“It doesn’t shine like gold nor smell like oil, but it’s worth more than both. And the countries that don’t control it will vanish from the new energy map.”
The Resource You Can’t See, But That Powers Everything
Green hydrogen cannot be seen, smelled, stored in barrels, nor is it yet traded on the London Metal Exchange. But it moves more money, expectations, and power strategies than nearly any other emerging resource. It is, quite literally, the energy of the future. And not because governments say so, but because the planet’s mathematics demand it. To meet decarbonization targets by 2050, the world needs to replace more than 30 percent of current fossil fuels. No single source can do that alone. Only green hydrogen has the ability to store clean energy, transport renewables in liquid form, power heavy industrial processes, and serve as the basis for synthetic fuels used in aviation and maritime transport.
In other words, green hydrogen is the giant battery humanity needs to move beyond carbon. But unlike lithium or copper, it’s not extracted from the earth—it’s manufactured. From water and renewable electricity. With technology, investment, and political will. And that changes everything. Because it’s not enough to possess the resource—you have to know how to transform it. The countries that master the production and conversion chain of hydrogen will also dominate the economy of tomorrow. And that race has already begun.
The importance of green hydrogen for the future is absolute. It will not only replace dirty fuels, but completely reconfigure the planet’s energy chains. And those making the first moves are not poor countries. Germany, China, Japan, the United States, Norway, and South Korea are already investing billions of dollars in infrastructure, patents, and pilot plants. They’re not waiting for the market to mature—they are designing it. They know that whoever controls hydrogen will control maritime transport, aviation, steelmaking, the chemical industry, and the energy corridors of the 21st century. Meanwhile, many countries in the Global South continue to wait for investments that may never arrive.
How Green Hydrogen Is Produced and Who Can Make It
The process is simple in theory, complex in scale. It’s called electrolysis. It involves taking water, applying electricity, and separating its molecules into hydrogen and oxygen. But not just any electricity. Only electricity from clean sources like solar or wind power is suitable. And not just any water. It must be treated, purified, and often desalinated if taken from the sea. The central equipment is the electrolyzer—a machine that can take up half a football field and consume tens of megawatts per hour.
For every ton of hydrogen produced, around 9,000 liters of treated water and about 50 to 55 MWh of renewable electricity are required. An industrial-scale plant can require
more than 1,000 tons of water per day, and operate with an installed capacity of 100 MW or more. Current production costs for green hydrogen range between USD 4 and USD 7 per kilogram, although they are expected to fall below USD 2 per kilogram by 2030, thanks to economies of scale and technological improvements.
The International Energy Agency estimates that around 180,000 tons of green hydrogen will be produced globally in 2024—less than 1% of total global hydrogen production, which is dominated by the gray version (natural gas) with more than 90 million tons annually. In energy terms, this represents a marginal fraction, but with high growth potential.
In terms of installed capacity, the planet currently has 700 MW operational in electrolysis plants dedicated to green hydrogen. Projections suggest surpassing 134 GW by 2030, according to BloombergNEF data. Achieving that leap would require annual investments exceeding USD 150 billion over the next decade.
The leading countries today in green hydrogen capacity are:
- China holds 33% of the global installed capacity.
- Germany has 15% (including projects under expansion).
- Australia holds 12%, with operating plants and advanced permits.
- The United States has 10%, but with strong future investment via federal subsidies.
- Chile holds 1%, with one pilot plant and 40 projects in the pipeline.
But true leadership does not lie in having the most plants, but in having the full value chain: production, storage, transportation, consumption, and exportation. Today, no country yet dominates this cycle independently. China advances with cross-subsidies. Germany with innovation. Australia with scale. Chile with wind. And the United States with its checkbook.
The challenge is not chemical, but political and infrastructural. Green hydrogen requires high initial investment, new distribution networks, safe storage, port logistics, and above all, a clear national strategy. Having wind is not enough. One must know who the production is for, who buys it, how much they pay, and who controls the entire cycle.
Countries that only sell the molecule without industrializing it will repeat the old extractive model. Green hydrogen may be clean, but it will not be fair if it only benefits the same companies as always.
The HIF Plant in Magallanes Is Chile’s First Line
Chile has earned a place on the map—not by chance, but thanks to its wind. In the Magallanes region, at the southernmost end of the south, rises the first pilot-scale green hydrogen project in Latin America: Haru Oni, developed by HIF Global, with participation from Porsche, Siemens Energy, and Enel Green Power. The plant, located near Punta Arenas, is already producing synthetic fuels from green hydrogen and CO₂ captured from the air.
