Good morning, welcome to the UBS Carbon Capture Huddle. I'm one of your hosts, Shneur Gershuni, Head of Americas ESG Research for the investment bank here at UBS. Co-hosting today's events include Josh Spector, Brian Reynolds, Steve Fisher, Andreas Bokkenheuser, Damien Kurcz, and Cleve Rucker, all members of the UBS U.S. equity research team here at UBS. We have a packed lineup here today, including Air Products, EnLink, Svante, Navigator CO2, CF Industries, Cleveland-Cliffs, and Denbury, all to discuss developments in the carbon capture in the U.S. post their passage of the recent Inflation Reduction Act. Our first speaker today is Air Products and Chemicals. Before turning the panel over to Josh Spector, our Chemicals Analyst, to host the first session, I have a few disclosures to read.
As a research analyst, we are required to provide certain disclosures relating to the nature of our own relationship and that of UBS with any company on which we express a view on this Zoom today. These disclosures are available at www.ubs.com/disclosures. Alternatively, please reach out to any one of us, and we can provide them to you after this Zoom today. With that, I'm gonna turn it over to Josh to introduce our first panel.
Thanks, Shneur, and thanks everyone again for joining us today. Happy to be joined by the IR suite from Air Products. Air Products is a leading producer of hydrogen. It represents around 30% of their sales and a higher percentage of earnings. Total company sales are near about $13 billion, about 45% in North America, 30% EMEA, and the rest is mostly split in Asia, with about half coming in China. Air Products has been very busy in the last few years and currently have about 5 large projects in their backlog, over $1 billion investments that are focused on green or blue hydrogen. I won't go through everything, needless to say, carbon capture is an important enabler for blue hydrogen investments and progress in decarbonizing existing Air Products operations.
From Air Products today, we're joined by Sidd Manjeshwar, VP of Treasury and IR, who is taking over the reins from Simon Moore as he nears his retirement. We're also joined by Simon today, and we also have Mun Shieh, an important pillar of Air Products' IR team. From UBS, also have Shneur as well, who can jump in with questions from the ESG side of things. We have some questions that we'll start with. We're gonna come through this, come at this from the carbon capture angle, which for Air Products, which will naturally go into conversations on blue hydrogen as a topic as well. If anyone on the line has questions you'd like worked in, feel free to email me, joshua.spector@ubs.com, or Shneur as well, and we'll try to get on those.
Thank you, Air Products, for joining us today. I'll kick it off with a question, pretty broad, start us moving into this subject here. You know, for listeners on the line which may be less familiar, can you discuss your role in the CCUS value chain today?
Sure, Josh. First of all, let me say thank you very much to you and Shneur and the UBS team for the opportunity to be here today. It's wonderful to be talking about hydrogen, and CCUS is an enabler of our low zero carbon hydrogen strategy. You know, it's easy to dive straight into the project, Josh, but maybe let's just take a step back and set the stage from a overall strategic perspective. At the end of the day, why is Air Products doing what we are? It's because the world wants more energy, and it wants it with a lower carbon footprint. The specifics of how different countries, regions are getting there might be slightly different, but there's an overwhelming consensus that that's the fundamental goal and direction, and we don't see anything changing there.
In fact, I think that's accelerating on the back of supportive landmark public policy globally, like the U.S. IRA, the potential E.U.'s Green Deal Industrial Plan and other announcements, Canadian grants and other global programs. Given the fact that the world needs more energy and it wants it with a lower carbon footprint, we think hydrogen has an absolutely critical role to play in decarbonizing hard to abate sectors of our economy. Because candidly, there are some things you can do with electricity. You can produce electricity in a renewable fashion, but there's a lot of opportunities where, or applications where it's impossible or practical, impractical to do so, and hence, hydrogen plays a key role. Pivoting to CCUS, you know, we're not purely in the CCUS business, but it's purely a enabler for us and our low carbon strategy.
