The Netherlands is undergoing a major energy transition, aiming to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 55 percent by 2030 and to reach full climate neutrality by 2050. Hydrogen is expected to play a key role in this transition, particularly in industrial sectors where electrification is technically challenging or economically unviable. In support of this goal, the Dutch government is investing in large-scale hydrogen production and the phased development of a national hydrogen backbone, led by HyNetwork Services. This network will connect five major industrial clusters by 2033. However, it does not extend to the many medium-sized industrial sites dispersed across the country, collectively referred to as Cluster 6. These firms, active in energy-intensive sectors such as food processing, chemicals, glass, and metals, face significant barriers to adopting hydrogen, including high connection costs and limited infrastructure access. Additionally, many of these companies have high energy demands and rely on processes that are difficult to electrify. Combined with widespread congestion on the electricity grid, these factors severely limit their ability to transition away from fossil fuels, leaving few viable pathways for decarbonization.

This thesis explores the coordination challenge that arises from this situation. Medium-sized firms cannot commit to hydrogen without reliable infrastructure, while infrastructure providers are reluctant to invest without visible, concentrated demand. To examine how different planning strategies can address this deadlock, the thesis develops an agent-based model that simulates interactions between a central infrastructure planner and spatially distributed industrial users. The planner combines the roles of Hydrogen Distribution Network Operator and Distribution System Operator and responds to firm-level adoption decisions under real-world constraints such as investment cycles, capacity limitations, and policy changes. The model evaluates three rollout strategies: a reactive approach in which infrastructure follows demand, a proactive approach in which infrastructure anticipates demand, and a delay scenario in which no infrastructure is built. Outcomes are assessed using a Societal Net Present Value metric that captures financial costs, emissions reductions, and avoided grid reinforcements.

The simulation results show that proactive infrastructure rollout significantly improves hydrogen adoption and societal outcomes. Even modest anticipatory investments, when timed to align with firms’ decision-making cycles, help overcome coordination failures, accelerate emissions reductions, and increase infrastructure efficiency. In contrast, reactive strategies lead to fragmented, delayed development and fail to unlock widespread decarbonization. The findings also highlight the importance of policy design: hydrogen subsidies are most effective when paired with visible infrastructure, while uncoordinated electricity subsidies can fragment adoption and reduce system coherence.

The thesis concludes that enabling the hydrogen transition for medium-sized industry requires a shift from reactive to anticipatory planning. This requires urgently defining the role and responsibilities of future Hydrogen Distribution Network Operators (HDNOs), along with granting them a clear mandate to invest ahead of demand. Cost recovery mechanisms and supportive regulatory frameworks must enable timely, coordinated rollout. Only by aligning infrastructure deployment with the decarbonization timelines of medium-sized industry can regions like Cluster 6 be fully integrated into the energy transition and contribute meaningfully to national climate targets.

Hydrogen is becoming increasingly integral to global energy transition strategies, especially in sectors difficult to electrify. In the Netherlands, industrial clusters are expected to be key centers for sustainable hydrogen supply and demand. However, smaller industries outside the main clusters (Cluster 6) face significant challenges due to their distance from major demand points and the complexities of integrating hydrogen into their operations. They struggle with the high initial investment costs for on-site hydrogen generation, limited access to decarbonization subsidies, and the technical challenges posed by a congested electricity grid. The lower priority given to these regions in the hydrogen roll-out plan exacerbates the uncertainty and hesitancy among Cluster 6 industries, threatening the efficient development of regional hydrogen infrastructure and creating a risk of underutilization. The research employs a modeling approach and agent-based simulation to analyze the potential for collective action to overcome technical, economic, and institutional limitations, facilitating hydrogen production and consumption among smaller, dispersed industries. This approach allows for comparative analysis of emergent system behavior under different organizing principles, agent interactions, and government policy interventions. The simulation results highlight that collective investment is key to successful hydrogen transitions, with unified strategies leading to quicker and more effective outcomes. When driven by individual efforts instead of collective action, transitions tend to face delays and result with less sector inclusion. In regions with more hydrogen-dependent companies, contribution of collective action grows exponentially, with primary off-takers initiating the shift. However, relaxing subsidy criteria in such regional settings can weaken regional cooperation and slow progress. Therefore, designing region-specific policies that promote collaboration and encouraging communication and inclusiveness among companies can help achieve a smoother and more unified regional shift to hydrogen. Future research should address the limitations of the current study by incorporating more detailed cost-benefit analyses, exploring alternative hydrogen supply and transportation methods, and considering a broader range of factors influencing industrial decisions on hydrogen adoption.