The Hydrogen Bus Illusion: Essen & Mülheim’s Costly Reality

Sign up for daily news updates from CleanTechnica on email. Or follow us on Google News!

Last Updated on: 12th March 2025, 01:54 am

The latest hydrogen bus setback in Germany is no surprise. Essen and Mülheim are now stuck with 19 hydrogen buses that need to travel up to 89 km round trip just to refuel after the state of North Rhine–Westphalia withdrew its subsidy for further fleet conversion. The financial burden has left the cities scrambling for alternatives, but the real question is: why did anyone expect this to work in the first place?

This is just the latest in a string of failures for hydrogen buses. Wiesbaden scrapped its hydrogen bus program and pivoted to battery-electric buses instead. London’s hydrogen double-deckers proved too expensive to run, with Transport for London (TfL) acknowledging that the cost per mile was nearly double that of diesel buses, even with subsidies. A 2023 report from TfL revealed that the total operating cost of hydrogen buses was around £1.50 per mile, compared to £0.80 for diesel and £0.65 for battery-electric buses. The high costs, combined with refueling challenges and supply chain issues, led TfL to shift its focus toward battery-electric alternatives.

Even in the U.S., California transit agencies like AC Transit and SunLine have quietly scaled back their hydrogen ambitions due to sky-high costs and infrastructure failures. AC Transit, which once touted its hydrogen bus fleet as the future of clean transit, reported that hydrogen fuel costs were four times higher than diesel per mile, leading to operational budget strain. A 2022 study by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) found that the total cost of ownership for hydrogen buses was 50–100% higher than that of battery-electric buses, even with subsidies. SunLine, facing similar cost pressures, has begun transitioning toward battery-electric alternatives, acknowledging that the long-term sustainability of hydrogen transit remains questionable without continuous public funding.

The Economics of Hydrogen Buses: A Recurring Disaster

Hydrogen buses are twice as expensive as their diesel counterparts, and their fuel costs are three or more times higher. Essen’s hydrogen buses, for example, are estimated to cost around €140 per 100 km, while diesel buses operate at approximately €40 per 100 km. A 2023 study from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) found that real-world hydrogen bus costs can vary significantly based on hydrogen production and distribution methods, with some transit agencies reporting costs three or more times higher than diesel. The study attributed these high costs to expensive hydrogen production, distribution, and infrastructure requirements.

Battery-electric buses, which cost up to €50 per 100 km, have demonstrated lower operating costs in multiple studies. According to a 2022 California Air Resources Board (CARB) report, the total cost of ownership for battery-electric buses is significantly lower than hydrogen buses when accounting for fuel costs, maintenance, and infrastructure requirements. The report determined that battery-electric buses offer a lower total cost of ownership due to reduced fuel expenses, simpler maintenance, and more scalable charging infrastructure.

The European market has confirmed this shift. According to Transport & Environment (T&E), nearly half of all new city buses sold in the EU in 2024 were battery-electric, with countries like the Netherlands, Finland, and Norway reaching over 90% electrification rates for new city buses. Even in major markets like Spain and the UK, battery-electric models now represent more than 50% of new transit bus purchases. The 2024 report from T&E highlights this trend, showing that battery-electric buses now dominate the European market, while hydrogen fuel cell buses account for just 3% of new city bus sales. This data underscores the rapid market rejection of hydrogen as a viable alternative and a clear shift toward battery-electric solutions.

Then there’s the infrastructure. Hydrogen refueling stations cost millions to build and require a constant supply of hydrogen—often transported in diesel-powered trucks. The Ruhrbahn’s buses must currently detour up to 44 km each way just to refuel, wasting precious range and driving up costs further.

Aberdeen, Scotland, spent millions on a hydrogen bus fleet only to find it cost 40% more to operate than diesel, according to a 2022 Transport Scotland report that highlighted excessive fuel and maintenance costs compared to diesel and electric alternatives. Oslo, Norway, shut down its hydrogen bus program in 2011 because the refueling station was too expensive to maintain. The Norwegian Public Roads Administration’s 2012 report found that operational costs exceeded those of existing battery-electric buses. The report concluded that the program collapsed due to high expenses, unreliable refueling infrastructure, and ongoing technical failures that made it financially unviable.

Los Angeles, USA, had to subsidize hydrogen refueling stations heavily to keep its transit buses running. A 2021 study by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) found that hydrogen fueling infrastructure was financially unviable without substantial public funding. The report highlighted that the per-kilogram cost of hydrogen at transit refueling stations was consistently three to four times higher than diesel on an energy-equivalent basis. Furthermore, hydrogen stations in California experienced frequent downtime and supply shortages, leading to operational inefficiencies for transit agencies. The report also noted that maintenance costs for hydrogen refueling equipment were significantly higher than those for battery-electric charging infrastructure, further undermining the long-term viability of hydrogen in public transit.

Hydrogen’s Efficiency Problem: A Physics Nightmare

Hydrogen buses suffer from brutal energy inefficiencies. Producing hydrogen from electricity involves multiple conversion losses. First, electrolysis, the process of splitting water into hydrogen and oxygen, is at best 70% efficient. Then, the hydrogen must be compressed and transported, losing another 15–20% of the energy in the process. Finally, when the hydrogen is used in a fuel cell to generate electricity, only 50% of the remaining energy is converted into motion.

At best, only 30% of the original electricity actually moves the bus. By contrast, battery-electric buses retain 70–80% of their electricity input, making them more than twice as efficient as hydrogen buses. With fewer moving parts, lower maintenance, and no need for costly hydrogen refueling stations, battery-electric buses are proving to be the more practical and cost-effective solution.

Hydrogen’s Future in Transit: A Dead End

Despite decades of hype, the hydrogen bus industry is stuck in a cycle of pilot projects that fail at scale. Governments fund ambitious programs, the cost reality sets in, and the subsidies dry up. Essen and Mülheim’s struggles are a textbook example of what happens when cities chase hydrogen as a transit solution.

Meanwhile, battery-electric buses are taking over. China has already deployed about 700,000 electric buses, and cities worldwide are following suit. Germany’s Berlin and Hamburg are investing in battery-electric fleets, recognizing that direct electrification is simply cheaper, more efficient, and easier to implement.

Essen’s hydrogen misadventure isn’t unique—it’s just another chapter in the slow collapse of the hydrogen bus dream. The question isn’t whether hydrogen will fail in transit—it’s how many more cities need to waste millions before they admit it.