The first stage was inaugurated in 2022. It is a pilot plant with the capacity to produce 750,000 liters of eFuels per year, equivalent to about 2,050 liters per day. The electricity comes from a wind farm with an installed capacity of 3.4 MW, powering a PEM-type Siemens electrolyzer, which produces the green hydrogen. That hydrogen is then combined with CO₂ captured directly from the air using DAC (Direct Air Capture) technology to generate synthetic methanol, which is later converted into climate-neutral gasoline.
The estimated cost of this pilot production, according to sources at HIF and Porsche, is USD 7 to 10 per liter of eFuel, meaning the total annual value of this phase is around USD 6 to 7 million. Although the cost is high, the goal is not yet to compete with fossil fuels but rather to validate the technology and open commercial routes. The fuel is already being shipped to Germany for testing in Porsche engines. It is sold in small batches as premium synthetic fuel and serves as a model for larger contracts in Europe.
But the real leap is the commercial phase, which is already under development. The planned plant will have an estimated capacity of 550 million liters per year, equivalent to producing 1.5 million liters per day—enough to supply nearly half a million vehicles annually. The estimated investment exceeds USD 5 billion, and it is expected to be operational before 2028.
If a target market price between USD 2 and 3 per liter is maintained (as unit costs decrease with scale), annual production could generate between USD 1.1 and 1.65 billion, positioning Chile as one of the world’s largest eFuel exporters. Target destinations include Germany, Japan, and the United States, especially for hard-to-electrify sectors like maritime and air transport, and high-end sports car fleets.
Commercialization is led by Porsche AG, which has already announced that all its internal combustion vehicles will continue operating with neutral fuels until 2035. HIF Global, meanwhile, manages strategic alliances, environmental permits, and technological development, while Siemens provides the electrolysis systems. The model is an international private capital partnership with an export-oriented vision.
The plant includes an electrical substation, a desalination unit, a hydrogen compression and storage system, a methanol synthesis plant, and a synthetic gasoline conversion unit. All of this is being built in one of the most extreme climates in the world—but also one of the most favorable for this type of energy.
Today, HIF is a symbol. But if Chile does not replicate, regulate, and capture the value, it will once again follow the copper playbook: exporting raw wealth and buying back technology at a premium. The Magallanes plant is not the end—it is the starting point. And Chile’s energy story is to be written based on what happens next.
Australia: A Wind Power Giant Without a National Industry
Australia is currently the world’s largest lithium producer and one of the leaders in green hydrogen development—but without a strategic national industry. Its role in the new energy map is the same as always: providing raw materials with no added value. It produces, exports, but does not dominate.
In the green hydrogen sector, Australia has over 90 projects in the pipeline, about twenty of which are already under construction or in advanced permitting stages. The total projected capacity exceeds 70 GW by 2030, with estimated investments of over USD 200 billion, according to the official report from the Australian Renewable Energy Agency (ARENA).
The main development regions are Pilbara (Western Australia), Gladstone (Queensland), and Tasmania, where solar resources, coastal winds, and proximity to export ports converge. The most advanced plants include:
- Asian Renewable Energy Hub (AREH): A megaproject in Pilbara of 26 GW, aiming to produce green hydrogen and ammonia for export to Asia, with an estimated investment of USD 35 billion.
- Gladstone Hydrogen Project: Developed by Sumitomo and Stanwell, aiming to produce 200,000 tons of hydrogen annually—equivalent to over 1 billion liters of eFuel—with projected annual revenues of USD 1.8 billion.
- Tasmania Green Hydrogen Hub: Focused on hydroelectric and wind power, with an initial investment of USD 700 million, led by Fortescue Future Industries (FFI).
Despite the scale and investment, over 90% of Australian hydrogen is oriented toward export in the form of ammonia. There is no clear strategy for domestic use or industrialization. The model remains the same as with gas or lithium: export the resource, charge by the ton, and leave the industry in foreign hands.
China and Japan are the main potential clients. Companies such as JERA, Mitsubishi, Sinopec, and PetroChina have signed memorandums of understanding to secure long-term purchases. Australia guarantees volume, political stability, and functional ports. But it has no domestic electrolysis technology, no state-owned companies, and no local eFuel refining. The entire value chain is in foreign hands.