We've got a few exciting operating projects as well as announcements in our backlog and other things that we're working on our pipeline that we can talk about. First, our first example, if you think about our operating asset, for over the last decade, we have been operating one of the largest carbon capture systems at 2 of our SMRs in Port Arthur, Texas, where we capture over 1 million tons of CO2 per year, where we've deployed our own proprietary technology, right, where we've got all the patents to it. We're excited to deploy, you know, that proprietary technology, the operating experience that we've gained and the skill set that we have, and to press our first-mover advantage on the various projects we have globally as well. I think another terrific example, a second example would be our net zero blue hydrogen project in Edmonton, Canada.
It's located off our existing pipeline network where we are connected to a robust network of customers and existing assets. It uses our Gasification Technology, which allows us to gasify natural gas, given the large natural gas infrastructure in that part of the world, and capture over 95% of the CO2. In addition, we do use some of the hydrogen for our internal energy consumption and export power to the grid, which yields us a net-zero blue hydrogen project.
In terms of the CO2 there, we hand the CO2 to the Alberta Carbon Trunk Line for sequestration, given there's an existing infrastructure for carbon sequestration in Canada and Alberta. Now, IOL, which is Exxon's venture in Canada, saw the tremendous value of the blue hydrogen and entered into a long-term agreement akin to our classic on-site business model and those commercial frameworks and the strength those frameworks provide to support their multi-decade investment in a renewable diesel project. Again, renewable diesel for most investors, you know, most people probably appreciate this, consumes 5x the amount of hydrogen than what a classic conventional refinery would for a classic conventional barrel of oil. Again, this project also supports a burgeoning merchant hydrogen for mobility market in Alberta.
To round it out, I'd say we received approximately $500 million in grants from the government of Canada, and it was both federal and provincial grants, which recognized the merits of our first-mover advantage to accelerate the energy transition that the province of Alberta and Canada is very focused on as well. Now, if we pivot back to the U.S., the third example we could cite in our backlog is our Louisiana Blue Hydrogen project. Again, a $4.5 billion project where we produce roughly 750 million scf of blue hydrogen per day, and we have the optionality and ability to produce blue ammonia as well. It's again located on our pipeline network in the Gulf Coast. It's the world's largest and longest pipeline network where we've got a large customer and existing asset base.
We plan to capture and sequester the carbon there roughly 5 million tons of CO2 per year, which earns us the $85 a ton in the 45Q tax credit. That's roughly $425 million a year for 12 years, which is what the program is for. We were the first company which pressed our first-mover advantage again, where we entered into a multi-decade agreement with the Mineral Board of Louisiana that granted us pore space or basically space that's the hole in the ground. That's absolutely critical and our true competitive advantage having that. Because you hear a lot of announcements of blue hydrogen or blue ammonia projects, but at this point, if they don't have access to pore space to put that CO2, it's not really blue. You know, you've heard Seifi occasionally call those fake blue projects.
That's something I think, you know, it's very important to emphasize and reiterate for investors. This is another example where we've taken the carbon, we'll have title, and we put it into the ground, and we're highly confident in our execution, and we're full speed ahead on that project. In addition to those, you know, we've got an existing asset base globally in Europe and here where there is an opportunity to retrofit our assets on the back of some of the supportive regulatory policies. You know, Simon Moore last year given he leads the sustainability portfolio internally at Air Products, had announced our sustainability goals. Across our Scope 1, 2, and we're one of the handful of companies globally that actually has a Scope 3 emissions as well.
We've announced a third by 30 reduction there in our carbon intensity goals from our 2015 baseline. Overall, very excited about the projects that we've been operating as well as what are in our backlog. We've got a huge pipeline where we're looking at other opportunities and having exciting and interesting conversations with customers as well.
Thanks, Sid. You know, that's definitely a helpful overview to think about it. I guess just, you know, when you think about making an investment in carbon capture or something that's gonna enable that, I guess, how are you thinking about the returns of those projects and the timing of returns on those investments?
