PEM Fuel Cell Shipping Risk, More Sjo’s $120 M Order, 2 Hydrogen Vessels, and 15 Bunkering Projects (2021 to 2026)

The primary constraint on the adoption of hydrogen fuel cells in coastal shipping is the profound lack of port-side bunkering infrastructure, a risk that vessel orders like More Sjo’s $100-120 million investment in two newbuilds are designed to mitigate by creating bankable, long-term demand. While onboard propulsion technology is maturing, the economic viability and operational success of these early commercial-scale fleets depend entirely on the parallel, and currently lagging, development of a reliable green hydrogen supply chain. These initial vessel orders serve as a critical demand signal intended to catalyze investment in the production and port infrastructure necessary to create functional green shipping corridors.

Hydrogen Project Scale, More Sjo’s Shift from Pilots to Commercial Fleets

The maritime industry’s approach to hydrogen shifted after 2024 from small-scale, grant-funded pilot projects to the first commercial-scale asset financing for fleet renewal, transferring the primary execution risk from vessel technology to fuel infrastructure availability.

• Between 2021 and 2024, hydrogen adoption in shipping was characterized by small demonstration projects focused on technical validation. An example is the 75-passenger *MV Sea Change* ferry, which used a 360 k W fuel cell powertrain to prove operational viability but carried no commercial cargo and had a limited operational range.
• Starting in 2025, the strategy pivoted to commercial execution with orders for larger, revenue-generating assets. More Sjo’s order for two 5, 000 DWT cargo vessels and orders from operators like Samskip for container ships represent a fundamental belief that the technology is ready for commercial deployment, provided the fuel is available.
• This shift validates the increasing maturity of marine fuel cell systems, with Technology Readiness Levels (TRL) advancing to TRL 6-8 for megawatt-scale propulsion. However, it exposes the critical lag in port bunkering infrastructure, which remains at a pre-commercial TRL 4-6 and is now the primary bottleneck to wider adoption.
• Other operators like the MSC Group and GMI Rederi are also developing hydrogen-powered vessels, indicating a broader industry trend toward exploring and committing to this fuel pathway.

$120 M More Sjo Investment, De-Risking Hydrogen CAPEX with Public Subsidies

Early commercial investments in hydrogen vessels are structured to absorb a significant “green premium” on capital expenditure, with operators leveraging public subsidies and policy incentives to de-risk the initial asset purchase ahead of achieving operational cost parity.

• The estimated $50-60 million cost per vessel for More Sjo’s order is substantially higher than a conventional ship, a premium driven by the high cost of multi-megawatt fuel cell systems and specialized cryogenic or compressed hydrogen storage tanks.
• This upfront cost barrier is being mitigated by government support. For example, the Netherlands opened a €33.6 million clean shipping subsidy round in 2026, building on a previous round that allocated €40 million specifically for hydrogen-powered vessels, directly enabling investments by companies like Samskip.
• These investments are classified as Project Equity / Asset Financing, not venture capital. The goal is to build and own revenue-generating assets that comply with future regulations like the EU’s Fuel EU Maritime initiative, which mandates progressive cuts in the GHG intensity of marine fuels starting in 2025.
• By committing its own capital, More Sjo provides a bankable demand signal to potential hydrogen producers, a crucial step in financing new production projects that currently face a shortage of confirmed long-term offtakers.

European Regulatory Drivers, More Sjo’s Strategy for Green Corridors

Europe, particularly Norway and the Netherlands, has become the global center for hydrogen shipping adoption due to a potent combination of stringent environmental regulations, substantial public funding, and national strategies aimed at developing a hydrogen economy.

