1. Introduction

Hydrogen backbone network planning law concerns the legal framework governing the identification, design, approval, financing, construction, conversion, operation and expansion of large-scale hydrogen transmission networks. A hydrogen backbone is essentially a high-capacity network of pipelines, compressor stations, storage connections, import terminals and interconnections designed to connect major hydrogen-production centres, industrial consumers, storage facilities, power plants and international import corridors.

Unlike conventional natural-gas networks, hydrogen networks are being developed during a period of technological and market uncertainty. Consequently, network-planning law must answer several questions:

Who determines where the backbone should be built?

How is future hydrogen demand legally established?

Can existing natural-gas pipelines be converted to hydrogen?

Who pays for infrastructure that may initially have low utilisation?

How are competing projects prioritised?

What degree of regulatory oversight is required?

How are environmental and land-use interests incorporated?

How should electricity, natural gas and hydrogen planning be coordinated?

How are cross-border hydrogen corridors legally established?

The European Union and Germany provide particularly developed examples of this emerging legal architecture. The EU's 2024 Hydrogen and Decarbonised Gas Market Directive expressly establishes integrated network-development planning for hydrogen and natural gas. (EUR-Lex)

2. Meaning of a Hydrogen Backbone

A hydrogen backbone is not merely a collection of individual hydrogen pipelines. Legally and economically, it is increasingly conceived as strategic network infrastructure.

It normally connects:

hydrogen-production facilities;

renewable-energy-based electrolysers;

industrial clusters;

hydrogen storage;

hydrogen-fired power generation;

ports and import terminals;

cross-border pipelines;

regional distribution networks; and

potentially converted natural-gas infrastructure.

The backbone therefore creates a network effect. An individual hydrogen producer may have little commercial value without access to consumers, while consumers may hesitate to invest without reliable hydrogen transportation.

This produces a classic infrastructure-planning problem: the network often has to be planned before the market is fully mature.

3. Principal Objectives of Backbone Planning Law

Hydrogen network planning law generally seeks to achieve six objectives.

A. Security of hydrogen supply

The network should provide multiple production and import routes so that dependence on a single source is reduced.

B. Efficient infrastructure investment

Regulators must prevent unnecessary or duplicative pipelines.

C. Market development

Backbone infrastructure should permit multiple producers and consumers to enter the hydrogen market.

D. Energy-system integration

Hydrogen planning increasingly has to be coordinated with electricity, natural gas, storage and potentially district-heating systems.

E. Decarbonisation

Network planning should support renewable and low-carbon hydrogen while avoiding infrastructure that unnecessarily locks economies into high-emission pathways.

F. Territorial and environmental protection

Pipeline construction requires land acquisition, environmental assessment, permitting and consideration of affected communities.

4. EU Legal Framework

The EU's Directive (EU) 2024/1788 is particularly important because it creates a specific legal framework for hydrogen-network development.

Article 55 requires transmission system operators and hydrogen transmission-network operators to submit a ten-year network development plan at least every two years. Member States may establish separate natural-gas and hydrogen plans or a joint plan. (EUR-Lex)

The plans must identify major infrastructure requirements, investment decisions and infrastructure that may be repurposed for hydrogen.

Importantly, hydrogen planning must consider:

expected supply;

expected demand;

infrastructure requirements;

repurposing of existing gas pipelines;

alternatives to network expansion;

energy-efficiency considerations;

international trade;

electricity and gas systems;

storage;

power-to-gas facilities; and

the location of hard-to-decarbonise consumers. (EUR-Lex)

This represents a transition from project-by-project infrastructure approval toward system-wide network planning.

5. Ten-Year Network Development Planning

The ten-year planning model is legally significant because hydrogen infrastructure frequently has an economic life of several decades.

The planning authority must therefore evaluate future rather than merely present demand.

A simplified legal planning sequence is:

Demand forecasting → supply forecasting → scenario development → infrastructure modelling → stakeholder consultation → cost/benefit assessment → regulatory approval → investment → construction → periodic review

The legal challenge is that hydrogen demand forecasts may be uncertain.

