogen demand curtailment and ii) availability of the different supplies.

The advanced infrastructure level shows a lower overall hydrogen demand curtailment rate in Europe. The reduction in the demand curtailment in this infrastructure level is related to the higher availability of hydrogen shipped imports and the maximization of the use of pipeline imports, more specifically Norwegian, North African and Ukrainian imports. The maximization of imports is possible thanks to the consideration of non-PCI/PMI advanced infrastructure that enables transport to countries that were isolated in the PCI/PMI infrastructure level, through the SK/HU/RO hydrogen corridor, as well as, the maximization of national production (both from electrolytic and natural-gas based) through a higher utilization of PCI/PMI infrastructure.

Despite i) the infrastructure development foreseen in the Advanced hydrogen infrastructure level for 2040 (see section 1.1.2), ii) the increase of extra-EU supply potentials via terminals and pipelines, and iii) the significant increase of electrolytic hydrogen production (by approximately 250 % compared to 2030), this is not sufficient to satisfy the hydrogen demand in many European countries and therefore, overall hydrogen demand curtailment rises compared to the 2030 values leading to an average hydrogen curtailment of 12 % in Europe. This is lower than the 15 % average hydrogen demand curtailment in Europe in the PCI/PMI hydrogen infrastructure level. This reduction is related to the higher availability of hydrogen terminals and the maximization of the use of pipeline imports from Norway, North Africa and Ukraine. The maximization of imports is possible thanks to the consideration of non-PCI/PMI advanced infrastructure that enables transport to countries that were isolated in the PCI/PMI hydrogen infrastructure level. This relates to the transit route through Slovakia, Hungary and Romania as well as the maximisation of national hydrogen production enabled by increased capacities.

Figure 30 shows the electrolytic hydrogen production in the different European countries for the Advanced hydrogen infrastructure level in the 2040 assessment. The European electrolytic production significantly increased compared to 2030 in most European countries. The electrolytic production slightly varies country to country in comparison to the PCI/PMI hydrogen infrastructure level, being slightly higher for the Advanced hydrogen ­infrastructure level in 2040. However, the overall distribution across Europe is rather similar.

Figure 31 shows the distribution of hydrogen ­production from natural gas in 2040. There is a reduction in hydrogen production from natural gas compared to 2030. The reasons for this are explained in section 4.1.1.

Considering the supply and demand distribution presented in Table 31, the intra-EU transport corridors that already emerged in the 2030 assessment of the Advanced hydrogen infrastructure level as well as new supply corridors are even more needed in the 2040 assessment due to the increase of hydrogen demand between 2030 and 2040.

These corridors are the Iberian and the Baltic corridors as well as the North African corridor with the main European hydrogen hub in Germany.

In addition, as presented in Figure 32, other intra-EU transport corridors emerge, mainly driven by the availability of extra-EU supplies in the 2040 assessment. Namely, the new corridors identified for 2040 are:

In the 2040 Advanced hydrogen infrastructure level assessment for the reference weather year, countries can be grouped in four different categories according to their supply-demand balance on a yearly basis:

With the exception of Hungary and Romania, that are integrated in the European hydrogen network through the Slovakia-Hungary-Romania hydrogen route, among the previously interconnected countries, the exporting/importing and transit roles did not change significantly in comparison to the PCI/PMI hydrogen infrastructure level assessment for 2040 (see Figure 26).

The overall yearly supply-demand balance for the Advanced hydrogen infrastructure level in 2040 for the stressful weather year is presented in Table 32. Electrolytic hydrogen production is the main source of hydrogen in Europe but it is reduced in comparison with the reference weather year. To compensate the reduction of electrolytic hydrogen production, hydrogen import sources, mainly via ship, increase in comparison with the reference weather year. The imports via terminals increase by 10 %. Pipeline imports however hardly increase as the effective import potential is limited by the import capacities of import pipelines (see Table 5) and by EU-internal bottlenecks (see section 4.2.1), there already were high utilisations in the reference weather year, and there is missing hydrogen storage infrastructure.