• Activity before 2024 was geographically diffuse, with small research projects occurring globally. From 2025 onward, commercial activity has concentrated in Northern Europe, where regulatory pressure from the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) and Fuel EU Maritime creates a clear business case for decarbonization.
• Norway is leveraging its national strategy to build a hydrogen economy to support projects like More Sjo’s. The goal is to establish “green shipping corridors” along its extensive coastline, creating localized, self-sustaining ecosystems of hydrogen production, bunkering, and consumption.
• The Netherlands is using direct subsidies to stimulate demand, while ports like Rotterdam are actively planning for large-scale hydrogen import and bunkering infrastructure, positioning the region as a future hub for zero-emission shipping.
• This geographic focus is a deliberate strategy. By concentrating investment and activity along fixed, high-traffic coastal routes, operators and governments can tackle the infrastructure challenge in a manageable, phased approach rather than attempting a global rollout.

Technology Readiness, More Sjo’s Bet on Fuel Cells Over Infrastructure

The core technological challenge for hydrogen shipping has pivoted from the viability of the vessel to the availability of the fuel, as onboard systems are rapidly advancing toward commercial maturity while the essential bunkering infrastructure remains largely conceptual.

• Between 2021 and 2024, the primary focus was on adapting and scaling fuel cell technology for the harsh marine environment. Projects focused on marinizing systems, proving durability, and achieving the necessary power output for propulsion.
• By 2025, the technology for the vessel itself is considered largely de-risked. Marine proton-exchange membrane (PEM) fuel cells and solid oxide fuel cells (SOFC) are at TRL 6-8, and onboard storage for liquid or compressed hydrogen is at TRL 7-9. The integration of these systems is a complex engineering task but no longer a fundamental research problem.
• The critical gap is the bunkering infrastructure, which lags at TRL 4-6. There are currently no large-scale, dedicated hydrogen bunkering facilities at major ports, creating a classic chicken-and-egg dilemma that vessel orders like More Sjo’s are intended to break.
• More Sjo’s investment is therefore a calculated decision that the technology onboard the ship is sound, and that committing to vessel construction is the necessary catalyst to force the development of the shoreside supply chain.

SWOT Analysis, More Sjo’s Hydrogen Vessel Investment Strategy

More Sjo’s investment establishes it as a first mover in zero-emission coastal shipping, a position that offers significant competitive advantages but also exposes the company to substantial infrastructure and fuel cost risks.

Table: SWOT Analysis for More Sjo’s Hydrogen Vessel Investment

Scenario Modeling, More Sjo’s Path to a 2026 Hydrogen Offtake Agreement

The single most critical catalyst for validating More Sjo’s strategy and unlocking further investment in hydrogen shipping will be the signing of a long-term green hydrogen offtake agreement before the vessels are delivered.

• If this happens: More Sjo announces a long-term (10-15 year) offtake agreement with a green hydrogen producer to supply fuel at a key port on its route. This contract would provide the revenue certainty needed for a producer to reach a final investment decision (FID) on a new electrolyzer plant.
• Watch this: Following the offtake agreement, watch for an FID on a dedicated hydrogen production and bunkering facility at a specific port (e.g., Port of Bergen). This would be the first concrete evidence of the supply chain being built out to meet the new demand.
• These could be happening: Competitors in the short-sea shipping market, having seen the de-risking of both the vessel and fuel supply, will likely accelerate their own fleet renewal plans. Announcements of similar hydrogen vessel orders from other regional operators within 12-18 months would signal that a market-wide tipping point has been reached. Companies like Viking and MOL, who are also exploring fuel cell applications, would be key to watch.

The questions your competitors are already asking

This report covers one angle of the commercialization of hydrogen-powered coastal shipping. The questions that matter most depend on your work.

• More Sjo investments and funding. Is the $100-120M newbuild order on track to catalyze investment in port-side bunkering infrastructure?
• What is the outlook for green hydrogen bunkering deployment in coastal shipping corridors by 2026?
• Which coastal shipping operators, like More Sjo and Samskip, are gaining ground by financing commercial-scale hydrogen vessels?

This report does not answer these. Enki Brief Pro does.

Your question, your angle, your framework. SWOT, PESTL, scenario modelling. The same niche depth, built around the decision your work actually depends on.

Run your first brief in Enki Brief Pro