Liquid Organic Hydrogen Carriers (LOHC) 2026: Transporting H₂ Safely

Executive Summary

Liquid organic hydrogen carriers (LOHC) promise a way to transport and store hydrogen using existing liquid fuel infrastructure: hydrogen is chemically bound to an organic molecule, shipped as a stable liquid, then released (dehydrogenated) at the destination. The concept is simple; the thermodynamics are not. LOHC pathways pay a heavy energy penalty in hydrogenation/dehydrogenation while competing directly with ammonia, liquid hydrogen, and synthetic fuels. At Energy Solutions, we benchmark LOHC systems against alternative hydrogen logistics and identify where they may still carve out a role.

• Typical LOHC systems (e.g. toluene/MCH, dibenzyltoluene) suffer round-trip energy efficiencies of ~35–45% from electricity to released hydrogen, compared with ~50–60% for compressed hydrogen and similar or higher for ammonia-to-power chains.
• On a volumetric basis, LOHCs can carry more hydrogen per cubic metre than compressed gas at moderate pressures, but less than liquid hydrogen or ammonia once conversion losses are factored in.
• Capital-intensive dehydrogenation plants and heat integration requirements make LOHC particularly suited to large, stable demand centres such as industrial clusters, not dispersed refuelling stations.
• Safety advantages include lower explosion risk and compatibility with existing liquid fuel tankers and storage tanks; however, toxicity and flammability of carrier liquids must still be managed carefully.
• In most 2030/2035 scenarios, LOHC remains a niche solution for specific corridors or industrial projects rather than the dominant hydrogen vector, but it can complement pipelines, ammonia, and liquid hydrogen where infrastructure or public acceptance is limiting.

What You'll Learn

• LOHC Basics: Molecules, Processes, and Use Cases
• Benchmarks: Energy Density, Efficiency, and Cost vs Other H₂ Carriers
• Case Studies: Early LOHC Demonstrations and Projects
• Infrastructure: Hydrogenation, Dehydrogenation, and Logistics
• Risk & Safety: Handling, Toxicity, and Regulatory Considerations
• Devil's Advocate: Are We Overcomplicating Hydrogen Logistics?
• Outlook to 2030/2035: Where LOHC Could Fit in the Hydrogen Value Chain
• FAQ: LOHC Economics, Safety, and Competing Technologies

LOHC Basics: Molecules, Processes, and Use Cases

LOHC systems rely on reversible hydrogenation reactions. A “lean” carrier molecule (without hydrogen) is hydrogenated at the source, transported as a “rich” carrier, and later dehydrogenated near the point of use. Common carrier pairs include:

• Toluene → Methylcyclohexane (MCH): Toluene is hydrogenated to MCH and later dehydrogenated back to toluene.
• Dibenzyltoluene systems: High-boiling, thermally stable liquids designed specifically as LOHCs.

Idealised use cases include:

• Overseas shipping of hydrogen: Using chemical tankers instead of cryogenic H₂ carriers.
• Buffer storage for industrial hydrogen users: Leveraging existing oil storage tanks.
• Distributed hydrogen delivery: Trucking LOHC liquids to refuelling stations and dehydrogenating on-site (though this is capital-intensive).

Benchmarks: Energy Density, Efficiency, and Cost vs Other H₂ Carriers

LOHCs are often marketed as having high volumetric hydrogen density, but this must be weighed against conversion losses and carrier recycling costs. The table below summarises stylised benchmarks.

Case Studies: Early LOHC Demonstrations and Projects

Case Studies: LOHC in Practice

Case Study 1 – Pilot LOHC Supply Chain to Industrial Cluster

Context

• Use case: Importing hydrogen via LOHC to supply a refinery/chemical cluster.
• Concept: Hydrogenation at a coastal export hub, shipping in chemical tankers, dehydrogenation near end-users.

