The global energy transition is not just a technological challenge; it is also a social one. In our efforts to demystify hydrogen ecosystem, we are trying to confront the issue of public perception of hydrogen technology and its application with this blog. As the world moves toward clean energy, hydrogen has emerged as a promising contender in the decarbonization of industries, transportation, and energy systems. With its high potential to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and complement renewables, hydrogen offers a guaranteed solution for climate action.
Yet, despite its environmental benefits and increasing technological advancements, public perception of hydrogen safety remains a concern preventing its widespread adoption. Fear, misinformation, and a general lack of awareness continue to hinder hydrogen’s public image— impacting everything from policy support and investment decisions to community acceptance and project implementation.
As countries like India aim to become global leaders in green hydrogen production through national missions and international collaboration, this perception gap remains a hurdle in accelerating the pace to reach the desired momentum for deployment of the technology. Building public trust in hydrogen is just as essential as building pipelines, electrolysers, or refueling stations.
This blog explores the root cause of these perceptions, the reality of hydrogen safety, and the need to bridge the awareness gap through transparency, data-driven education, and community engagement.
The Root Cause of Public Concern
Public anxieties have been a part of various novel initiatives since the beginning of time. And it is not at all irrational. In fact, it is historically rooted, emotionally charged, and often reinforced by incomplete or misleading information. And so, hydrogen’s public image has long been shaped by historical incidents, such as the 1937 Hindenburg disaster. The German passenger airship, filled with hydrogen, caught fire while attempting to dock in New Jersey, taking the lives of 35 people out of the 97 aboard. The dramatic footage, widely broadcast and replayed over the decades, etched the spectacle into collective memory and seeded an enduring association between hydrogen and danger.
While the actual cause of the disaster is debated and likely related to the flammable coating of the airship’s skin rather than hydrogen itself, the incident nonetheless cast a shadow on hydrogen’s perceived safety levels. It is safe to say that scientific investigations have since raised questions about hydrogen’s actual role in the tragedy. (Source: Britannica, Airsteps.net)
In more recent decades, industrial accidents involving hydrogen have further contributed to anxiety in the general public, even when the underlying causes were unrelated to the fuel itself. While these incidents are statistically rare, they tend to receive amplified media attention.
Crucially, many of these accidents were the result of human error, inadequate design, or unrelated system failures and not the inherent properties of hydrogen itself. But nuance is often lost in public discourse, and each headline reinforces the impression that hydrogen is dangerously unpredictable.
Because hydrogen is colorless, odorless, and burns with a nearly invisible flame, it is perceived as inherently risky. For instance, unlike natural gas, which is odorized for leak detection, hydrogen’s properties require specialized sensors for safe monitoring. This unfamiliarity creates discomfort, even though similar properties exist in other widely accepted fuels like natural gas or LPG, which also pose serious hazards but enjoy far greater public confidence.
(Source: Hydrogen Safety: Myths, Reality, and Future Prospects, NRDC)
The Reality of Hydrogen Safety
Contrary to popular belief, hydrogen can be handled safely when supported by proper technology, engineering, safety protocols, and regulatory oversight. In fact, due to its low density, hydrogen disperses rapidly when released, reducing the risk of fire compared to denser fossil fuels that pool near the ground. It has been demonstrated in controlled experiments that hydrogen is less dangerous than gasoline in a car since gasoline remains and keeps burning for long while hydrogen gets vented quickly. Hydrogen vs. Gasoline Leak and Ignition Test– which is safer? Hydrogen has been used safely in industrial settings for over a century in sectors such as oil refining, food processing, and aerospace.
Furthermore, these days, hydrogen systems are subject to rigorous testing and safety standards. For example, fuel cell electric vehicles (FCEVs) must pass stringent crash, leak, and fire resistance tests. Storage tanks are built to withstand high pressure and external impacts, often exceeding the safety benchmarks of gasoline tanks. In an old and often referred experiment, Toyota demonstrated that the hydrogen tank can even survive a gun bullet. Tank Safety: Hydrogen Tank Gunshot | Toyota
Will a Hydrogen Tank Survive a Bullet?
