Data
Extra cost of low-emissions ammonia in the European Union (IEA)
How much more it cost to produce low-emissions ammonia than conventional ammonia from unabated natural gas in the European Union in 2024, as the IEA states it: around 25 percent more with carbon capture and about 120 to 220 percent more from electrolysis; as little as 5 percent and 75 to 160 percent more if a CO2 cost of USD 100 per tonne applied.
Latest value
120%
European Union, 2024. Version Global Hydrogen Review 2025 (IEA, September 2025; revised October 2025).
As published
“In the European Union for instance, the cost gap is around 25% for CCUS and ranges around 120-220% for electrolysis.”
Global Hydrogen Review 2025, Chapter 2, the competitiveness of hydrogen technologies (ammonia), p. 51. Checked word for word against the stored copy of the document every time the data is rebuilt.
Every value
| Low-emissions route | CO2 cost assumed | Stated value or end of the stated range | Period | Value (%) | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Natural gas with carbon capture (CCUS)Chapter 2, the competitiveness of hydrogen technologies (ammonia), p. 51: "In the European Union for instance, the cost gap is around 25% for CCUS and ranges around 120-220% for electrolysis." | Without a CO2 costChapter 2, the competitiveness of hydrogen technologies (ammonia), p. 51: "In the European Union for instance, the cost gap is around 25% for CCUS and ranges around 120-220% for electrolysis." | Stated valueChapter 2, the competitiveness of hydrogen technologies (ammonia), p. 51: "In the European Union for instance, the cost gap is around 25% for CCUS and ranges around 120-220% for electrolysis." | 2024 | 25 | final |
| Electrolysis (electrolytic hydrogen)Chapter 2, the competitiveness of hydrogen technologies (ammonia), p. 51: "In the European Union for instance, the cost gap is around 25% for CCUS and ranges around 120-220% for electrolysis." | Without a CO2 costChapter 2, the competitiveness of hydrogen technologies (ammonia), p. 51: "In the European Union for instance, the cost gap is around 25% for CCUS and ranges around 120-220% for electrolysis." | Low end of the stated rangeChapter 2, the competitiveness of hydrogen technologies (ammonia), p. 51: "In the European Union for instance, the cost gap is around 25% for CCUS and ranges around 120-220% for electrolysis." | 2024 | 120 | final |
| Electrolysis (electrolytic hydrogen)Chapter 2, the competitiveness of hydrogen technologies (ammonia), p. 51: "In the European Union for instance, the cost gap is around 25% for CCUS and ranges around 120-220% for electrolysis." | Without a CO2 costChapter 2, the competitiveness of hydrogen technologies (ammonia), p. 51: "In the European Union for instance, the cost gap is around 25% for CCUS and ranges around 120-220% for electrolysis." | High end of the stated rangeChapter 2, the competitiveness of hydrogen technologies (ammonia), p. 51: "In the European Union for instance, the cost gap is around 25% for CCUS and ranges around 120-220% for electrolysis." | 2024 | 220 | final |
| Natural gas with carbon capture (CCUS)Chapter 2, the competitiveness of hydrogen technologies (ammonia), p. 51: "This could reduce the cost gap to as little as 5% for CCUS, and 75-160% for electrolysis, assuming a CO2 cost of USD 100/t." | With a CO2 cost of USD 100 per tonneChapter 2, the competitiveness of hydrogen technologies (ammonia), p. 51: "This could reduce the cost gap to as little as 5% for CCUS, and 75-160% for electrolysis, assuming a CO2 cost of USD 100/t." | Stated valueChapter 2, the competitiveness of hydrogen technologies (ammonia), p. 51: "This could reduce the cost gap to as little as 5% for CCUS, and 75-160% for electrolysis, assuming a CO2 cost of USD 100/t." | 2024 | 5 | final |