The consideration of a stressful weather year leads to an approximate rate of 15 % of hydrogen demand curtailment at European level. This is an increase compared to the 12 % for the reference weather year with the Advanced hydrogen infrastructure level and a reduction compared to the 18 % for the stressful weather year with the PCI/PMI hydrogen infrastructure level.

Figure 33 shows the distribution of electrolytic hydrogen production in the different European countries for the Advanced hydrogen infrastructure level in the 2040 assessment under stressful weather conditions.

While keeping the same overall distribution as in the reference case, the electrolytic production was reduced all over Europe.

Figure 34 shows the distribution of natural-gas based hydrogen production in the different European countries for the Advanced hydrogen infrastructure level in the 2040 assessment under stressful weather conditions.

No significant change was observed in comparison to the reference weather year presented in Figure 31.

When comparing Figure 32 with Figure 35, most European countries show the same behaviour in terms of being a net exporter, a net importer or a transit country for the stressful as for the reference weather year. As expected under stressful climatic conditions, corridors based mainly on electrolytic production will see their exporting role slightly reduced due to the lower availability of RES (i. e., Iberian and Nordic corridors).

Consequently, also the transit through countries along these routes is reduced (e. g., transit through Baltic countries). On the contrary, countries with access to import terminals will increase imports via ship for own consumption and transit. In addition, imports via pipeline from Ukrainian and North African corridors slightly increase their imports up to the maximum capability, determined by supply potentials and infrastructure bottlenecks.

The increase of hydrogen demand considered in the 2040 assessment leads to a general increase of average hydrogen market clearing prices in Europe when compared to the 2030 assessment, as represented in Figure 36. The fundamental reasons are explained in section 4.1.1.1 The Advanced hydrogen infrastructure level considers a significant increase of import terminal capacities (see Table 6 in section 1.1.2), increasing the overall availability of shipped hydrogen imports.

Despite having lower overall hydrogen demand curtailment in the Advanced hydrogen infrastructure level, hydrogen market clearing prices in most European countries are higher than in the PCI/PMI hydrogen infrastructure level for 2040 and lower in some countries like Poland. This relates to the improved connectivity that enables more countries to compete for the hydrogen supply options, maximising the overall socio-economic welfare that includes (among others) the surplus of all the hydrogen consumers as well as the surplus of the hydrogen producers.

The price formation in the DHEM is based on the merit order of hydrogen production (see ­section 1.2.1). Several price groups stand out, while a signification correlation is understood here as a correlation above 0.7:

The IGI indicator 1 in the 2040 assessment of the Advanced hydrogen infrastructure level reveals the same borders that were identified in the PCI/PMI hydrogen infrastructure level assessment for 2040.

As explained in section 1.2.2, this IGI indicator assesses infrastructure gaps by quantifying hydrogen demand curtailments at individual nodes during the reference weather year, assuming no disruptions of infrastructures or of supply sources. It involves a multi-step simulation process integrating DHEM and DGM³ outputs to evaluate the combined curtailments across nodes. The assessment is performed for the advanced hydrogen infrastructure level in 2040, showing the effects of matured infrastructure in 2040.

Figure 34 and Table 35 show yearly average curtailment rates of hydrogen demand in the Zone 2 nodes of different European countries. For countries where the hydrogen market is divided into several sub-zones (i. e., nodes), the curtailment rate in the different sub-zones is presented. The yearly average hydrogen curtailment rates are thereby colour-coded in the map to indicate levels relative to the set threshold: blue signifies curtailment above the threshold, while green represents rates that are not above it.

All European countries and regions overshoot the threshold of 0 % for IGI indicator 2.1 under the Advanced hydrogen infrastructure level in 2040. However, differences in the hydrogen curtailment rates between nodes are related to the level of infrastructure development and supply availability. In comparison with IGI indicator 1, this IGI indicator focusses on the availability of supplies.