You know, Seifi's always told investors that our mantra internally is to earn a minimum 10% EBIT for every dollar of capital that's invested in the ground. Another proxy would be a 10% unlevered project return. Again, I'd stress the minimum return. You know, 2 recent examples which you can see is in January of this year, we announced the group 2 closing of our Jazan transaction, where we acquired the world's largest industrial complex in Saudi Arabia for $12 billion, and that was closed over a 2-group phase approach. You know, we've guided investors to $1.35 in EPS for that, and we invested roughly $2.4 billion in equity in that venture. As the investors can do the math, you know, that's well, well north of a minimum 10% return that we've spoken about.
If we look at the Louisiana project, where we are gonna be building a blue hydrogen project with the carbon and sequestration and capture angle to it, you know, even if you run the math earning the 45Q, $85 a ton for 12 years, which earns us roughly $425 million. If you calculate it based on the EBIT and even, you know, assuming natural gas prices at a $5 a MMBTU or power cost at $50 a megawatt hour, right? And you assume, you know, a number somewhere between 3.6 million and 3.4 million tons of blue ammonia, just for simplicity's sake again, and run it at an average price of what gray ammonia prices were for the last 10 years, you know, you're looking at a 20%-21% IRR project, right?
I think we're tremendously excited about the projects we're executing. Again, we'd guide you back to that minimum 10% EBIT on every $ of capital.
Maybe just to clarify on that latter point then. When you are looking at these projects and that return, I mean, you highlight the gray versus green versus blue premium. I guess, how are you thinking about what you bake into your planning? Are you assuming that you don't get a premium, or do you assume that you do get a premium for? Is that different for blue versus green?
Sure. A great question, Josh. You know, as an organization, Air Products does not have a cost-plus mentality, right, which you sometimes hear about in certain investment circles. We are having very interesting conversations with our customers who recognize the tremendous value of low carbon hydrogen. You know, the IOL Edmonton example is a clear one where Exxon's entered into a multi-year agreement, you know, for the blue hydrogen for their renewable diesel asset. I think for us, the key is to be positioned to support our customers' demand growth and their decarbonization journeys in different parts of the world. I think we've got a myriad of solutions to their specific needs. While, you know, the colors are interesting, Josh, I think the world really cares about is carbon intensity, right? I think it's important for investors, regulators, and customers to focus on carbon intensity.
An example would be the IRA incentives. You know, it incentivizes lower carbon intensity. It doesn't really pick winners and losers and colors, right? It lets companies figure out the best technological configurations with the lowest carbon intensity. Again, for our blue hydrogen projects, which I think blue plays a critical role in decarbonization and, you know, solving some of our climate goals alongside green, you need access to that pore space that I mentioned earlier to sequester the carbon, which is a real competitive advantage. You know, for us, in layman's terms, you know, one example I'd cite is, you know, today when you go to a gas station, you've got a 87 or 89 slash 91 and a 93 grade fuel level, right? We'd liken that similar to a gray, blue, and green.
I think there are use cases and exciting applications for them globally. You know, our Net-Zero project was one example of the net blue. Again, it's on the back of our traditional on-site business model, and we receive government grants as well. Finally, what I'd say is, you know, the U.S. IRA and other public policy regulatory incentives, and you can see, you know, the 45V tax incentive, which was provided, provides you $3 a kg for the lowest carbon intensity hydrogen that you can produce, right? Truly a game changer for low carbon hydrogen and for the energy transition overall as well.
Sidd, maybe I can follow up a little bit here. Just to clarify, your last response, I also had some questions on the earlier ones. Basically, the fact that the product itself, you're not pricing the product as a premium product and so forth. Like, the IRR calculations are unique for you get the 45Q for putting the equipment on, that's the IRR calculation there. Then what you can actually sell the product for is completely separate and unique, and it's not part of the IRR calculation. Is that kind of the right way to be thinking about it?
