My central judgement is that this question is most likely resolved by FES 2026, rather than by some other NESO publication. NESO says the FES annual cycle starts and ends with publication in July; FES 2025 was launched on 15 July 2025; FES 2024 is a July 2024 report; and FES 2021 was published on 12 July 2021. By contrast, NESO’s SSEP page says the draft SSEP and its environmental report go to consultation only in early 2027, so SSEP is unlikely to generate an eligible new 2050 GB hydrogen-to-power number inside the 22 May 2026 to 11 August 2026 window. (neso.energy)

I still leave a meaningful probability on a 0 GW resolution, because the question requires newly released or newly versioned eligible material in a fairly tight window, and if no such NESO source provides a resolvable 2050 GB hydrogen-to-power value then the market resolves to 0. NESO’s OSR 2026 page also says that year’s operability work uses CP30 and FES 2025 analysis and data as its baseline, which reinforces the idea that the main authoritative whole-system summer update cadence is still tied to FES rather than to some separate 2050 hydrogen publication. I therefore put about a 13% chance on the ‘no eligible resolvable source’ branch and about an 87% chance on an eligible publication, mostly FES 2026. (neso.energy)

For the value conditional on release, FES 2025 is the best anchor. NESO reports 2050 low-carbon dispatchable power capacities of 48.3 GW, 54.2 GW and 55.2 GW across Holistic Transition, Electric Engagement and Hydrogen Evolution. NESO also says in its FES 2025 changes document that low-carbon dispatchable power consists of hydrogen-to-power plus gas with CCS; that hydrogen-to-power accounted for 53% of 2050 low-carbon-dispatchable capacity on average in FES 2025, down from 68% in FES 2024; and that the total 2050 low-carbon-dispatchable range narrowed to 48-55 GW in FES 2025. A simple calculation from those figures implies an average FES 2025 hydrogen-to-power capacity of about 27.9 GW, which I use as the main baseline for a 2026 median-across-pathways value. (neso.energy)

I lean only slightly below/around that baseline for 2026 rather than expecting a major move. The same FES 2025 changes document says the 2035 hydrogen-to-power range was cut sharply from 4-18 GW in FES 2024 to 1-7 GW in FES 2025 because research and stakeholder engagement suggested the earlier pace was too challenging. That pushes me away from a big upward revision in 2026. But FES 2025 still gives hydrogen a major long-run role: the main report says Hydrogen Evolution has high levels of hydrogen dispatchable power plants, and the report/foreword note ongoing policy support for low-carbon hydrogen, CCS and development of an H2P business model. Putting those together, my conditional distribution is centered in the high 20s, with most probability mass roughly in the 22-33 GW region and a modest downside skew from further realism on hydrogen infrastructure and build-out constraints. Combining that with the 13% zero branch gives my final forecast. (neso.energy)

The first question is whether any eligible NESO material will appear in time. NESO’s own FES participation page says the FES process is annual and “starts and ends with the publication of the scenarios in July,” and the current FES page shows FES 2025 launch events on 15 and 17 July 2025. That makes an eligible July 2026 release inside the 22 May-11 August 2026 window more likely than not, so I put only a modest probability on the market resolving to 0 GW because no eligible/resolvable source appears. (neso.energy)

For the level itself, the best anchor is FES 2025. NESO says that, relative to FES 2024, the assumed pace of hydrogen-to-power deployment in 2035 was cut because stakeholder feedback suggested the earlier pace would be challenging, but that in 2050 hydrogen-to-power still made up 53% of low-carbon dispatchable power on average in FES 2025. The main FES 2025 report gives total 2050 low-carbon dispatchable capacities of 48.3, 54.2 and 55.2 GW in the three net-zero pathways; multiplying their average by 53% gives about 27.86 GW average hydrogen-to-power capacity across those three pathways. (neso.energy)

That average is strikingly similar to FES 2024. NESO says hydrogen-to-power was 68% of 2050 low-carbon dispatchable capacity on average in FES 2024, and FES 2024’s total low-carbon dispatchable capacities in the three net-zero pathways were 29, 37 and 56 GW. That implies about 27.65 GW average hydrogen-to-power capacity in FES 2024. So the recent evidence is not “hydrogen-to-power collapsing”; it is more “hydrogen share down, total dispatchable need up, leaving the absolute 2050 H2-to-power average roughly flat around 28 GW.” (neso.energy)

The resolution rule, though, uses the selected source’s explicit value or the median across qualifying scenarios/pathways, and it includes non-net-zero pathways while excluding materially different source types like 10-year forecasts. That pushes me below the ~28 GW net-zero-pathway average, because if FES 2026 again includes three net-zero pathways plus a lower-hydrogen non-net-zero pathway, the resolved median would likely sit in the mid-20s rather than at the net-zero average. I therefore center the forecast near 26 GW. Downside risk comes from NESO’s explicit warning that hydrogen-to-power scaling is challenging; upside risk comes from continuing security-of-supply pressure for dispatchable low-carbon capacity, the developing H2P support model NESO references, and evidence from the reformed connection pipeline that low-carbon dispatchable capacity is being planned rather than abandoned. (neso.energy)