As detailed in Figure 37, (regions of) countries can be aggregated in different groups according to their average yearly hydrogen demand curtailment rates:

Without the infrastructure already considered in the hydrogen infrastructure level, the overall hydrogen demand curtailment would be higher.

While hydrogen demand curtailment rates decrease in newly connected countries and regions and the overall hydrogen demand curtailment in Europe decreases compared to the PCI/PMI hydrogen infrastructure level, the curtailment rates in several countries and regions increase slightly, as other, newly connected countries and regions are supplied instead.

Considering group 1, in comparison with the PCI/PMI hydrogen infrastructure level, improved infrastructure could especially enhance the curtailment situation of the France-Southwest region (11.5 % to 3 %).

Within group 2, especially Hungary could benefit from its new interconnection in the Advanced hydrogen infrastructure level (75 % to 5 %).

Countries and regions of group 3 see the most significant reduction in the Poland-North region (50 % to 23 %) due to additional capacities in the Advanced hydrogen infrastructure level as well as in Romania (90 % to 49 %) due to its new interconnection with Hungary. Here, Hungary is acting as a transit country for hydrogen it receives from ­Slovakia.

In group 4, advanced infrastructure projects mitigate curtailment in Poland-South.

Malta and Cyprus, representing group 5, remain fully curtailed due to their geographic isolation within the European hydrogen market and have no hydrogen production assets.

In the Poland-North Region, France and Czechia, on top of the curtailments observed in Zone 2 nodes as described in the paragraphs above, hydrogen demand curtailments can be observed in Zone 1 that increase during the winter months.

The 2.2 IGI indicator shows the yearly average hydrogen demand curtailment rates in the Zone 2 nodes of various European countries for 2040, simulated under a stressful weather year. This weather scenario assumes adverse conditions, such as reduced wind and solar energy availability, which directly impacts hydrogen production.

For countries with hydrogen markets divided into multiple sub-zones (i. e., nodes), curtailment rates are depicted individually for each sub-zone on the map. The yearly average hydrogen curtailment rates are thereby colour-coded to indicate levels relative to the set threshold 1: blue signifies curtailment above the threshold, while green represents rates that are not.

Countries and (regions of countries) can be aggregated in different groups according to their average yearly hydrogen demand curtailment rates:

Rates below 3 %: Slovakia-East, Slovakia-West, Spain, Italy.

Rates between 3 % and 20 %: Austria, Belgium, Estonia, Finland, Finland-North region, Finland-South region, France, France-South region, France-Southwest region, Hungary, Ireland, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Portugal, Sweden, the United Kingdom.

Table 37 displays the maximum utilisation rates of hydrogen interconnections for both hydrogen infrastructure levels in 2040 for the reference weather year. As stated in section 1.1, some countries are completely isolated from the hydrogen infrastructure:

This section will be produced after the public consultation of the TYNDP 2024 Infrastructure Gaps Identification report in line with the methodology described by steps 2 to 3 in section 6 of the TYNDP 2024 Annex D2.

Solved infrastructure gaps in Advanced hydrogen infrastructure level compared to PCI/PMI hydrogen infrastructure level

The additional projects of the advanced infrastructure level could solve the following indications of regional hydrogen infrastructure gaps:

Not all IGI indicators could be solved from a regional perspective even if the advanced hydrogen projects provide benefits.

Identification of advanced, non-PCI/PMI ­projects responsible for solving hydrogen ­infrastructure gaps by addressing hydrogen infrastructure bottlenecks

The following advanced, non-PCI/PMI projects contributed to mitigate the identified infrastructure gaps in the 2040 assessment:

Besides the projects listed above, the projects included in the PCI/PMI hydrogen infrastructure level also contribute to the solving and mitigation of infrastructure gaps.