For example, an industrial consumer may announce plans for hydrogen use but later delay investment. Conversely, a new hydrogen-consuming industry may emerge after the network plan has been adopted.

Consequently, modern hydrogen planning frameworks need adaptive planning mechanisms rather than rigid long-term commitments.

6. Repurposing Natural-Gas Pipelines

One of the most important issues in hydrogen backbone law is whether existing natural-gas pipelines can be converted.

EU law expressly requires hydrogen network-development planning to examine infrastructure that can or is intended to be repurposed for hydrogen transmission. (EUR-Lex)

Repurposing raises several legal questions:

1. Ownership

Who owns the existing gas pipeline?

2. Regulatory classification

Does conversion transform a regulated gas asset into a hydrogen-network asset?

3. Stranded-asset consequences

If a gas pipeline is converted, remaining gas consumers may face higher costs because fewer users remain to recover the gas network's costs.

4. Technical compatibility

Hydrogen can interact differently with pipeline materials, compressors, valves and equipment.

5. Public-interest assessment

The regulator must compare:

conversion cost + remaining gas-system effects

against

new hydrogen-pipeline construction cost + environmental impacts.

Germany illustrates this approach particularly clearly.

7. German Hydrogen Backbone Planning

Germany has developed a statutory hydrogen-core-network model under its Energy Industry Act (EnWG).

The Bundesnetzagentur explains that the hydrogen core network is intended to connect major hydrogen consumption and production regions, including industrial centres, storage facilities, power plants and import corridors. (Bundesnetzagentur)

On 22 October 2024, the Bundesnetzagentur approved a hydrogen core network covering approximately 9,040 km, with around 60% based on conversion of existing natural-gas pipelines, and estimated investment costs of approximately €18.9 billion. (Bundesnetzagentur)

This provides an important legal example of the principle:

Backbone planning should combine new construction with strategic repurposing where technically and economically justified.

8. Integrated Gas-Hydrogen Planning in Germany

Germany has moved beyond a completely separate hydrogen planning system.

Under §§15a et seq. EnWG, gas transmission operators and regulated hydrogen transmission operators are required to participate in an integrated nationwide Gas and Hydrogen Network Development Plan.

The planning process operates through a scenario framework followed by network-development planning. The reference periods extend approximately 10–15 years, while 2045 is also considered in the planning process. (Bundesnetzagentur)

The process therefore attempts to coordinate:

natural-gas infrastructure;

hydrogen infrastructure;

electricity infrastructure;

electrolysers;

power plants;

storage;

industrial demand; and

climate-policy objectives.

This is an important development because hydrogen is not legally isolated from the wider energy system.

9. Scenario Planning

Hydrogen backbone law increasingly relies upon scenario planning.

Rather than assuming one future, planners can develop several scenarios, such as:

Scenario 1 – High hydrogen demand

Rapid industrial conversion and hydrogen-based power generation.

Scenario 2 – Moderate hydrogen demand

Hydrogen concentrates primarily in steel, chemicals, refining and heavy transport.

Scenario 3 – Electrification-dominant pathway

Direct electrification reduces hydrogen demand.

The purpose is not to predict the future with certainty but to identify infrastructure that remains useful across multiple plausible futures.

Germany's current gas/hydrogen planning framework uses multiple scenarios for future reference years and incorporates common assumptions concerning, among other things, power-plant and electrolyser locations. (Bundesnetzagentur)

10. Demand Aggregation and Market Testing

A major legal difficulty is establishing whether projected hydrogen demand is sufficiently credible to justify billions of euros in infrastructure expenditure.

Regulators may therefore rely on:

market surveys;

binding demand declarations;

non-binding expressions of interest;

industrial decarbonisation plans;

connection applications;

capacity reservations; and

public-sector hydrogen strategies.