I think we look at everything holistically, Shneur. You know, I think our customers recognize the tremendous value of low-carbon hydrogen, right? I think, you know, by 2024, when IOL Edmonton comes online or when NEOM comes online in 2026 or our Louisiana project in 2027, we'd be literally the only name in town which has that volume of low-carbon hydrogen. I think there's a scarcity premium there. Again, you know, given we're not a cost plus mentality, we basically provide this value, low-carbon molecule to our customers for the market's willing to bear and guiding investors back to that minimum 10% EBIT rule. Hopefully, those waypoints will give you a sense of how we navigate the landscape.
That makes perfect sense. You know, sort of 2 follow-up questions from the ones before. You had mentioned that you have this structure in Louisiana where you're able to sequester the carbon. I just wanted to clarify, is that into a Class VI well? Just if you can give us a little bit of detail with respect to how that works, 'cause we've heard about a shortage of Class VI wells.
Sure. You know, today there are several Class VI wells operating in the U.S. You know, there are a couple that are post-injection and couple in the injection phase, in Illinois, and there are a couple in North Dakota as well. There are previous precedents in terms of taking this through the permitting process with the EPA. We will be applying for Class VI permits. We're well underway on the execution of those and the prep work for those. The EPA currently guides applicants to a 18 to 24 month application process there, and we're highly confident. Our team's been doing a lot of work on this for the last several years, as you heard Seifi mention.
Again, we will be probably hiring subcontractors that are experts in the oil field drilling services to help execute some of these for us as well. But we have access to pore space, which is a lot more of the hole in the ground, can handle a lot more than just our $4.5 billion Louisiana project, which is a large project which we're executing on. Again, when you're ready to inject into the wells is when you need that Class VI permit. So we're executing the project and its construction schedule as things stand today, and we're full speed ahead and highly confident of acquiring those permits.
Great. Just one other question. In your opening remarks, you talked about your proprietary technology and how you've sort of done it yourself and so forth. Are there any plans to license the technology and sell it to other companies? Is that a potential new business segment for you where you actually sell it? Or is this something that's gonna sit uniquely inside Air Products?
I think the technology that we employed, at our port, so the 2 facilities there, given its proprietary, we do have patents. At this point, we haven't really, you know, I think we appreciate the optionality of the question that you mentioned, but we haven't focused on it. I think at this point, we're having interesting conversations with our customers, and given we've got over 2 dozen assets on the Gulf Coast and others globally that potentially could be retrofitted, I think we're focused on those efforts at this point. There are other technologies, as you allude to, Shneur, you know, Dow, BASF, which have other amine technologies for sequestration, and those are things that we also look at.
You know, over the last 60 years, we've accumulated a ton of wealth of experience in the hydrogen business, skills, experiences, and a portfolio of technologies, right? I think what you'll see is, and with the Edmonton project and Louisiana projects, 2 clear examples that no 2 projects are alike, right? Depending on the geography, the regions we're in, the subsidies available to customers, the availability of resources and renewable attributes, I think we tend to create, you know, I'd say specific solutions to certain climate change and customer issues that we're trying to solve.
Great. Thank you.
Sid, I actually wanna kind of follow up on kinda some of that line of thinking. You talked about that, you know, you have a lot of existing gray hydrogen assets today. You wanna focus on, you know, addressing those. What's the limiting factor or really the catalyst for when you start to look at more of your existing assets and say, "Now's the right time to add carbon capture?" Is it the customer? Is it carbon sequestration? Where do you see that today, and how does that evolve?
Sure. You know, we've got, like I mentioned, we've got over 2 dozen assets, Josh. You know, some of those assets candidly may be at end of life and may not make sense in terms of what we sequester or what we retrofit. We do have a lot of assets which are fairly newer and where customers, you know, see the value in the blue hydrogen that some of those asset retrofits could provide them. Again, you know, this IRA has been a game changer for that space. The $85 of credit for each ton of CO2 has made those conversations a lot more interesting, and the opportunity is more compelling. You know, we're in a evaluation mode at this point, and, you know, when we are ready to make some announcements, we will.