My resulting distribution has roughly a 7% chance on 0 GW, most of the remaining mass between about 22 and 31 GW, an implied median around 26.2 GW, and a small right tail above 35 GW. In words: I expect an eligible NESO July 2026 release to appear, and I expect it to keep 2050 hydrogen-to-power in the same broad neighborhood as recent FES work, but with the resolved figure pulled down somewhat by the market’s median-across-pathways rule rather than landing exactly on the net-zero-pathway average. (neso.energy)

My forecast is bimodal. I put a substantial probability on 0 GW because there may simply be no eligible NESO public material in the window that gives a resolvable 2050 GB hydrogen-to-power figure. But if such material does appear, I expect the value to land mostly in the high teens to low 20s GW. In my final distribution, the unconditional median is 15 GW, the mean is about 11.5 GW, and the conditional median given a non-zero outcome is about 20 GW.

The first thing I looked at was the publication base rate. NESO’s current FES page shows FES 2025 as the latest main publication and notes launch events on 15 July 2025 and 17 July 2025. FES 2024 was also a July 2024 publication. So a summer release is plausible. But NESO’s published 2025 methodology says FES is moving to a three-yearly cycle for major updates, with only possible annual minor updates if NESO decides a significant change has occurred. That makes a summer-2026 FES-style publication possible, but not something I can treat as routine. (neso.energy)

The strongest alternative route to resolution is SSEP-related material. NESO says the final SSEP has moved to Autumn 2027, with the draft SSEP public consultation in early 2027, but also says pathway options will be submitted to the Secretary of State in summer 2026. NESO’s SSEP page says transparency updates will be made available and updated regularly, and the March 2026 transparency update already discusses how NESO will present zones and capacity ranges for technologies in the final SSEP. The same update explicitly includes Hydrogen Power in the policy considerations, and the January 2026 SSEP technical webinar slides say the summer-2026 Pathway Options Report will represent 4-6 appraised pathway options. (neso.energy)

Those SSEP materials also tell us something about likely H2P content if a public number does appear. The webinar slides say early modelling finds that gas and/or hydrogen support a renewables-dominated system, and that if gas capacity is restricted then hydrogen-to-power is built as an alternative, alongside more hydrogen electrolysers, storage, and transmission. They also say hydrogen assets are among the technologies most sensitive to other system choices. That makes me think any published H2P figure is likely to depend heavily on whether the source is a single chosen pathway or a median across several options. (neso.energy)

Why not assign an even higher probability to a non-zero resolution? Because the clearly scheduled summer-2026 public strategic-planning items I can verify besides SSEP are mainly methodological: NESO says the final Electricity Transmission Design Principles will be published in early summer 2026, and the RESP methodology material says the final RESP methodology is expected in summer 2026. Those are not obvious vehicles for an explicit 2050 GB H2P total. Combined with the fact that the public draft SSEP is only due in early 2027, this keeps the “no resolvable public source by 11 August 2026” path very live. (neso.energy)

For the value itself, the best anchor is the recent FES history. In FES 2024, NESO explicitly said Hydrogen Evolution reaches 45 GW of hydrogen turbine capacity in 2050, and said much of low-carbon dispatchable growth is attributed to the distribution level, particularly hydrogen peaking plants. In FES 2025, NESO no longer gives the split so cleanly in the main table; instead it reports combined gas/CCS + hydrogen dispatchable capacity of 48.3-55.2 GW across the three net-zero pathways in 2050. At the same time, FES 2025 says the near-to-medium-term availability of low-carbon dispatchable power is likely to come from gas power stations with CCS, with large-scale dispatchable hydrogen facing infrastructure scaling challenges. My inference is that, if NESO publishes a scenario set in summer 2026 and the market resolves using the median across pathways, the implied H2P number is more likely to sit in the teens or 20s GW than at the very hydrogen-heavy upper end represented by the 2024 Hydrogen Evolution pathway. (neso.energy)

Putting that together, I assign roughly 40% probability to the question resolving at 0 GW through lack of eligible resolvable material. Conditional on a non-zero resolution, I center the mass around 18-24 GW, with a smaller tail into the upper 20s/low 30s and only a thin tail above 35 GW. The thin right tail reflects the possibility of a more hydrogen-forward single pathway or source; the large left mass reflects publication risk rather than disbelief in H2P as a technology. Overall, my modal non-zero outcomes are around 18, 20, and 22 GW.

