Hydrogen is increasingly discussed as a cornerstone of low-carbon aviation in Europe—but it is not yet a mainstream solution. Today, the aviation sector’s decarbonisation efforts are still dominated by sustainable aviation fuel (SAF), which is being actively deployed under EU regulatory frameworks such as ReFuelEU Aviation. Hydrogen, by contrast, remains in an early-stage development phase, positioned as a long-term solution within the aviation industry’s broader climate transition.
For companies, this distinction is critical. Hydrogen is not currently a scalable or commercially available alternative to conventional jet fuel. Instead, it represents a strategic future pathway that requires significant technological, infrastructural, and regulatory evolution before widespread adoption becomes viable.
The interest in hydrogen is nevertheless strong—and growing. Its main advantage lies in its potential to enable zero-emission flight when produced from renewable energy sources. This aligns closely with EU climate objectives and long-term net-zero targets, making hydrogen an attractive option for policymakers, investors, and industry leaders seeking deeper decarbonisation beyond what SAF alone can deliver.
However, hydrogen aviation is still at the demonstration and pilot stage. Aircraft concepts are being tested, and early prototypes are validating the feasibility of hydrogen propulsion systems, particularly for short- and medium-haul flights. Commercial deployment at scale is unlikely within this decade, and significant uncertainty remains around cost, infrastructure readiness, and technological standardisation.
Two technological pathways are under active exploration. Hydrogen fuel cells offer near-zero emissions by converting hydrogen into electricity for electric propulsion, while direct hydrogen combustion provides a more familiar engineering approach but with residual emissions challenges. At this stage, it is unclear which pathway—or combination of pathways—will dominate, adding complexity to corporate investment decisions.
The biggest barrier is systemic transformation. Unlike SAF, which can be integrated into existing aircraft and fuel systems, hydrogen requires entirely new aircraft designs and fuel storage solutions due to its low volumetric energy density. This implies long lead times, high capital expenditure, and fundamental changes to fleet strategies.
Infrastructure readiness further reinforces hydrogen’s long-term nature. Airports across Europe are currently not equipped to handle hydrogen at scale, and significant investment will be required in storage, distribution, and safety systems. This creates a classic “chicken-and-egg” challenge: airlines are unlikely to invest without infrastructure, while infrastructure providers need demand certainty before committing capital.
From a regulatory perspective, the EU is clearly prioritising SAF in the near term while supporting hydrogen through innovation funding and broader clean hydrogen strategies. This signals that hydrogen is being actively promoted, but not yet relied upon as a primary decarbonisation lever.
For companies, the implication is a dual transition strategy. SAF will remain the primary compliance and decarbonisation tool in the short to medium term, while hydrogen should be monitored, tested, and gradually integrated into long-term planning. This approach is essential for credible aviation climate transition plans, particularly in the context of ESG disclosure frameworks such as CSRD and IFRS S2, which require forward-looking assessments of transition risks and opportunities.
In practical terms, hydrogen should be treated as a strategic option rather than an immediate solution. Companies that engage early—through partnerships, pilot projects, and scenario planning—can build capabilities and optionality without overcommitting capital prematurely.
Ultimately, hydrogen is neither hype nor immediate reality. It is a promising but long-term enabler of zero-emission aviation, with the potential to reshape the industry beyond what incremental solutions can achieve. The companies that succeed will be those that balance short-term execution on SAF with long-term positioning in hydrogen and broader low-carbon aviation technologies.