Search arXiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2610.41447

Why delivered costs understate prices in an integrated global hydrogen market

Bastian Weißenburger·Martin Wietschel·Patrick Plötz·Russell McKenna
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Delivered-cost estimates are often used as proxies for hydrogen import prices. Yet they measure average supply-chain costs, whereas marginal prices measure the system value of an additional unit. Market interactions can make the two diverge, potentially biasing long-term price assumptions. We quantify this gap using an 81-region global hydrogen-market model, comparing each region's costs and prices when only its demand is active and when all regions' demands are active. The 2045 price-cost gap is positive in 78 regions and averages 63 EUR/MWh (52% of the single-buyer cost) on a demand-weighted basis. Only 12 EUR/MWh reflects higher average sourcing costs due to competing demand. The remaining 51 EUR/MWh is the difference between the global-market price and the delivered portfolio's average cost. In several regions, wholesale prices rise while average delivered costs fall. Hydrogen strategies should distinguish delivered-cost benchmarks from market-price expectations, as low-cost supply does not guarantee low regional market prices.

Explore related subjects

physics.soc-phecon.GNq-fin.EC

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Bastian Weißenburger, Martin Wietschel, Patrick Plötz, Russell McKenna. 2026-10-30. Why delivered costs understate prices in an integrated global hydrogen market. https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.41447

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Open-ended innovation arm-race in zero-sum games

We discuss zero-sum games with open-ended innovation, whereby each player may introduce new strategies. The innovation process is modeled as a draw of new strategies form a distribution. It is argued that, when the cost of innovation is vanishingly small, this setting can lead to an everlasting innovation arm-race. In particular, the introduction of new technologies of the advanced player increases the marginal utility for technological innovation of the backward one, whereas innovation of the backward player discourages the more advanced one to innovate.

physics.soc-ph↗
arXiv2026

Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment of Fossil- and Bio-Based Membrane Manufacturing

The transition towards sustainable membrane manufacturing is challenged by its reliance on fossil-based polymers, organic solvents, and generation of large volumes of contaminated water. We combined process simulation, life cycle assessment, and Monte Carlo simulation to identify hotspots in the manufacturing of ultrafiltration hollow-fiber membranes for pharmaceutical applications and evaluate strategies to mitigate impact and reduce waste generation. Process models informed by industry input compared fossil- and bio-based membranes on a cradle-to-gate basis per square meter of membrane produced. Key environmental hotspots include polymer and bore solution preparation, driven by the contribution of polymer and solvent, accounting for 30-80% of total impacts across the categories investigated, and wastewater dilution, driven by the environmental burden of solvent-contaminated wastewater management. Under the modeled conditions, although polymer substitution can reduce environmental burdens, cellulose-based membranes show higher impacts than polysulfone membranes in at least 85% of simulations within each impact category, due to chemical-intensive cellulose modification and regeneration. In contrast, solvent recycling can mitigate solvent- and wastewater-related burdens when combined with reduced water demand, yielding climate change benefits at water demands below approximately 36 L per m2 under the modeled recovery configuration and highlighting its potential to reduce the environmental footprint of membrane manufacturing.

physics.soc-ph↗
arXiv2026

Fractional Orbital Bombardment Systems

We analyze Fractional Orbital Bombardment Systems (FOBS) as a means of delivering nuclear weapons by placing warheads into partial orbits around the Earth, and show that they do not represent a game-changing advance in technology or capability. We consider potential uses of such a weapon, including evading missile defenses and delivering attacks with short warning time. FOBS could underfly current exoatmospheric defenses, but the required payload reduction may not justify its use if other countermeasures are deemed effective. If a FOBS attack could be successfully disguised as a satellite launch, the warning time could be short enough to raise fears of a decapitating strike. The development of such a capability could lead countries to shorten decision-making timelines in a crisis, which would be destabilizing. The US can take steps to ensure that very-short-warning attacks would not succeed, thereby enhancing deterrence during a crisis.

physics.soc-ph↗