I put the highest probability on an eligible annual NESO pathways publication appearing before 11 August 2026 and resolving to a value in the low 20s GW. My point estimate is 20.8 GW. (neso.energy)

The first step is publication risk, because the market resolves to 0 GW if no eligible public NESO material provides a resolvable 2050 GB hydrogen-to-power number. The annual FES release has usually landed in July: 23 July 2020, 12 July 2021, 10 July 2023, and 15 July 2025. NESO also says that, as it transitions, it will produce a Future Energy Pathways data book annually. That makes a qualifying release by 11 August 2026 more likely than not; I assign about 9% to the 0 GW resolution from no qualifying or non-resolvable public source. (neso.energy)

I do not expect summer-2026 SSEP work to be the likeliest resolving source. NESO said SSEP pathway options would be submitted to the Secretary of State in summer 2026, but the public consultation on the draft SSEP is only planned for early 2027. So the most likely authoritative public source in this market window is the annual FES/FEP-style publication rather than SSEP consultation material. (neso.energy)

For the level itself, FES 2025 is the best anchor. NESO’s 2025 Pathway Insights put 2050 low-carbon dispatchable power at 48.3 GW in Holistic Transition, 54.2 GW in Electric Engagement, and 55.2 GW in Hydrogen Evolution. The FES 2025 changes paper then says hydrogen-to-power makes up 53% of low-carbon dispatchable power capacity on average in 2050. Using those two facts together implies about 27.9 GW average hydrogen-to-power capacity across the three net-zero pathways. The same changes paper also says NESO reduced 2035 hydrogen-to-power from 4-18 GW in FES 2024 to 1-7 GW in FES 2025 because the earlier pace looked challenging, which is evidence that NESO had become more cautious on the technology. (neso.energy)

FES 2024 is a useful comparison. NESO said 2050 low-carbon dispatchable power reached 29 GW in Holistic Transition, 37 GW in Electric Engagement, and 56 GW in Hydrogen Evolution, and specifically that Hydrogen Evolution was made up of 11 GW gas CCS plus 45 GW hydrogen turbine capacity. NESO also said hydrogen represented 68% of low-carbon dispatchable capacity on average in 2050 in FES 2024. That implies an average hydrogen-to-power capacity of about 27.7 GW in FES 2024, very close to the 2025 implied average. So even though FES 2025 shifted away from hydrogen on a share basis, the absolute average hydrogen-to-power anchor barely moved because total dispatchable capacity rose sharply. (neso.energy)

That stable average is not the same as the resolving number here, because the market uses the median across qualifying scenarios. In FES 2025 tables, NESO still shows Holistic Transition, Electric Engagement, Hydrogen Evolution, Falling Behind, and a separate 10 Year Forecast. Under this market’s rules, the 10 Year Forecast would be excluded, while Falling Behind would likely still count if 2026 uses the same structure. That means the resolved value would probably be the average of the two middle scenario values; if Falling Behind remains the lowest and Hydrogen Evolution the highest, that is effectively the average of Holistic Transition and Electric Engagement. This is an inference from the 2025 table structure plus the market rules, not something NESO states directly. (neso.energy)

Given the 2024-2025 evidence, my base case is that the three-pathway average hydrogen-to-power capacity remains around the high-20s GW, while Hydrogen Evolution stays much higher than the other pathways because it is the hydrogen-heavy case. If the three-pathway average is roughly 28 GW and Hydrogen Evolution is still in roughly the low-40s GW, then Holistic Transition plus Electric Engagement together naturally sit around the high-30s to low-40s GW, putting their average—and thus the likely market-resolving median if Falling Behind is included—around 19 to 22 GW. I center slightly above the midpoint of that band, at 20.8 GW. (neso.energy)

I keep a meaningful downside tail because NESO explicitly cited scaling challenges for hydrogen-to-power in FES 2025, and because FES 2025 also leaned more toward gas CCS within low-carbon dispatchable power. I keep an upside tail because NESO still sees hydrogen-to-power as part of the long-run flexibility mix, and the overall need for firm low-carbon dispatchable capacity in 2050 is large in the current pathways. That produces the CDF shape I coded: about 9% mass below 10 GW from the 0-GW resolution route, most non-zero mass concentrated from roughly 16 to 27 GW, and a thinner upside tail into the low 30s. (neso.energy)

The first and biggest branch is publication risk. NESO says its FES process runs on an annual cycle that starts and ends with publication in July, which makes a July 2026 FES/FEP-style release the dominant path inside the 22 May to 11 Aug 2026 window. FES 2025 followed that July pattern. (neso.energy)

Other strategic-planning products look less likely to set resolution. NESO says the final Strategic Spatial Energy Plan was pushed back to Autumn 2027, with pathway options submitted to the Secretary of State in summer 2026 and public consultation only in early 2027; that makes a public SSEP 2050 source during this question window unlikely. NESO also says the refresh of the second transitional CSNP will be delivered by 30 June 2026, so I allow some chance of another eligible source, but this looks less likely than the annual FES release to provide the decisive 2050 GB hydrogen-to-power figure. This is an inference from the product timelines and descriptions. (neso.energy)

If a 2026 FES/FEP-type release does arrive, it is likely to be resolvable rather than purely narrative. NESO’s FES methodology says datasets are published alongside the report via the website and machine-readable data portal, and the current ES1 electricity-supply table already exposes technology-level Capacity fields by pathway, category, type and subtype out to 2050. That makes it plausible that a newly released 2026 data book or portal table will explicitly carry hydrogen-to-power capacity. (neso.energy)