Germany, for example, conducted a major infrastructure-needs survey involving electricity and hydrogen network planning as part of its developing integrated system. (Bundesnetzagentur)

This creates a legal distinction between:

forecast demand and demonstrated demand.

A robust planning framework should avoid allowing speculative demand declarations to automatically justify major infrastructure expenditure.

11. Regulatory Authority

Hydrogen backbone planning requires an institution capable of independently assessing proposals.

The regulator generally determines:

whether proposed infrastructure is necessary;

whether the network is efficiently designed;

whether existing assets should be repurposed;

how costs should be recovered;

whether network operators comply with planning requirements;

access arrangements; and

whether investment is consistent with statutory energy and climate objectives.

This regulatory independence is supported by important EU case law.

12. Case Law: Commission v Germany, C-718/18

A major case relevant to hydrogen-network regulation is Commission v Germany, C-718/18, decided by the Court of Justice of the European Union on 2 September 2021.

The case concerned the independence and powers of Germany's energy regulator under the EU electricity and natural-gas directives. The Court found Germany had failed to fulfil certain obligations concerning the independence and regulatory powers of the national regulatory authority. (Infocuria)

Relevance to hydrogen backbone planning

Although the case did not concern a hydrogen backbone, its principle is highly relevant to emerging hydrogen regulation.

A regulator deciding:

whether a hydrogen pipeline is necessary;

whether a gas pipeline should be repurposed;

how infrastructure costs should be allocated; or

whether network access is discriminatory

must be capable of making regulatory decisions independently.

Thus, hydrogen network planning should not simply become an administrative mechanism for implementing political infrastructure preferences.

13. Case Law: Commission v Belgium, C-767/19

In Commission v Belgium, C-767/19, the CJEU examined the implementation of EU electricity and natural-gas market rules, including effective network separation and the independence of national regulatory authorities. (Infocuria)

The case illustrates another principle relevant to hydrogen backbone law:

network governance must be structurally separated from commercial supply interests where EU unbundling rules apply.

For hydrogen, this becomes increasingly significant because some companies may simultaneously participate in:

hydrogen production;

hydrogen import;

hydrogen storage;

hydrogen transportation; and

hydrogen supply.

The legal framework must therefore prevent control over backbone infrastructure from being used to exclude competing hydrogen producers or consumers.

14. Third-Party Access

A hydrogen backbone cannot function as an open market if its infrastructure is controlled exclusively for the benefit of its owner.

Consequently, hydrogen regulation increasingly addresses third-party access.

A legal framework may require:

transparent capacity allocation;

non-discriminatory access;

publication of network information;

transparent tariffs;

connection rules;

congestion management; and

confidentiality protections for commercially sensitive information.

The EU 2024 Directive contains provisions addressing hydrogen-network operation and commercially sensitive information, reinforcing the market-access dimension of hydrogen infrastructure regulation. (EUR-Lex)

15. Cross-Border Hydrogen Backbone

Hydrogen backbone planning cannot remain entirely national.

Potential hydrogen corridors may connect:

North Africa → Southern Europe → Central Europe

or

North Sea renewable hydrogen → Germany → Central Europe

or connect ports, storage facilities and industrial clusters across several Member States.

Cross-border planning therefore requires coordination of:

infrastructure standards;

permitting;

capacity allocation;

tariffs;

certification;

network operation;

safety;

environmental assessment; and

state aid.

The legal problem becomes more complicated because a pipeline can be economically important to several countries while falling under different national regulatory systems.

16. Environmental and Land-Use Law

Hydrogen backbone development also intersects with environmental law.

Large pipelines can require:

environmental-impact assessment;

land-use approval;

protected-area assessment;

water-crossing permissions;

biodiversity assessment;

construction permits; and

land acquisition or easement rights.

A hydrogen backbone therefore cannot be justified solely on the basis of energy policy.

The planning authority must reconcile infrastructure development with environmental and property interests.

17. Cost Recovery and Tariff Regulation

A central issue is who pays for the backbone.

Possible models include:

User-pay model

Current network users pay through transmission charges.