Insights

• Existing liquid tankers and terminals can be adapted, reducing greenfield port capex.
• Heat integration with industrial processes is essential to improve dehydrogenation efficiency.
• Carrier management (lean/rich logistics) adds complexity to supply chain operations.

Case Study 2 – LOHC for Distributed Refuelling (Concept Study)

Context

• Use case: Supplying multiple hydrogen refuelling stations via LOHC tankers.
• Concept: Dehydrogenation units at or near stations, recycling lean carrier back to a central plant.

Insights

• Capex for many small dehydrogenation sites can outweigh benefits of liquid logistics.
• Operational complexity and safety management requirements are high.
• Often more attractive to use compressed or liquid hydrogen for stations unless LOHC is shared with nearby industrial demand.

Infrastructure: Hydrogenation, Dehydrogenation, and Logistics

LOHC systems require both chemical processing plants and conventional logistics assets. Key elements include:

• Hydrogenation units (source-side) with reactors, heat exchangers, and hydrogen supply.
• Dehydrogenation plants (sink-side) requiring high-temperature heat (often 250–320 °C).
• Storage tanks and loading/unloading systems for lean and rich LOHC streams.
• Carrier make-up and purification systems to compensate for degradation over cycles.

Risk & Safety: Handling, Toxicity, and Regulatory Considerations

Unlike cryogenic LH₂, LOHC liquids are typically handled at ambient conditions and moderate pressures, reducing boil-off and embrittlement risks. However, they introduce their own safety profile:

Devil's Advocate: Are We Overcomplicating Hydrogen Logistics?

Critics argue that LOHCs turn hydrogen logistics into a chemistry problem that might not need to exist. In many regions, the fastest way to decarbonise is to electrify end-uses directly and avoid hydrogen altogether where possible. Where hydrogen is unavoidable, simpler options—such as pipelines, compressed gas, or ammonia shipped in bulk—may beat LOHC on cost and efficiency.

From a system perspective, heavy investment in LOHC could divert capital and policy focus from grid reinforcement, direct electrification, and synthetic fuels. LOHC’s strongest case is where existing liquid fuel infrastructure and industrial heat sources can be fully leveraged; outside these niches, its complexity is harder to justify.

Outlook to 2030/2035: Where LOHC Could Fit in the Hydrogen Value Chain

Through 2030, LOHC activity is likely to remain dominated by pilots and early commercial projects linked to specific industrial clusters or demonstration trade routes. By 2035, LOHC could account for a noticeable share of international hydrogen trade in scenarios where ammonia faces social licence or technical barriers and where pipeline build-out lags.

FAQ: LOHC Economics, Safety, and Competing Technologies

When do LOHC systems make the most sense compared with ammonia or liquid hydrogen?

LOHCs are most compelling where there is existing liquid fuel infrastructure, access to high-temperature heat for dehydrogenation, and a relatively concentrated hydrogen demand centre. Under these conditions, the logistics and safety benefits can outweigh the energy penalty compared with alternatives.

How large is the energy penalty for LOHC compared with compressed hydrogen?

Depending on the specific chemistry and plant design, total electricity-to-hydrogen round-trip efficiency for LOHC systems often falls in the 35–45% range, compared with roughly 50–60% for compressed hydrogen. This means LOHC routes may require substantially more renewable generation to deliver the same end-use hydrogen.

Are LOHCs safer than other hydrogen carriers?

LOHC liquids typically have lower explosion and boil-off risk than cryogenic hydrogen and can be stored at ambient conditions, which simplifies some safety aspects. However, they are still combustible chemicals with potential toxicity, so established chemical handling standards and emergency protocols are essential.

Will LOHCs become a dominant hydrogen transport solution?

Most long-term scenarios see LOHC as part of a diversified portfolio of hydrogen carriers rather than the dominant solution. Its role will depend on comparative costs, regional infrastructure choices, and the evolution of ammonia, pipeline, and synthetic fuel routes.