For the level itself, the best anchor is FES 2025. In Table 32, NESO gives 2050 low-carbon-dispatchable-power capacity of 48.3 GW in Holistic Transition, 54.2 GW in Electric Engagement, 55.2 GW in Hydrogen Evolution, and 16.8 GW in Falling Behind. Separately, NESO’s Changes since FES 2024 document says hydrogen-to-power made up an average 53% of 2050 low-carbon-dispatchable capacity in FES 2025, down from 68% in FES 2024, while the overall 2050 low-carbon-dispatchable range narrowed to 48-55 GW in FES 2025. Multiplying 53% by the average of the three net-zero-pathway totals gives a rough 2050 hydrogen-to-power average near 27.9 GW, so the long-run hydrogen-to-power assumption still looks like high-20s GW rather than something near zero. (neso.energy)

The bearish counterpoint is that NESO says 2035 hydrogen-to-power capacities were cut materially in FES 2025, from 4-18 GW in FES 2024 to 1-7 GW in FES 2025, because the FES 2024 pace looked challenging. That suggests NESO became more cautious about hydrogen-to-power buildout, even while keeping sizeable 2050 capacity. So my central expectation for a 2026 resolved value is not above the 2025 rough average; it is a bit lower, in the mid-20s, reflecting continued skepticism on near- and medium-term deliverability plus the fact that the question’s resolution median includes non-net-zero pathways if a scenario set is published. (neso.energy)

Putting that together, I assign about a 10% chance that no eligible public NESO material yields a resolvable 2050 GB hydrogen-to-power value by 11 Aug 2026, which would resolve to 0 GW. The remaining 90% I place on a positive release, concentrated mostly around a FES-style scenario median in the mid-20s GW, with a smaller upper tail into the high-20s and low-30s if the decisive source is a more central single-pathway assumption or if 2026 analysis modestly re-expands hydrogen’s role.

I encoded that as a mixture with 10% point mass at 0 GW, 72% on a main positive component centered at 24.4 GW, and 18% on an upside component centered at 28.8 GW. That gives an overall median in the mid-20s while keeping some probability above 30 GW without making it the base case.

What 2050 hydrogen-to-power capacity will NESO assume in material newly released between 22 May and 11 Aug 2026?

• My most likely prediction for the 2050 hydrogen-to-power capacity assumed by NESO is 26.50 GW, with a 50% chance of falling between 24.00 and 28.75 GW.
• This forecast is heavily anchored in the FES 2025 (Pathway to Net Zero) data, which estimated total low-carbon dispatchable power at 48-55 GW, with hydrogen accounting for a 53% share.
• Recent trends show a downward revision in hydrogen-to-power expectations; for instance, 2035 projections were significantly reduced in the last reporting cycle.
• There is a material risk (approx. 15%) that the question resolves to 0 GW if NESO does not release the updated Future Energy Pathways (FEP) before the August 11, 2026, deadline.
• The 2026 reporting cycle is expected to continue the transition from the “Future Energy Scenarios” (FES) to the “Future Energy Pathways” (FEP) framework under the newly formed NESO.
• Gas with Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) remains the primary competitor for hydrogen in NESO’s dispatchable power mix, currently holding a higher generation share.

Key figures

Historical context

Historically, long-term energy projections in Great Britain were managed by National Grid ESO through the annual Future Energy Scenarios (FES). On October 1, 2024, the National Energy System Operator (NESO) was established as a government-owned corporation to take over these responsibilities. The FES reports have traditionally been released in July, providing pathways to 2050. In the FES 2024 cycle, hydrogen-to-power was seen as a dominant force in dispatchable power. However, the FES 2025 update (released July 2025) signaled a shift, narrowing the total dispatchable power range and reducing hydrogen’s expected share. For example, the 2035 projection for hydrogen-to-power was reduced by over 60% in one year. This reflects a maturing understanding of the infrastructure challenges associated with hydrogen transport and storage compared to more established technologies like gas CCS.

Tailwinds

• The UK’s commitment to a 2035 milestone of 81% emissions reduction supports long-term growth in hydrogen capacity.
• Establishment of the National Wealth Fund (2024) to catalyze green transition investments.
• Ongoing development of the HyNet cluster and other hydrogen infrastructure projects (e.g., Barrow Green Hydrogen FID in May 2026).
• Government targets for 10 GW of low-carbon hydrogen production by 2030, which may pressure system operators to increase power-side assumptions.

Headwinds

• Recent downward revision of 2035 hydrogen-to-power capacity targets by NESO (from 4-18 GW to 1-7 GW).
• Hydrogen’s share of low-carbon dispatchable power (LCDP) decreased from 68% in FES 2024 to 53% in FES 2025.
• Continued prioritization of Gas with Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) as a competing dispatchable power technology.
• Risks of publication delays for the 2026 Future Energy Pathways beyond the August 11 deadline.

Detailed reasoning

The forecast for Great Britain’s 2050 hydrogen-to-power (H2P) capacity is primarily anchored in the National Energy System Operator’s (NESO) most recent “Future Energy Scenarios” (FES) 2025. In that cycle, NESO projected total Low Carbon Dispatchable Power (LCDP) to reach between 48 GW and 55 GW by 2050. Within this category, hydrogen-to-power was assigned an average share of 53%. Mathematically, this implies a capacity range of approximately 25.4 GW to 29.2 GW. I have centered the most likely prediction at 26.5 GW, which aligns with the median of these previous pathway assumptions.