In India, regulators are actively implementing safety regulations that improve the outcomes from hydrogen projects. In April 2023, the Petroleum and Explosives Safety Organisation (PESO) granted consent to Reliance’s hydrogen refueling station in Jamnagar. This comes with strict conditions on leak detection and emergency protocols attached to it. GreenH Electrolysis recently received PESO approval for the hydrogen refueling station at Jind Haryana after a thorough review of the design philosophy and project layout.
According to a 2024 report by PIB’s Green Hydrogen Standards task force, approximately 73 different approvals are now required to establish a green hydrogen project, of which 13 relate directly to fire safety and pollution control—a notable increase from just 5 in 2022
What is clear is that much of the fear surrounding hydrogen arises from perceived unfamiliarity rather than actual comparative risk. This perception is often passed down through historical events, fueled by dramatic headlines, and left unchallenged due to a lack of accessible education on hydrogen’s modern applications and safety systems. Bridging this gap requires not only technical advancements but also a fundamental shift in how hydrogen is communicated, contextualized, and understood.
(Source: Hydrogen Program – Safety, Safe Use of Hydrogen, NRDC, International
Conference on Green Hydrogen, Green Hydrogen Standards & Approval Systems in India)
Hydrogen vs. Other Fuels: Risk Comparison
To truly understand public concern around hydrogen safety, it is important to place it within the broader context of fuel-related risk. While hydrogen is often singled out as dangerous due to its flammability and invisible flame, these traits are not unique to hydrogen alone. Every widely used energy carrier, be it gasoline, diesel, natural gas, LPG, or even lithium-ion batteries, they all carry inherent safety risks. What sets hydrogen apart is not necessarily its danger, but rather the unfamiliarity surrounding its behavior and management.
Hydrogen is highly flammable and has a wide flammability range, meaning it can ignite over a broad range of air-to-fuel mixtures. However, unlike heavier fuels that can pool near the ground and linger, hydrogen is the lightest element in the universe, which works in its favor. When released, it disperses almost instantly into the atmosphere, especially in outdoor environments, which significantly reduces the likelihood of explosion or sustained fire. Its flame, although nearly invisible, emits very low radiant heat, lowering the risk of secondary burns or heat-related injuries when compared to gasoline or diesel fires.
Indian safety standards for hydrogen vehicles are carefully designed to exceed global benchmarks in several key areas. The AIS‑195 standard mandates that the main hydrogen shut‑off valve must automatically close within 5 seconds if cabin hydrogen concentration exceeds 4% by volume, which is a critical safety threshold below the ignition limit, ensuring quick isolation of the fuel source after a crash. GreenH Electrolysis (& H2B2 Electrolysis Technologies) electrolysers employ an even stringent criterion and the shut-off valves are programmed to safe position if hydrogen concentration exceeds 1.4% by volume (35% LEL) and an alarm is triggered at an even lower level of 1.0% by hydrogen by volume (25% LEL) setting an exceptional standard for safety.
When compared, you will find that hydrogen is not inherently more dangerous than conventional fuels. In fact, in some aspects, it may pose fewer hazards when properly handled. The key to safety in all fuel systems lies in engineering design, maintenance practices, detection technology, and emergency preparedness. Hydrogen simply demands a different kind of risk management, which is increasingly standardized as adoption grows.
(Source: European Commission – Hydrogen Safety Factsheet, MDPI, NRDC, AIS – 195)
Media Representation and Its Impact
Public understanding of hydrogen safety is often shaped less by science and more by headlines. High-profile hydrogen-related incidents, no matter how rare, tend to dominate media coverage, reinforcing a perception of danger. When hydrogen is still unfamiliar to much of the public, the consequences are more profound.
Media narratives often emphasize rare incidents while underreporting the safe, routine use of hydrogen. Sensational headlines reinforce negative perceptions, especially when lacking scientific context. This skewed framing can slow community acceptance of hydrogen projects, from fueling stations to industrial hubs.
