According to engineerlive.com, Hyundai Motor Group held a high-level hydrogen strategy dialogue at the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) CEO Summit Korea 2025 on October 30, featuring vice chair Jaehoon Chang and Hydrogen Council CEO Ivana Jemelkova. The session highlighted $110 billion in committed capital across 510 global hydrogen projects and detailed Hyundai’s specific initiatives, including 1MW-class PEM electrolysis projects in Buan and Boryeong, a 5MW-class system in Jeju, and a new fuel cell production plant in Ulsan. The company also revealed expansion plans for XCIENT fuel cell trucks in Australia and ongoing logistics operations in California, Georgia, and Korean ports. This ambitious push comes as the Hydrogen Council reports tenfold growth in clean hydrogen commitments since 2020, though significant demand challenges remain.
The Infrastructure Paradox
Hyundai’s hydrogen vision faces the classic chicken-and-egg problem that has stalled alternative fuel adoption for decades. While the company is making impressive investments in production and vehicle deployment, the supporting infrastructure remains critically underdeveloped. Building hydrogen refueling stations requires massive capital expenditure, and without sufficient vehicles on the road, these stations operate at a loss. The company’s announcement mentions expansion in Australia and various logistics operations, but scaling from pilot projects to nationwide infrastructure represents a financial challenge that even major automakers struggle to overcome alone.
Cost Competitiveness Concerns
The economics of hydrogen remain challenging compared to both battery electric vehicles and traditional fuels. Green hydrogen production through PEM electrolysis, while environmentally preferable, costs significantly more than gray hydrogen from natural gas. Current hydrogen prices at the pump typically range from $13-16 per kilogram, making fuel cell vehicles substantially more expensive to operate than their diesel or electric counterparts. Hyundai’s focus on heavy-duty applications like the XCIENT trucks makes strategic sense given battery weight limitations, but even in this segment, total cost of ownership calculations often favor conventional solutions without substantial government subsidies.
Technical and Safety Hurdles
Hydrogen storage and transportation present unique engineering challenges that Hyundai must navigate. Hydrogen’s low energy density requires either high-pressure compression to 700 bar or cryogenic liquefaction at -253°C, both energy-intensive processes. The small molecular size of hydrogen also creates material compatibility issues, with potential for embrittlement in storage tanks and piping. While safety standards have improved dramatically, public perception of hydrogen safety remains a barrier, particularly after high-profile incidents in the industry’s early development phases.
Market Timing Risks
Hyundai’s aggressive hydrogen push comes as battery technology continues its rapid advancement. Lithium-ion battery costs have fallen nearly 90% over the past decade, while energy density has improved approximately 5-8% annually. For passenger vehicles and light commercial applications, the efficiency advantage of battery electric vehicles (70-80% well-to-wheel) versus hydrogen fuel cells (30-35% well-to-wheel) creates a significant headwind. Hyundai may be betting heavily on a technology window that could close faster than anticipated if solid-state batteries or other energy storage breakthroughs materialize.
Policy Dependency Trap
The hydrogen economy’s development remains heavily reliant on government support and regulation. Jemelkova’s comment about needing “clear, practical and stable policies” acknowledges this vulnerability. Changes in political leadership, shifting subsidy programs, or evolving emissions standards could dramatically alter the hydrogen business case. Hyundai’s global expansion strategy assumes consistent policy support across multiple jurisdictions, but the history of alternative energy initiatives shows how quickly political winds can shift, leaving companies with stranded assets and unprofitable investments.
Scalability Reality Check
While the cited $110 billion in committed capital sounds impressive, it pales in comparison to the estimated $11 trillion needed for global decarbonization by 2050. Scaling from pilot projects like the 5MW Jeju installation to industrial-scale production requires orders of magnitude more investment. The transition from “ambition to delivery” that Chang references involves not just technological readiness but also workforce development, supply chain establishment, and regulatory framework maturation—all of which take considerably longer than optimistic projections typically account for.