Weighting for this forecast considers three distinct scenarios. The first and most likely scenario (approx. 65-70% weight) assumes that the 2026 Future Energy Pathways (FEP) will be released within the specified window (mid-July to early August) and will maintain strategic continuity with the 2025 data. The 50% HDI of 24.00 to 28.75 GW reflects minor adjustments in scenario modeling or rounding that typically occur between annual reporting cycles.

The second scenario (approx. 15-20% weight) accounts for a potential downward revision. Historically, hydrogen-to-power projections have shown volatility. Between FES 2024 and FES 2025, the 2035 H2P capacity targets were slashed from a range of 4–18 GW down to just 1–7 GW. Furthermore, hydrogen’s share of the 2050 LCDP mix fell from 68% to 53% in the same period. If NESO continues to favor Gas with Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) over hydrogen due to cost or infrastructure delays, the 2050 value could shift toward the 18–22 GW range.

The third scenario is a “Zero Resolution” risk (approx. 10-15% weight). The question’s specific criteria state that if no eligible material is released between May 22 and August 11, 2026, the value resolves to 0 GW. While NESO typically releases FES/FEP material in July, recent institutional transitions (from National Grid ESO to NESO) and shifts in the Strategic Spatial Energy Plan (SSEP) timelines could cause a delay beyond the August 11 cutoff. This tail risk pulls the mean lower but does not change the most likely value of 26.5 GW, assuming a timely release occurs. I have largely discounted higher-end projections (above 30 GW) because the current trend in UK planning documents emphasizes a more cautious scaling of hydrogen for power generation compared to previous years.

Key uncertainties

• The exact release date of the 2026 Future Energy Pathways (FEP) is not yet confirmed; a delay beyond August 11 results in a 0 GW resolution.
• Possible methodology shifts in how NESO calculates “nameplate capacity” vs “de-rated capacity” in new pathways.
• Changes in the Strategic Spatial Energy Plan (SSEP) could alter regional hydrogen-to-power allocations that sum to the GB total.
• Potential political shifts in hydrogen strategy following government updates or industrial strategy reviews in 2025-2026.

Conclusion

• Decision-makers should treat 26.5 GW as the baseline for 2050 hydrogen-to-power capacity, while monitoring for a possible “step-down” revision toward 20 GW.
• The primary risk to the forecast is the “Zero Resolution” clause; if NESO delays its summer publication beyond August 11, the official value for this specific period will be 0 GW regardless of long-term intent.

Question: what will NESO’s 2026 FES/FEP-style material report for 2050 GB hydrogen-to-power (H2P) installed/nameplate capacity? The teams agree the main resolution mechanic is whether NESO publishes or version-updates a 2026 workbook/data table before 11 Aug 2026 (historically likely in July); if no eligible source provides a value the question resolves to 0 GW, so a small but non-negligible probability is assigned to that fallback. Conditional on an eligible release, all forecasters anchor on FES 2025, which reduced H2P versus FES 2024 but still left a substantial share of “low‑carbon dispatchable” capacity, implying a central estimate in the low‑to‑mid 20s GW (roughly 22–25 GW, teams center ~24 GW). Key drivers pulling in opposite directions are improved UK policy/design signals for an H2P business model (supporting upside) versus hydrogen transport/storage and deliverability constraints and possible competition from gas+CCS (limiting upside and producing downside scenarios). Forecasters therefore place most mass around the mid‑20s, with a smaller probability of values below ~10 GW (including the 0 GW fallback) and an open upper tail above ~35 GW if NESO reverted to a more hydrogen‑heavy pathway.

Forecast and Reasoning

Forecast: Probability distribution:

• 5.00% chance of value below 3.8
• 10.00% chance of value below 7.4
• 20.00% chance of value below 12.5
• 30.00% chance of value below 16.0
• 40.00% chance of value below 19.0
• 50.00% chance of value below 22.2
• 60.00% chance of value below 25.2
• 70.00% chance of value below 28.2
• 80.00% chance of value below 31.2
• 90.00% chance of value below 34.5
• 95.00% chance of value below 38.8

Forecast Reasoning

Key driver is whether NESO releases (or versions) an eligible, authoritative document in the 22 May–11 Aug 2026 window that contains a resolvable 2050 GB hydrogen-to-power installed capacity number. The main plausible candidates are (a) a 2026 Future Energy Scenarios-type release (if the annual cadence continues) and/or (b) Strategic Spatial Energy Plan (SSEP)-related publications. A material risk is that nothing eligible in-window contains an explicit (or summable regional) 2050 GB hydrogen-to-power capacity figure; in that case the question resolves to 0 GW, i.e., well below the 10 GW lower bound.

Conditional on there being an eligible resolvable publication, recent NESO scenario work (as summarized by the team) suggests hydrogen-to-power in 2050 is substantial but no longer at the most extreme earlier-high levels: one analyst cites 45 GW in an older scenario, while multiple analysts cite a more recent “up to ~30 GW” high-pathway figure and place the median-across-pathways outcome broadly in the high-teens to mid-20s GW. Because the resolution uses the median across pathways (including non-net-zero pathways when present), the median is expected to be below the maximum pathway value.