The production cost of green hydrogen in Australia ranges from USD 2.5 to 4 per kilogram, depending on the energy source used. But since most of it is exported as ammonia, the country receives an intermediate value and loses control over final uses. If Germany refines and Japan consumes, Australia merely extracts.
It has the wind. It has the sun. It has the water. But it lacks an industrial strategy. And in the 21st century, that’s called dependency disguised as power.
Germany: Engineering, Green Methanol, and European Leadership
Germany has no lithium, no deserts, and no extreme winds. But it has something even more decisive: engineering, planning, and technological sovereignty. Instead of betting on large volumes of extraction, it bet on mastering conversion, the chemical industry, and synthetic fuels. And it’s succeeding.
Today, Germany leads eFuel production in Europe and sets the standard for high-efficiency green hydrogen projects. Its focus is not on exporting raw hydrogen, but on refining it and converting it into green methanol, synthetic gasoline, or kerosene. That’s where the added value lies. That’s where the power is.
One of the most symbolic cases is the Haru Oni plant, located in Chile but largely designed and financed by Germany. The methanol produced in Magallanes is shipped directly to European ports to be used by Porsche, Bosch, Volkswagen, and other firms working on the transition to carbon-neutral engines. Germany doesn’t need to have the hydrogen. It needs to control it.
Within its own territory, the most advanced plant is in Leuna (Saxony-Anhalt), operated by Sunfire GmbH, in partnership with TotalEnergies and Siemens Energy. This plant uses solid oxide electrolyzers (SOEC)—cutting-edge German technology—and produces over 3,000 tons of green hydrogen annually, equivalent to about 30 million liters of eFuel.
The estimated commercial value of that production exceeds USD 75 million per year, and the goal is to double capacity by 2026. Another key facility is located in Schleswig-Holstein, operating with offshore wind energy and dedicated to producing synthetic kerosene for aviation, with a capacity of up to 8,000 tons annually—more than 90 million liters of clean jet fuel.
The total investment by the German state in green hydrogen and synthetic fuels exceeds USD 9 billion between 2020 and 2024, and the national plan foresees another USD 18 billion through 2030. The federal government has created cross-subsidies, tax incentives, research funds, and a guaranteed procurement system to ensure that new fuels have a stable market.
Germany does not act alone. It participates actively in international consortia, including partnerships with Chile, Namibia, and Saudi Arabia, securing a global hydrogen supply without having to extract it directly. Its role is that of processor, refiner, and high-value buyer—essentially, the role oil companies played in the 20th century.
While other countries are still debating whether to nationalize the resource or not, **Germany has already positioned itself to dominate the new energy cycle without having reserves beneath its feet. It does so with engineering, with alliances, and with vision.
In the geography of hydrogen, the winner is not the one with the most desert. The winner is the one who designs, refines, and sells the final product. Germany understood that a decade ago. And it’s already several steps ahead.
Chile and Its Historic Opportunity
Chile doesn’t have to choose between sun and wind. It has both. In the far north, the Atacama Desert has the highest solar radiation on the planet, and in the deep south, Magallanes possesses one of the most constant and powerful wind resources in the Southern Hemisphere. This unique combination makes Chile a natural candidate to become a global green hydrogen powerhouse—but it isn’t one yet.
Currently, the country has only one pilot plant in operation—HIF Patagonia—but there are over 40 projects in various stages of environmental review, permitting, or conceptual design. If even a third of those come to fruition, Chile could install 25 GW of electrolysis capacity by 2035, allowing for the production of over 3 million tons of green hydrogen annually, equivalent to nearly 30 billion liters of eFuels.
Here’s a selection of 8 significant green hydrogen projects in Chile, with key data on investment, capacity, estimated revenue, and ownership. They reflect the importance of this emerging industry—but remain in the hands of private investors, with the Chilean state largely absent.