You know, we've got other opportunities in Europe where they're looking to sequester carbon in the North Sea, in old depleted oil wells. Those are other opportunities that globally also have generated a lot of excitement with our customer base and us as well. You know, again, we've got the 4 and a half billion Louisiana project. You know, some of our assets in California, I think there are 2 parts of the equation there. I think there's a relative ease with which those assets could be retrofitted. You know, having access to pore space in California, I think most folks aren't as sanguine as they are in Louisiana or in the Gulf of Mexico, where those sites where there've been thousands of, you know, oil and gas wells that have been drilled, and there's no natural or induced seismicity, right?
It's one of the best sites in the U.S. where you could actually capture and sequester the carbon.
Okay. I don't know if there's an easy way to answer this, but if you look at your footprint today and, you know, the various schemes that are out there, Canada, North America, you know, what's evolving in Europe, I mean, what today is economic for you to capture, so what's in place today, kind of the, you know, everything lines up, how much of the carbon that's emitted today do you think you could potentially capture at an economic level?
You know, I think we, we measure everything against that 10% EBIT rule, right? Where for every dollar of capital, we own a minimum 10% return. I think, you know, we haven't really disclosed that to investors at this point, but I think most of the assets in the Gulf Coast, again, you know, it all comes down to proximity to geological pore space or the infrastructure and the pipeline access to get those carbon supercritical carbon dioxide to those sites, right? I think that's all part of our thought process and evaluation process currently. You know, candidly, assets that are closer to the pore space, you know, will have a lot more ease. At this point, I don't think we've peeled the onion further for investors.
I think we're looking at the entire portfolio and should be, you know, making an announcement, soon, as Seifi had mentioned to investors as well.
I guess maybe ask another way, is you have your third for thirty reduction. I guess how much of that, I guess, is that a gross reduction, or is that a reduction in, you know, per pound product or some framework like that? Cause you are adding obviously less carbon intensive production. I guess, should we use that as a framework to think about how much you guys would try to go after over the next 5 to 10 years?
No, I think that is a good framework. Candidly, our scope on emissions primarily are related to our HYCO franchise, right? You know, there's roughly $15 million in our scope on emissions, right? That's a huge target that we could, you know, sort of work on reducing. Our goals are third by thirty are our carbon intensity targets. They basically are $1 a ton of CO2 based on the energy equivalency of how much it costs to produce those. 'Cause I think that's a fair metric where you can't play with the denominator in terms of, you know, cutting headcount or cost optimizations or pass-throughs that can drive your revenues, which can be artificially inflated number.
Okay. I guess when you talk about Louisiana, you're pretty clear there's more perhaps capacity than what you have for the blue hydrogen plant you're visiting or you're building. I guess is that reserved for future Air Products capacity in your mind? Or is there something where, you know, Air Products opens that up to perhaps other companies to use that as an injection source over time?
I think at this point it's purely focused on Air Products assets, on new projects that we're working on, announced or developing in the retrofits. I think we probably could handle some more, but I think at this point, that's optionality, something that we keep in our back pocket. We're focused on our projects and executing and providing low carbon hydrogen for our customers. We see a lot of value in that today.
Okay. I guess if, I mean, if we think more broadly, I mean, the business obviously producing gases, transporting gases, you know, a big part of, majority of what you guys do today. I mean, what do you view as the scope for Air Products? I mean, I guess, is it you're producing hydrogen, you're selling hydrogen, that's a focus you wanna grow into? Is there any scenario where you'd say, "We have these pipelines, we have these networks, we have expertise moving things from point A to B," that you'd want to be involved in CO2 for sequestration versus CO2 for customer needs, which is what you're doing today?
No, I think we're purely focused on our low carbon hydrogen strategy. You know, if you think of our strategy today, it's built on our sustainability foundation, and our base business is one pillar of the strategy, and our low carbon blue and green hydrogen is the second pillar of the strategy. I think CCUS for us is an enabler of the blue hydrogen today.