I therefore use a mixture-style distribution: (i) a non-trivial left tail below 10 GW mainly representing “no eligible resolvable material” (0 GW resolution) and/or omission/definition issues, (ii) central mass around ~20–26 GW, and (iii) a small right tail above 35 GW reflecting the possibility of a renewed higher-hydrogen assumption (or a change in scenario set/definitions) that pushes the median beyond the creator’s expected upper range.

An amateur forecast would likely (a) anchor on the headline “up to ~30 GW” figure and overpredict the median (confusing max vs median across pathways), and/or (b) ignore the resolution’s sharp discontinuity where the outcome becomes 0 GW if no eligible resolvable material appears in the narrow window. My forecast explicitly models that publication/eligibility risk with meaningful below-10-GW tail mass, while still centering the in-range outcomes on a median-across-pathways value consistent with recent NESO scenario revisions. Confidence is moderate: the biggest uncertainty is procedural (what exactly NESO publishes in-window and whether it contains a directly resolvable 2050 GB value).

Forecast rationale (numeric):

— Iteration 1 — Across the forecasts, the core expectation is that NESO’s 2050 hydrogen-to-power assumption will land in the low-to-mid tens of GW, roughly 15–30 GW if a qualifying value is released, with a broader plausible span extending from about 10 GW to the mid-30s GW. The shared reasoning is that hydrogen-to-power is likely to remain a significant dispatchable/flexible resource in a highly electrified, renewables-heavy 2050 system, but not the dominant source of firm capacity; it would sit alongside storage, interconnection, nuclear, CCS, BECCS, and demand flexibility.

A major point of agreement is the use of historical NESO/FES scenario patterns, which commonly place 2050 hydrogen-to-power capacity in the 11–35 GW range, with central tendencies often around 20–25 GW. Forecasts also converge on the idea that upper-tail outcomes above 35 GW are possible if NESO leans more heavily on hydrogen as backup capacity.

The main disagreement is not about the conditional level, but about resolution risk: some forecasts assign a meaningful chance to 0.0 GW if there is no eligible newly released NESO material in the specified window, if the relevant publication arrives before the start date, or if the document does not provide a resolvable GB-wide total. This procedural uncertainty creates a bimodal shape in some rationales, pulling the overall median lower even while the conditional estimate remains in the tens of GW.

Publication Schedule and Modeling Framework NESO is expected to release its flagship long-term modeling document—transitioning from the traditional Future Energy Scenarios (FES) to the new Future Energy Pathways (FEP)—during its historical mid-July publication window. While there is a minor risk of administrative delays or aggregated data formatting that could obscure specific figures, the rationales generally anticipate a timely and resolvable release, potentially supplemented by secondary strategic network planning documents.

Scenario Structure and the Median Calculation The resolution criteria mandate utilizing the median of all presented pathways, explicitly including non-net-zero baselines. NESO is widely expected to maintain a multiple-scenario framework, typically featuring three net-zero pathways (spanning balanced, highly electrified, and hydrogen-heavy approaches) alongside one counterfactual “falling behind” pathway. Because the non-net-zero counterfactual generally relies on unabated gas rather than clean hydrogen, its inclusion acts as a mathematical anchor, dragging the overall median downward. If NESO unexpectedly publishes only the net-zero pathways, the median would simply align with their central, balanced scenario.

Economic Headwinds and Infrastructure Constraints While hydrogen remains a critical mechanism in NESO’s modeling for managing Dunkelflaute (prolonged periods of low wind and solar generation), the rationales strongly agree that its overall 2050 capacity projection faces severe downward pressure. Recent market realities are forcing a more pragmatic outlook. High-profile cancellations of hydrogen pilot projects, escalating capital cost estimates for hydrogen turbines, and strict physical bottlenecks regarding the development of necessary geological salt cavern storage are expected to temper the highly ambitious projections seen in older models.

Competition from Alternative Technologies Finally, hydrogen-to-power is increasingly facing fierce competition from alternative grid-balancing technologies. The rationales note that the growing commercial viability of Long-Duration Energy Storage (LDES), expansive Vehicle-to-Grid (V2G) assumptions, massive demand-side response modeling, and the advancement of natural gas with Carbon Capture and Storage (Gas-CCS) are systematically “crowding out” hydrogen. Consequently, NESO’s upcoming models are expected to relegate hydrogen-to-power to a highly specialized, low-utilization peaking role rather than a broad baseload solution.

