Open-Ed
South Africa’s green hydrogen ambitions are no longer simply a matter of futuristic plans and glossy investment presentations. The industry is moving steadily towards implementation, backed by government policy, international finance and billions of rands in investment. In August 2026, the SA-H2 Fund reached a first close of R3 billion to finance projects across the green hydrogen value chain, while several South African Power-to-X projects have already advanced into feasibility and engineering stages.
That momentum makes the debate more urgent, not less. Green hydrogen – promoted by many as a silver bullet to counter climate change – could play a role in decarbonising hard-to-abate industries, developing new industrial capacity and creating jobs. But the question for South Africa should not simply be how quickly we can build the industry. It should be: who will control it, who will benefit from it, and who will carry its environmental and social costs?
At Earthlife Africa, our position is cautious and conditional. Green hydrogen could contribute to a Just Transition – only if the industry puts people, communities and the environment ahead of rapid development and profit maximisation.
The stakes are particularly high as South Africa is attempting to develop a new export-oriented energy industry while confronting persistent inequalities in land ownership, serious water-security challenges and an ongoing transformation of its electricity system. The country’s National Water Action Plan released in July 2026 explicitly recognises increasingly severe water-supply challenges, making questions about the allocation of water to new industrial projects impossible to separate from questions about public need.
A green transition must also be a just transition
Large-scale green hydrogen production requires vast tracts of land for the solar and wind farms that power electrolysis. In a country carrying the deep historical legacy of land inequality and dispossession, dedicating expansive areas to export-driven energy production raises serious questions about land rights and who ultimately benefits from these developments.
For Earthlife Africa, communities cannot simply be treated as stakeholders to be consulted once projects are already taking shape. Public participation and meaningful community inclusion must be central to decisions about developments that affect people’s land, livelihoods, health and environment. Communities must have a genuine opportunity to understand, question and influence projects taking place in or around them.
Electrolysis requires large volumes of purified water. This presents a major concern as South Africa is already a water-stressed country familiar with strict municipal rationing. Developers are now looking towards seawater desalination. While desalination could potentially provide additional freshwater to surrounding communities, developers may instead underinvest in infrastructure or capacity that would benefit municipalities in order to minimise project costs and maximise profits.
Whose land, whose water, whose energy?
A few questions emerge on energy. South Africa’s electricity system is undergoing a fundamental transformation. As new renewable generation is built, a crucial question is ‘who gets access to that electricity and on what terms’. Should new renewable energy capacity primarily support export-oriented hydrogen production, or should a significant share underpin domestic industrialisation, affordable electricity and broader energy security? The fact that electricity supply conditions are improving does not make this question disappear; it makes the question of ‘how South Africa uses its new renewable capacity’ even more important.
The technical risks identified require strict oversight. Green ammonia and other hydrogen derivatives present acute toxic and explosion hazards. Host communities must be protected through mandatory air-quality monitoring stations, effective safety measures and operational early-warning systems.
Green does not mean risk-free
Hydrogen itself also presents an indirect climate concern because it can leak easily. Once released into the atmosphere, hydrogen can deplete atmospheric hydroxyl radicals, extending the lifespan of methane – a greenhouse gas far more potent than carbon dioxide. Without strict leak monitoring and enforcement, unmanaged hydrogen losses could accelerate climate warming rather than mitigate it. The danger is that, without deliberate policy intervention, South Africa could repeat a familiar pattern of extractivism – supplying clean resources to help decarbonise the Global North while absorbing the environmental and social risks locally.
The real test is who benefits
For green hydrogen to contribute to a genuine Just Transition, policymakers must do more than just promote investment – they must mandate strict safety enforcement, protect local land and water rights, ensure meaningful public participation, and reserve a clear portion of green energy for South Africa’s own economic development.
The question is not whether green hydrogen can be part of South Africa’s future, it is whether that future will be shaped around people and the environment, or around the need for profit. As South Africans, we must make sure that we do not repeat the mistakes of the past by focusing only on the benefits of a booming emerging green-hydrogen industry. A Just Transition must put people and the environment above profit.
Author: Ulrich Steenkamp
Ulrich is the Campaigns Coordinator at Earthlife Africa Johannesburg
Disclaimer: The articles and videos expressed in this publication are those of the authors. They do not purport to reflect the opinions or views of Green Building Africa, our staff or our advertisers. The designations employed in this publication and the presentation of material therein do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part Green Building Africa concerning the legal status of any country, area or territory or of its authorities.