Okay. I guess if I flip that question around the other way and look at it in terms of hydrogen markets today are involving a lot of new participants in it for, in various parts of that value chain, what's Air Products' role in that value chain, and where do you see you, Air Products or the gases companies historically having a competitive advantage there versus new entrants?
Great question, Josh. You know, look, Air Products was the first company that started the on-site business model, right? Today, roughly, 52% of our business is that on-site business model. You know, we've been in that hydrogen business for 60 years. As you mentioned, you know, today we're the largest producer of gray hydrogen at 9,000 tons per day. You know, we've got the largest global pipeline networks in the Gulf Coast and California, in Rotterdam, and we move those molecules today via pipeline and through our on-site business model. We also move it via truck in either a gaseous or a liquid form. We've got an outstanding record on reliability, efficiency, safety, and customer service, which our customers appreciate. What I'd say is we've got a 60-year head start on most new entrants into the business.
You know, people, you know, you've heard Seifi, you know, amusingly say that, you know, sometimes you have 3 guys and a dog and a truck that try to get into this business, right? There are significant barriers to entry for new entrants in this business: capital, safety and execution track record, a credibility. Candidly, certain of our industry incumbents have now jumped on our bandwagon and our strategy as well after being negative on the strategy for some time. You know, I think we continue to press our first mover advantage. We're backed by 80 years of operating history in the space. We've got the expertise, the skills, and a portfolio of technologies with real projects and access to pore space.
You know, we will have real low carbon blue molecules by 2024 in Canada, green molecules out of NEOM in 2026, and, you know, Louisiana by 2027. Look, candidly, where this low carbon hydrogen economy is headed, we're competitive and we'd love to win all projects, but you do need a lot more players adding to this, right, given where this market is potentially headed.
Sidd, maybe I can jump in with a few more questions here. I'm sure we wanna chat about clean ammonia as well too. When I sort of think about, you know, pre and post IRA, now we're at $85 a ton, are we in a position now where, I mean, for lack of a better word, are you effectively getting paid for the carbon? Is that sort of how the economics essentially works when you say that you're able to earn a 10% return? You know, there's the cost structure of capturing the carbon, transporting it, and sequestering it, then you taking that.
I mean, assuming that there's, you know, sequester points within, call it 50 miles of your facilities, is there any reason not to be doing it on your entire facility at this point? Could you potentially exceed your 30% target just by, you know, if the economics allow it? Just sort of wondering if you can sort of walk us through the steps.
Yeah. I think, great question, Shneur. Look, all these projects we've announced, right, are big mega scale projects. You know, our Edmonton project's $1.6 billion. NEOM's $1 billion.
Yep
... $8.5 billion at that point. You know, Louisiana's $4.5 billion. Our SAF project in California is $2.5 billion. These projects, once they come online, will literally be a step function change in our carbon intensity metrics, right? The existing fleet that we have, you know, several of those assets qualify for retrofits given your earlier comment of proximity to pore space, access to pipeline infrastructure, et cetera. Some assets may not get retrofitted given they may be end of life, and there could be other new exciting opportunities in our $100 billion backlog pipeline that Seifi often talks about. I think that's how we look at our overall global footprint and our projects. As it pertains to pricing, you know, I think our customers see a lot of value in the product today.
I think candidly, a lot of these subsidies were done to sort of provide economical benefits to the producers, and some of those would probably get passed to the customers as well to make that more viable. I think one thing which sometimes is often lost on investors is the seismic shift we're seeing in the investment landscape is purely driven by public policy today, right? All the compelling incentives they're providing. If you think of the last 150 years, you know, when we went from, say, coal, from wood to coal to oil, it was purely driven on the back of who had the most efficient and the cost-effective energy source, people pivoted. Today, you know, we can't compete with hydrocarbons toe-to-toe in terms of competitiveness. The IRA, the EU programs are helping in a large way.