| Electrolysis (electrolytic hydrogen)Chapter 2, the competitiveness of hydrogen technologies (ammonia), p. 51: "This could reduce the cost gap to as little as 5% for CCUS, and 75-160% for electrolysis, assuming a CO2 cost of USD 100/t." | With a CO2 cost of USD 100 per tonneChapter 2, the competitiveness of hydrogen technologies (ammonia), p. 51: "This could reduce the cost gap to as little as 5% for CCUS, and 75-160% for electrolysis, assuming a CO2 cost of USD 100/t." | Low end of the stated rangeChapter 2, the competitiveness of hydrogen technologies (ammonia), p. 51: "This could reduce the cost gap to as little as 5% for CCUS, and 75-160% for electrolysis, assuming a CO2 cost of USD 100/t." | 2024 | 75 | final |
| Electrolysis (electrolytic hydrogen)Chapter 2, the competitiveness of hydrogen technologies (ammonia), p. 51: "This could reduce the cost gap to as little as 5% for CCUS, and 75-160% for electrolysis, assuming a CO2 cost of USD 100/t." | With a CO2 cost of USD 100 per tonneChapter 2, the competitiveness of hydrogen technologies (ammonia), p. 51: "This could reduce the cost gap to as little as 5% for CCUS, and 75-160% for electrolysis, assuming a CO2 cost of USD 100/t." | High end of the stated rangeChapter 2, the competitiveness of hydrogen technologies (ammonia), p. 51: "This could reduce the cost gap to as little as 5% for CCUS, and 75-160% for electrolysis, assuming a CO2 cost of USD 100/t." | 2024 | 160 | final |
Where it comes from
- Producer
- International Energy Agency · Global Hydrogen Review 2025
- Version
- Global Hydrogen Review 2025 (IEA, September 2025; revised October 2025)
- Fetched
- 2026-10-08 (automatically), 10,610,820 bytes
- Fingerprint
- sha256 94f2912332e1e1d6bf0ac9514684cb189b30f1df7ed152505f5f67968413aeb2ETag 0x8DE0B26C4883D5C · Last-Modified Tue, 14 Oct 2025 13:37:06 GMT
- Copies
- No Wayback copy recorded yet.
- Cite the producer
- IEA 2025; Global Hydrogen Review 2025, https://www.iea.org/reports/global-hydrogen-review-2025, License: CC BY 4.0
What was done to it
Read the text of the PDF (sha256 94f2912332e1…). Found each of the 2 quoted statement(s) word for word on PDF page(s) 53, and the 3 context sentence(s) the scope relies on, before publishing.
Code: pipeline/src/envdash/transforms/action/green_premium.py · code sha256 c2e591e4a0510a3d… · inputs 94f2912332e1…
Published each number exactly as printed, with its statement in the value's note. A range 'A-B%' is published as its low end A and high end B (dimension 'bound'); nothing was computed, rounded or combined with any other source.
Code: pipeline/src/envdash/transforms/action/green_premium.py · code sha256 c2e591e4a0510a3d… · inputs 94f2912332e1…
'As little as 5%' is published as the stated value 5 for carbon capture with a CO2 cost of USD 100 per tonne; the sentence gives no other figure for that case.
Code: pipeline/src/envdash/transforms/action/green_premium.py · code sha256 c2e591e4a0510a3d… · inputs 94f2912332e1…
What it covers
- Geography
- European Union
- Basis
- Ammonia made with carbon capture or by electrolysis, compared with conventional (unabated natural gas-based) ammonia. Levelised cost of production in 2024 (the text's present tense, matching Figure 2.9, 'Levelised cost of production of selected materials by technology, 2024'), IEA analysis. Energy costs are regional end-user prices for industry including taxes and charges; no explicit financial support, though support embedded in cost components (such as fossil fuel subsidies) may be included (figure note). The 'with a CO2 cost' values assume USD 100 per tonne of CO2, the figure's carbon tax case.
- Unit
- percent more than the conventional route (%)