- HIF Haru Oni (Magallanes)
- Investment: USD 78 million
- Annual Production: 130,000 liters of e-gasoline and 750,000 liters of methanol
- Estimated Revenue: USD 6–7 million/year
- Owner: HIF Global with Porsche, Enel, Siemens, and ExxonMobil
- HIF Cabo Negro (Magallanes)
- Projected Investment: Over USD 850 million
- Annual Production: Up to 14 million liters of eFuels
- Projected Revenue: Over USD 150 million/year
- Owner: HIF Global international consortium
ENGIE H2 Magallanes
- Estimated Investment: USD 3 billion
- Projected Production: 880,000 tons of green ammonia/year
- Expected Revenue: Over USD 2 billion/year
- Owner: ENGIE (France)
AME Andes Renovables (Atacama)
- Estimated Investment: USD 600 million
- Electrolysis Capacity: 200 MW
- Annual Production: Over 100,000 tons
- Owner: AME with international partners
HIF Tal Tal (Antofagasta)
- Announced Investment: USD 1.4 billion
- Annual Production: Over 1 million tons of eFuels
- Projected Revenue: Over USD 1 billion
- Owner: HIF Global
ENEL Green Power (Antofagasta)
- Estimated Investment: USD 1 billion
- Electrolysis Capacity: 600 MW
- Annual Production: 50,000 tons
- Owner: ENEL Chile (Italian subsidiary)
Total Eren and Free Power (Arica and Parinacota)
- Projected Investment: USD 2 billion
- Production: 350,000 tons of green ammonia
- Estimated Revenue: USD 1.5 billion/year
- Owners: Total Eren (France) and Free Power (Chile)
Mainstream Renewable Power (Atacama and Coquimbo)
- Investment: Around USD 850 million
- Projected Capacity: 500 MW
- Annual Production: Over 200,000 tons
- Owner: Aker Horizons (Norway)
The commercial value of this production would exceed USD 60 billion annually, equivalent to more than 20% of Chile’s current GDP. Even if only half of that capacity materializes, Chile could double its mining exports with green fuels alone. But today, there’s no infrastructure to move that energy, no suitable ports, no storage network, and no internal logistics.
The National Green Hydrogen Strategy, launched in 2020, sets ambitious goals: to become the world’s lowest-cost producer by 2030, a major exporter by 2040, and a continental industrial hub by 2050. But for now, these goals exist only in PowerPoint slides. There is no national company, no serious subsidies, no guaranteed state procurement, and no internal use strategy to decarbonize mining, transportation, or cities.
Chile remains stuck in the same old logic—the logic of extracting and selling without transforming, of attracting private capital without building sovereignty, of hoping the market will solve what only industrial policy can orchestrate. While Germany installs refineries and Australia signs contracts, Chile continues to grant permits in a scattered way, without national coordination.
And the most serious issue is that if a public green hydrogen company is not established, Chile could repeat the exact same model that doomed it with lithium and copper. A new energy matrix is useless if it reproduces the old structure of dependency.
Chile has wind and it has sun. It has water in the sea and technology in its universities. It has ports, logistical corridors, and dormant industrial capacity. What it lacks is strategic decision-making. And in the 21st century, that can cost more than the lost oil of the 20th.
Global Figures of Green Hydrogen
Green hydrogen is no longer a future promise. It is an active market, with operational plants, signed contracts, emerging energy corridors, and billions of dollars at stake. While it still represents a small fraction of global energy consumption, its growth is the fastest among all clean sources—and its geopolitical impact is already becoming visible.
As of early 2024, the world has approximately 780 MW of installed capacity in operational electrolysis plants dedicated to green hydrogen. This equates to an annual production of nearly 200,000 tons, or around 2 billion liters of eFuels if converted into methanol or derivatives. Despite its still modest scale, the pace of growth is historic: in 2019, that figure was just 20 MW.
The commercial value of this production is around USD 500 million annually, but the global green hydrogen market is projected to exceed USD 250 billion by 2030, according to BloombergNEF. In 2023 alone, projects totaling over USD 70 billion were announced in 30 different countries. Installed capacity is expected to exceed 134 GW in six years, requiring a 180-fold increase in current infrastructure.
The countries currently leading industrial-scale green hydrogen development—by operational capacity, active permits, and commercial projections—are:
- China, with 33% of global installed capacity. A leader in electrolyzer manufacturing, with over 250 MW operational and 30 pilot projects expanding.
- Germany, with 15%, featuring high-efficiency eFuel plants and strong state subsidies.
- Australia, with 12%, with over 70 projects under development and major export alliances with Asia.
- United States, with 10%, driven by the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), which provides direct subsidies per kilo produced.
- United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia, with 7%, as part of their energy transition.
- France, Japan, South Korea, with a combined 5%, focused on technology and logistics.
- Chile, with 1%, with one pilot plant and a strong but yet-to-be-executed project portfolio.
Leading Corporations in the Market
The dominant corporate players include:
- Siemens Energy (Germany)
- Cummins and Plug Power (United States)
- ITM Power (United Kingdom)
- NEL ASA (Norway)
- Longi and Sinopec (China)
- Fortescue Future Industries (Australia)
These companies control a large portion of electrolyzer production, pilot plants, green ammonia contracts, and systems integration engineering. The map is not just state-driven—it’s corporate. And as happened with oil, those who control the valves of green hydrogen production and transport will control the energy transition.