A lot of this is driven by public policy pushing people into the low carbon space. Then, you know, we have, you know, investor conversations all the time where they're asking us about our ESG goals and what we are looking to do to accelerate that. All our customers in the steel space, the refining, the pet chem, mobility, you know, hydrogen as an energy substitute, their investor bases are pushing them and asking them the same questions. I think there's a collective push across companies, regions, countries in the world to get to a net zero target soon.
Maybe one final question before turning back to Josh. You mentioned your customers have their objectives as well too. I mean, are you effectively helping them facilitate their goals? That could potentially... I mean, you talked about a potential for premium pricing up in Alberta, but could that be something that sort of cascades throughout your entire organization and all your products kind of on a go-forward basis as, you know, your customers are attempting to achieve their own ESG related goals or carbon reduction related goals?
Absolutely. I think, you know, the IOL example of, with our Edmonton asset, you know, in addition to their carbon ESG goals as well, you know, the renewable diesel that they produce has a lot of value and subsidies that they get in western Canada as well as in California with the LCFS sort of regimes, right? SAF also gets a subsidy in the IRA. I think there's a value transfer across the chain, and we're all solving each other's ESG goals. It's a win-win situation for all involved.
Perfect. Thank you.
Yeah, Sid, I'd like to ask about some of the evolving European regulations. I think, I mean, obviously a lot of focus on the IRA, and I think we understand some of the benefits there. I guess, you know, with the introduction of the Net-Zero Industry Act in Europe, I mean, I know it's still evolving, and there's a meshwork of different frameworks to look at. Is there anything you'd highlight from that that is incremental or maybe changes how you've thought about investing in Europe? A lot of your, you know, mega projects have been obviously more North America, previously more Asia. How do you think about Europe now?
Sure. Maybe I'll spend 30 seconds on the IRA, and then we can compare and contrast that to Europe. Look, the IRA was a seismic shift, right? A true seminal moment in the U.S. It was a firm commitment to the energy transition and the critical role hydrogen plays. We've been on this strategy for the last several years, so this is great for us. If you think of Europe is in a actually very interesting dilemma at this point, right? Because most people didn't expect the U.S. would end up being the first nation to come and pass this landmark legislation. They're faced with the prospect where with their energy crisis as well, you know, thankfully Europe's coming through the energy crisis. They've had a milder winter, so, you know, thoughts are with them.
There is a significant prospect of a lot of people in Europe looking to move their operations globally, right? To the U.S. on the back of the support of U.S. IRA. The U.S. IRA was heavily skewed to the product producers or incentives for the producers like us. I think in Europe, look, we don't like to speculate on legislation. There have been certain drafts that have leaked out, and it's a balance between the 2 where they've got some incentives on the producer side, but it's more heavily, it's more skewed to the customer side, where you incentivize truck drivers, steel companies, chemical companies, power generation companies to all use the low hydrogen product. You know, Europe has been on this journey for a long time, right?
If you think of Germany, you know, picking them as an example, they have had some announcements in the recent past before the EU Green Industrial Plan, where they've got this program called H2 Global, which imports 10 million tons of green ammonia/hydrogen by 2030. They've got other incentives across Europe where they provide grants for capital investments in fuel cell vehicles and mobility or provide subsidies on the consumption side. You hear the Contract for Difference term used. They've also got programs where, you know, the RED II standard provides what we are familiar with in California as LCFS credits, equivalent credits in certain countries there on a $ per kg.
you know, just at a very high level, they've got this concept called a hydrogen bank and where they're looking to provide certain subsidies to low carbon fuel providers such as ourselves and others who import that product into Europe on this Contract for Difference sort of framework. They've also got this contract for carbon sort of a setup where the customer steel and other industrial applications are provided subsidies for low carbon fuel consumption as well. I think Europe's thinking about this. They're clearly focused. They're seeking, you know, opinions from all the various players in that space, and I think we are looking forward to some constructive legislation that comes to fruition soon there.