Socialised tariff model

Costs are distributed across a wider group of network users.

Government-supported model

Public funds subsidise strategic infrastructure.

Hybrid model

Network charges are combined with government financing, EU funding or guarantees.

Germany's hydrogen-core-network framework demonstrates the importance of public financing and State-aid compatibility. The German regulator notes that European Commission State-aid approval was required in connection with financing the hydrogen core network. (Bundesnetzagentur)

18. Stranded Asset Risk

Hydrogen backbone planning has an unusual risk: infrastructure can become obsolete in either direction.

A pipeline may become stranded because:

hydrogen demand is lower than expected;

direct electrification becomes cheaper;

alternative hydrogen routes develop;

imported hydrogen becomes more competitive; or

technological changes reduce pipeline demand.

Conversely, insufficient investment may produce infrastructure scarcity, preventing industrial decarbonisation.

Therefore, good planning law should incorporate:

periodic review;

scenario testing;

investment thresholds;

demand verification;

repurposing mechanisms; and

regulatory reassessment.

19. Hydrogen Distribution versus Backbone

The backbone should generally be distinguished from local hydrogen distribution.

The EU framework separately addresses hydrogen distribution-network development. Article 56 provides for hydrogen distribution operators to prepare network-development plans and requires cooperation with gas and electricity distribution operators and, where relevant, district-heating operators. (EUR-Lex)

This produces a hierarchical system:

Production/import → Backbone transmission → Regional network → Local distribution → End user

Each level may require different planning criteria.

20. Key Legal Principles

A mature hydrogen-backbone planning regime should be based on the following principles:

21. Emerging Legal Doctrine

Hydrogen backbone planning is developing a new conception of infrastructure law.

Traditional infrastructure regulation generally followed:

Demand → project → permit → construction → operation

Hydrogen requires a more sophisticated model:

Scenario → system planning → market testing → network optimisation → regulatory approval → phased investment → periodic reassessment

The difference is fundamental.

The law is moving from regulation of individual pipelines toward regulation of the hydrogen system as a whole.

22. Indian Perspective

For India, hydrogen backbone planning would interact with the National Green Hydrogen Mission, petroleum and natural-gas regulation, electricity regulation, environmental law, land acquisition, industrial policy and port infrastructure.

A future Indian hydrogen backbone could potentially connect:

renewable-energy-rich regions;

electrolyser clusters;

refineries;

fertiliser plants;

steel-producing regions;

ports;

hydrogen storage;

industrial corridors; and

export terminals.

A dedicated statutory framework could establish:

a national hydrogen network-planning authority;

ten-year hydrogen network-development plans;

regional hydrogen plans;

infrastructure-demand assessment;

pipeline repurposing rules;

third-party access;

tariff methodology;

cross-border pipeline regulation;

environmental and safety standards; and

public consultation requirements.

The German experience demonstrates the importance of establishing the planning framework before large-scale infrastructure investment becomes irreversible.

23. Conclusion

Hydrogen Backbone Network Planning Law is the emerging legal discipline governing the transition from fragmented hydrogen projects to integrated hydrogen infrastructure systems.

The EU model establishes ten-year network-development planning, stakeholder consultation, infrastructure assessment, consideration of repurposing and coordination between hydrogen, gas and electricity systems. (EUR-Lex) Germany provides a particularly concrete example: its approved hydrogen core network covers approximately 9,040 km and relies substantially on conversion of existing gas pipelines. (Bundesnetzagentur)

The available case law is currently predominantly analogous rather than hydrogen-specific. Decisions such as Commission v Germany (C-718/18) and Commission v Belgium (C-767/19) establish broader principles concerning independent energy regulation, network governance and market structure that are highly relevant to hydrogen infrastructure. (Infocuria)

The central legal challenge is therefore to create a backbone that is strategic enough to enable hydrogen-market development, but sufficiently evidence-based, transparent, independently regulated and adaptable to avoid inefficient or stranded infrastructure.