Currently, there are about 120 green hydrogen plants operating worldwide, and over 1,000 in planning or construction—from 1 MW pilot facilities to megaprojects exceeding 10 GW. The shift has already begun. But it won’t be equitable unless producing countries intervene with public policies that ensure technological sovereignty, national participation, and real benefit returns.
The numbers are clear: green hydrogen is advancing. The market exists. The infrastructure is multiplying. The only thing missing is political will, so it doesn’t end up in the hands of the same players as always.
Green Energy: What It Weighs Today and What’s Still Missing
Green energy is no longer marginal—but it is still far from dominant. In 2024, renewable sources account for 31% of global electricity generation, according to the International Energy Agency (IEA). The remaining 69% still relies on fossil fuels: coal, gas, and oil.
Of that 31% in renewables, most comes from hydropower (16%), followed by wind (8%) and solar (5%). The rest is supplied by biomass, geothermal, and other minor sources. While numbers have improved, progress remains uneven and slow in many regions.
In terms of investment, the global renewable energy market mobilized over USD 570 billion in 2023, including solar, wind, hydroelectric, and green hydrogen projects. Of that total, USD 135 billion went to solar and USD 105 billion to wind. Green hydrogen still represents a small fraction, but its growth curve is exponential.
The ranking of countries with the highest renewable electricity generation is led by:
- China, with 32% of its energy coming from renewables. It is the country with the largest installed solar and wind capacity in the world.
- Brazil, with 85% of its electricity matrix being renewable, thanks to its dominance in hydropower and expansion of solar.
- Germany, with 51% of its electricity from renewables. Europe’s leader in solar and onshore wind.
- Spain, with 50%, backed by strong investment in solar and new wind capacity.
- India, with 23%, but with aggressive plans to expand solar in the north and west.
- Chile, with 28% of its electricity matrix renewable. Latin America’s leader in solar per capita, but with low state investment.
The regions with the least progress in renewables are Central Asia, Sub-Saharan Africa (except South Africa and Morocco), and Middle Eastern oil-producing countries that still heavily subsidize fossil fuels.
The gaps are not technological—they are political. The main barriers remain:
- Lack of solid regulatory frameworks
- Active subsidies for fossil fuels (over USD 800 billion in 2022)
- Lack of access to green financing for developing countries
- Opposition from traditional energy lobbies
The decarbonization target agreed in Paris requires the world to reach at least 59% renewable electricity generation by 2040. To achieve that, annual investments must exceed USD 1.5 trillion starting in 2026. But that goal is still far away. If the transition doesn’t accelerate, global warming will continue to rise—even though the technology to stop it already exists.
This is not just about producing clean energy—it’s about dismantling dirty dependency. And so far, the pace is not enough.
Oil in Retreat? When Will We Replace It?
The world currently burns more than 100 million barrels of oil per day. That number has not decreased, not even after pandemics or climate agreements. What has changed is the narrative. Now we talk about decarbonization, transition, green hydrogen, solar, and wind. But the fossil matrix remains intact. And each day of delay in replacing it is measured in emissions, in dollars, and in lives.
According to projections by the International Energy Agency, for the world to meet its minimum climate commitments, clean energy must exceed 59% of the global energy matrix by 2040. That doesn’t just mean electricity—it includes transportation, heating, industry, mining, and food systems. In other words: everything.
Today, renewables cover only 31% of global electricity generation and less than 17% of total primary energy consumption. To reach the 59% target, annual investment would need to triple in less than five years. That means more than USD 1.5 trillion per year just for clean energy—not including networks, storage, industrial reconversion, and transition subsidies.
The barriers are not technological. The systems to produce clean energy at scale already exist. What’s missing is global political will to accelerate the replacement. The United States still subsidizes its oil industry with more than USD 40 billion per year. Saudi Arabia defends oil as a legitimate development source. And China, while leading in renewables, is also one of the world’s largest coal consumers.
Three Possible Scenarios — All Different
- Scenario 1: Optimistic Transition
Renewables surpass 59% of the global electricity matrix by 2038. Oil begins to decline in 2030 and ceases to dominate by 2045. This requires global cooperation, carbon taxes, and massive industrial transformation. - Scenario 2: Controlled Inertia
Renewables reach 50% only by 2045. Oil remains dominant until 2050. This slows down climate collapse but does not prevent it. Poor regions are left out of the transition. - Scenario 3: Fossil Continuity
Oil remains dominant until 2070. Clean investments grow, but not fast enough to offset rising global demand. The planet surpasses 2.5 °C of warming. The consequences are irreversible.