We can take the example of the 2019 explosion at a hydrogen refueling station in Norway. The incident was isolated, with no fatalities, and was later traced to a faulty valve, not to hydrogen’s intrinsic properties. Yet global headlines painted it as a cautionary tale against hydrogen fuel. What was less widely reported were the swift investigations, the technical fix, and the rapid return of confidence in refueling infrastructure. Norwegian safety regulators had also imposed a NOK 25 million fine (approximately USD 2.5 million) on Nel Hydrogen, the company responsible for the equipment, due to violations of safety procedures and insufficient risk assessments. This accountability underscores the fact that robust safety and legal mechanisms are in place. This kind of asymmetrical reporting leaves lasting impressions that skew public perception toward fear rather than fact. (Source: H2 View)
The most favorable solution to this lies in proactive communication. Governments, companies, and researchers must take the initiative to explain risks transparently, clarify safety protocols, and highlight successful deployments.
(Source: Hydrogen Council – Scaling Up Hydrogen)
Meanwhile, thousands of hydrogen facilities operate safely every day around the world in mobility, industry, and energy. These routine and uneventful operations rarely make the news. As a result, the media narrative becomes skewed: a single rare incident can outweigh decades of safe use in the public imagination.
A 2022 report by the Clean Hydrogen Partnership and the European Hydrogen Safety Panel emphasized the role of responsible communication in shaping public perception. They found that media misrepresentation contributes significantly to local opposition against hydrogen infrastructure, which was often based on fear and misinformation. The report called on both industry leaders and public officials to engage in proactive and transparent risk communication. (Source: Clean Hydrogen Partnership)
The Path Towards Building a Hydrogen-Literate Society
Bridging the hydrogen awareness gap is significant in today’s day and age. it is central to the success of the clean energy transition. As nations invest in hydrogen infrastructure and technology, public perception will play a defining role in determining how quickly and effectively this transition takes place.
As discussed above, hydrogen is not inherently more dangerous than other fuels. Like all energy carriers, it requires careful handling, robust systems, and proper oversight. Yet, historic events, media misrepresentation, and a general lack of knowledge continue to shape public hesitation and misunderstanding. This makes trust as critical a component as pipelines or electrolysers in the hydrogen value chain.
To earn that trust, industry players, governments, educators, and media must work together to normalize hydrogen through clear, consistent, and science-based communication. Educational campaigns, public demonstrations, transparent safety data, and community involvement should all be prioritized as essential infrastructure. Building a hydrogen-literate society also means integrating hydrogen literacy into school curricula, workforce development, and national energy dialogues.
Importantly, the narrative around hydrogen must shift, from seeing it as experimental or dangerous, to viewing it as reliable, proven, and ready. Public exposure to these use cases, when paired with honest discussions about risks and safeguards, can help close the perception gap.
A path towards closing the gap is already underway with initiatives such as MSMEs in Green Hydrogen Supply Chain. With the launch of the Green Hydrogen Certification scheme in April 2025, de-risking strategies, blended finance mechanisms, among other things, were discussed. The mission includes the Development of Green Hydrogen production of at least 5 million metric tonnes in capacity per annum by the year 2030 with an associated renewable energy capacity addition of about 125 GW in the country. This also extends to abatement of nearly 50 MMT of annual greenhouse gas emissions.
Public trust is not given, it is earned through openness, consistency, and engagement.
Bridging the hydrogen awareness gap will require multiple efforts going hand-in-hand. This will bring together scientists, educators, government officials, and media professionals for their aid in the mission. The goal is to make hydrogen less of a mystery and more of a mainstream energy solution.
As countries like India seek to become global leaders in green hydrogen, success will not depend on technology alone. India’s ambition to become a global green hydrogen hub will ultimately depend not just on policy or investment, but on people as well as their perception. The success of this journey requires communities that understand, accept, and participate in the transition. By fostering a culture of openness and proactive engagement, we can make hydrogen – a fuel not of fear, but of progress.
Hydrogen is not a fuel of the future; it is a fuel of the now. And the sooner the public understands that the faster we can transition to a safer, cleaner energy world.
(Source: Clean Hydrogen Partnership, MDPI, Hydrogen Europe – Public Perception Report, Green Hydrogen Certification Scheme)