Yeah, I think, I mean, the Hydrogen Bank I thought was an interesting concept, I at least was interested to see some of the import perhaps mechanisms they had to support things. I mean, you guys are building the Neom facility, green hydrogen going to green ammonia that you're exporting. In the U.S. you have the blue hydrogen with potential for blue ammonia. I guess 2 things there is, one, you know, would imported green blue ammonia be something that could get a credit from the Hydrogen Bank initiative in Europe, do you think today? 2, along those lines, how do you think about, you know, shipping hydrogen versus ammonia in a clean form around the world? You know, where do you see more opportunity there?
Yeah, no, great question, Josh. Look, I think, again, I wouldn't wanna speculate on how it all plays out, but the H2Global program that was announced in Germany is a similar sort of a setup where they provide you a subsidy for importing. Hopefully they're thinking about similar frameworks for the existing legislation as well. I think to your point, you know, when Neom was announced in July of 2020, we'd mentioned that, you know, Europe was gonna be one of the potential markets. Since that, we've now started connecting the dots for investors where we've announced 3 port, you know, import green ammonia import terminals work that we're doing in Europe, right? One in Hamburg, where Seifi was with Minister Habeck, when that was announced in December last year.
We're doing the same in Rotterdam where we've got an existing pipeline network, so we could import the green ammonia, disassociate it. We can put into a pipeline to our existing customer base, or we've got the options of liquefying it and moving it by truck for other mobility applications, right? Similarly, the same in Immingham where it can service the entire UK's needs as well. You know, if you think about Germany and that H2 Global program, Josh, Neom, even if you assume a truck consumes 50 kgs of hydrogen per day, you know, that's 13,000 trucks that you need in Germany to fully load the asset. Last I checked, I think Germany has somewhere between 650,000 and 700,000 trucks plying on the roads in Germany today.
It's a drop in the ocean in terms of adoption, right? Then since we made the announcement, you know, in addition to the hydrogen for mobility applications, I think the green hydrogen industrial application, that opportunity set has gotten tremendously exciting for us, right? If you think of green steel and everything people are looking to do there, Germany produces between 40 and 50 million tons of steel today. That market globally is roughly 1.8, 1.9 billion tons. Assuming even $50 to $60 a kg of hydrogen needed for 1 ton of green steel, you know, Neom is entirely spoken for with just 1% or 10% of the molecules going to green steel in Germany, right? We're seeing a lot of pilot projects for those in Germany today.
You know, power consumption, you've heard of ammonia, green ammonia being blended into coal and other power generation applications. Germany has lost over 140 terawatt hours of power generation assets to its coal and nuke retirements, right? You know, Chancellor Scholz last week had made an announcement where they need 21 gigawatts of new hydrogen-based gas turbine technology. I think steel, petchem is refining, you know, the mobility, the energy substitute applications are just gonna be gigantic, not only in Germany, but just globally and we're excited for where this is headed.
Okay. No, thanks for that's it. I think we're actually at the 40 minutes here. We have a pretty busy schedule for the day. I wanna thank, you know, everyone from Air Products for joining and thank everyone that's on the line. I mean, if you have any questions on Air Products, Sid, Moon, Simon, all great about responding and getting back to you, or feel free to, you know, ask something to us, and we can try to help you or pass that along. I guess, Shneur, I don't know if I'll hand it over to you to maybe if you wanna wrap things up or lead to the next call here.
No, thank you everyone for joining. Sidd, thank you, great presentation. Really appreciate the candidness in your responses today. We will be continuing again in about 8 minutes at 8:50 A.M. with Enbridge. You know, thank you again to the Air Products team. You guys are of course welcome to continue participating in the conference. We'll take a pause here for another 7 minutes now. Thank you, everyone.
Sounds good. Thanks Josh and Shneur. Thanks a lot, investors, for your time.