The current reality resembles the second scenario. The transition is moving—but far too slowly. Oil is not retreating. It’s just being rebranded. Meanwhile, the major oil companies—Shell, ExxonMobil, Aramco, Chevron—continue to report record profits and new exploration fields.
Green hydrogen could be a turning point. But if it’s not accompanied by a political and economic break with the old energy model, it will just become another product in the hands of the same the market. And the market doesn’t change the world—it only sells it.
The energy transition will not be a straight line. It will be a struggle. And like every struggle, it will have winners, losers, and traitors.
The Energy Map Is Being Redrawn — Right Now
The world no longer revolves solely around oil. The global energy map is being redrawn—not through open wars, but through investments, treaties, and long-term contracts. Green hydrogen is the new contested territory. There are no bombs, but there are secret maps. No armies, but corporations. And those who dominate today are not necessarily the ones with the most wind or sun—but those who control design, industry, and geopolitics.
China leads in electrolyzer manufacturing, refines lithium, and is now advancing in the hydrogen value chain with homegrown technology, state financing, and strategic presence in Africa, Central Asia, and Latin America. It doesn’t need to possess all the resources—it just needs to control them. LONGi and Sinopec are the new Shell and BP, but with Asian patience and quiet financial expansion.
Germany doesn’t produce much green hydrogen, but it turns it into value. It refines, synthesizes, converts, and sells. It has the industry, subsidies, engineering, and backing of the European Union. And most importantly: it has a long-term vision. With every liter of eFuel entering through Hamburg or Rotterdam, Europe ensures it won’t depend on Russia or the Gulf.
The United States responds with its wallet. Through the Inflation Reduction Act, it offers direct subsidies of up to USD 3 per kilo of green hydrogen, aiming to attract factories, investments, and to prevent China from dominating the energy century. But it doesn’t lead in technology or efficiency—it leads in lobbying and capital.
Australia remains what it has always been: the world’s raw material supermarket. It has massive projects, but all are designed to export hydrogen as ammonia to Asia. It does not refine. It does not transform. It does not regulate. It just delivers.
Chile, meanwhile, still hasn’t decided. It has the wind of the south and the sun of the north. It has seawater, ports, and interested companies. But it continues to operate as a supplier, not a power. Its only operational plant is foreign-owned. There is no state-owned company, no national hydrogen law, no protection of the resource—just promises, permits, and PowerPoint slides.
The New Energy Map Is Being Drawn Now
Not when all the plants are built. Not when it’s too late. The treaties being signed today will determine who controls the fuels of the 21st century. And if Latin America doesn’t act, it will once again become someone else’s pantry.
This isn’t just about generating clean energy. It’s about building clean power. And that kind of power is not exported in barrels. It is built at home.
You Can’t See It, But Everything Is at Stake
Green hydrogen cannot be seen. It doesn’t shine, it has no weight, it leaves no trace. But silently, it is driving the strategic decisions of the world’s most powerful nations. It is reconfiguring alliances, financing projects, and shaping the industrial roadmap of the 21st century. It’s not a trend. It’s a race. And it’s already begun.
The invisible gold of the 21st century won’t come from a mine. It will come from an electrolysis plant. It won’t be sold in ingots—it will be compressed into tanks. It won’t fund dictatorships—but it could consolidate new forms of dependency. And if the Global South doesn’t react, it will lose everything—again.
First it was saltpeter.
Then it was copper.
Then lithium.
And now—hydrogen?
Chile has what it takes to be on the front line—not as a supplier, but as a power. It has the resources, the geography, the industrial experience, and the human capital. What’s missing is not technology—it’s political will. And if that will doesn’t come from the state, others will step in: foreign companies, investment funds, interests that don’t care about the country—only about their margins.
There is no time for hesitation. Hydrogen cannot be handed over like lithium was. The concession model without control cannot be repeated. We cannot keep believing that the market will regulate itself. Because the market doesn’t think about Chile—it only thinks about contracts.
This is not just an energy debate. It is a political debate.
Whoever controls green hydrogen in the next 20 years will control:
- Industry
- Transportation
- Food systems
- Global trade
They will control the future.