SUMMARY

Question: What 2050 hydrogen-to-power capacity will NESO assume in material newly released between 22 May and 11 Aug 2026? Final Prediction: Probability distribution:

• 10.00% chance of value below 0.031667
• 20.00% chance of value below 0.074333
• 40.00% chance of value below 0.169667
• 60.00% chance of value below 7.16
• 80.00% chance of value below 24.933333
• 90.00% chance of value below 32.666667

Total Cost: extra_metadata_in_explanation is disabled Time Spent: extra_metadata_in_explanation is disabled LLMs: extra_metadata_in_explanation is disabled Bot Name: extra_metadata_in_explanation is disabled

Report 1 Summary

Forecasts

Forecaster 1: Probability distribution:

• 10.00% chance of value below 0.06
• 20.00% chance of value below 0.16
• 40.00% chance of value below 0.36
• 60.00% chance of value below 0.49
• 80.00% chance of value below 24.5
• 90.00% chance of value below 32.5

Forecaster 2: Probability distribution:

• 10.00% chance of value below 0.025
• 20.00% chance of value below 0.038
• 40.00% chance of value below 0.049
• 60.00% chance of value below 20.5
• 80.00% chance of value below 29.5
• 90.00% chance of value below 35.0

Forecaster 3: Probability distribution:

• 10.00% chance of value below 0.01
• 20.00% chance of value below 0.025
• 40.00% chance of value below 0.1
• 60.00% chance of value below 0.49
• 80.00% chance of value below 20.8
• 90.00% chance of value below 30.5

Research Summary

The research found that NESO’s most recent comparable publication (FES 2025) reported hydrogen-to-power generation capacity of about 25.5–55.2 GW by 2050 across its scenario pathways (with the highest values in the “Hydrogen Evolution” pathway). It also identified that NESO has shifted from annual FES releases to a three‑year cycle (FES 2025 was described as the last annual edition until 2028) and that major downstream strategic products (the Strategic Spatial Energy Plan and the Centralised Strategic Network Plan) are scheduled for 2027 and 2028 respectively. The research therefore highlights that FES 2025 provides the most recent scenario range (25.5–55.2 GW) but that NESO’s changed publication cadence means major new FES‑style material is not expected in the May 22–Aug 11, 2026 window.

The research also searched for interim NESO publications, prediction‑market activity, and historical base rates. It reported no scheduled major NESO publications within the May–August 2026 window, no specific prediction‑market contracts found on major platforms for this question, and noted that FES reports historically provide multiple scenario ranges (so the FES 2025 range serves as the closest reference class). The research therefore frames two operational points of reference: (a) the FES 2025 scenario range of 25.5–55.2 GW by 2050, and (b) NESO’s announced move to less frequent major publications (next FES/major plans expected in 2027–2028), which affects the likelihood of new eligible material in the target window.

Sources used (domains/pages searched or cited where available):

• https://www.neso.org.uk
• https://www.nationalgrideso.com/future-energy/future-energy-scenarios
• https://www.gov.uk
• https://manifold.markets
• https://www.metaculus.com
• https://polymarket.com

(Note: specific page URLs for NESO/FES 2025 and related NESO announcements were referenced in the research; domain links above are the primary sources used.)

RESEARCH

Report 1 Research

I’ll help you gather comprehensive research for this forecasting question about NESO’s 2050 hydrogen-to-power capacity projections. Let me conduct systematic searches to find relevant information.

Agent Forecast (numeric, confidence: medium)

• 25-28: 31.0%
• 28-30: 17.0%
• 30-35: 15.0%
• 22-25: 11.0%
• Below 10: 10.0%

Base Rate: FES 2025 median 2050 H2-to-power = 26.8 GW (HT 26.082, EE 27.52, HE 29.963, FB 0; mean of two middle values). FES 2024 → FES 2025 median delta: approximately +6.6 GW upward.

Initial Reasoning:

• Trajectory 1 reasoning

  FES 2025 per-pathway 2050 H2P installed capacity values are: HT=26.1 GW, EE=27.5 GW, HE=30.0 GW, FB=0 GW.
• The 4-pathway median (mean of 2nd and 3rd sorted values) = (26.1+27.5)/2 = 26.8 GW, which falls in the 25-28 GW bin.
• FES is released every July (confirmed 2024 and 2025), making FES 2026 the most likely qualifying document, expected ~July 2026 within the window.
• FES 2025 saw LCDP increase (48-55 GW total, H2P at 53%) for security of supply reasons.
• The trend is for H2P values to remain broadly similar or modestly shift; no strong directional driver for large deviations.
• A 12% probability mass on ‘Below 10’ accounts for FES 2026 being delayed past Aug 11, NESO restructuring FES away from the scenario format, or no qualifying H2P figure being published in the window.

Trajectory 2 reasoning

The primary eligible source will almost certainly be FES 2026 (or FEP 2026), released ~July 2026, within the May 22–Aug 11 eligibility window.

• NESO has published FES every July for 15+ years with no announced interruptions.
• From direct API queries of NESO’s official data: FES 2025 2050 H2-to-power capacity across 4 pathways is HT≈26.1 GW, EE≈27.5 GW, HE≈30.0 GW, Falling Behind=0 GW (sorted: 0, 26.1, 27.5, 30.0 → median=(26.1+27.5)/2≈26.8 GW).
• FES 2024 median was ~20.2 GW — meaning a +6.6 GW median increase occurred year-over-year, driven by NESO increasing low-carbon dispatchable power across all net-zero scenarios for security of supply.
• Falling Behind has 0 GW H2-to-power in 2050 (no hydrogen entries in ES1 data).
• For FES 2026, with continued H2P business model development and policy momentum, modest upward pressure is expected on HT and EE scenarios (~2-4 GW).
• HE has been volatile (44.5→30.0 GW across two years).
• Central estimate for FES 2026 median: ~27-30 GW.
• The 25-28 and 28-30 bins are collectively most likely at 42% combined. ~11% probability of Below 10 GW captures both no-qualifying-release scenarios and dramatic downward revision possibili

Key Uncertainties:

• Whether FES 2026 (or FEP 2026) is released before Aug 11, 2026 — ~10% no-qualifying-release risk drives the Below 10 GW bin
• Whether NESO transitions to a different FEP structure (fewer scenarios or a single central pathway) which would change the median calculation
• Year-over-year volatility in scenario assumptions — HE moved from 44.5 GW (FES 2024) to ~30.0 GW (FES 2025), so individual scenarios can shift significantly
• Whether Falling Behind remains at 0 GW H2P (anchoring the median to the two net-zero pathway values) or whether a non-net-zero pathway adopts non-zero H2P capacity

Evidence Sources (11):

• NESO FES 2025 Changes since FES 2024
• NESO FES 2025 Main Report
• NESO FES 2025 Electricity Supply Data (ES1) v006
• NESO FES page
• NESO SSEP page
• Ofgem Future Energy Pathways Guidance Decision
• NESO’s Energy Pathways: Why consumers hold the key to net zero
• NESO 2026 priorities statement by CEO Fintan Slye
• NESO FES 2025 Electricity Supply Data Table (ES1) - API
• Ofgem Future Energy Pathways Guidance (Feb 2025)
• Solar Power Portal analysis of FES 2025

Grounding Facts (passed to reviewers): Here are 8 key grounding facts:

1. NESO FES 20

Draft: 25-28: 27.5%, 22-25: 14.5%, 28-30: 14.5%, 30-35: 12.0%, Below 10: 11.5%

Reviewer Panel:

Reviewer (reasoning)

The draft forecast rests almost entirely on the assumption that NESO will issue a four-scenario FES 2026 in July with hydrogen-to-power figures very similar to 2025’s 26.8 GW median, without sufficiently accounting for the risk that NESO changes its modeling framework, delays the release, or omits an explicit 2050 hydrogen-to-power total. It also overallocates probability to extreme tail outcomes (below 10 GW or above 35 GW) without identifying any credible drivers for such large deviations.

Objections:

• Relies on an unverified assumption that FES will maintain the same four‐pathway structure and naming conventions in 2026, despite ongoing NESO methodology reviews.
• Does not consider the possibility that NESO might publish hydrogen assumptions only within a broader capacity stack or energy system report, making a standalone 2050 H2P figure non-existent.
• Fails to incorporate the observed policy slowdown in hydrogen deployment planning post-2025, which suggests downward pressure relative to the 2025 jump, rather than a further leap upward.

Reviewer (calibration)

The forecast provides a solid baseline from FES 2025 but may be slightly conservative in projecting future increases. While acknowledging the upward trend from FES 2024 to 2025 due to security of supply, the probability distribution doesn’t fully reflect the potential for continued, albeit modest, upward revisions driven by ongoing policy momentum and business model development in the hydrogen sector. The central tendency appears to anchor heavily on the 2025 median without sufficiently exploring the drivers for further change.

Objections:

• The forecast acknowledges the +6.6 GW increase from FES 2024 to FES 2025 but then suggests only ‘modest shifts’ or ‘modest upward pressure’ for FES 2026 without fully quantifying or weighting this potential. This might lead to an underestimation of the probability of values above 28 GW.
• While ‘H2P business model development and policy momentum’ are mentioned, the forecast does not delve into specific recent or anticipated policy developments, funding announcements, or industry progress that could significantly influence NESO’s 2050 projections for hydrogen-to-power capacity.
• The forecast assumes 0 GW for the ‘Falling Behind’ scenario, which significantly pulls down the median. While this was true for FES 2025, the reasoning doesn’t explicitly confirm if this scenario is definitively a ‘non-net-zero pathway’ as per resolution criteria, or if NESO might introduce other non-net-zero scenarios with some H2P capacity in FES 2026.

Reviewer (fact-checker)

1 factual error(s). 3 unsupported claim(s). Verdict: minor_issues

Unsupported claims:

• FES 2024 median was ~20.2 GW
• HE has been volatile (44.5→30.0 GW across two years)
• +6.6 GW median increase occurred year-over-year

Objections:

• [minor] FES 2025 per-pathway 2050 H2P installed capacity values are: HT=26.1 GW, EE=27.5 GW, HE=30.0 GW, FB=0 GW — Corpus says: Corpus shows HT 26.082 GW, EE 27.52 GW, HE 29.963 GW, FB 0 GW (minor rounding differences only)

Adjustment Rationale:

Shifted ~7 points of probability mass into the 25-28 GW bin (0.24 → 0.31) because Reviewer 1 correctly identified that the draft over-allocated to extreme tails relative to the strong central anchor at 26.8 GW (FES 2025 median, fact-checker confirmed). Trimmed Below 10 (0.11→0.10) and Above 35 (0.08→0.07) for the same reason. Kept meaningful mass in 28-30 (0.17) and 30-35 (0.15) per Reviewer 2’s point that the +6.6 GW YoY increase from FES 2024→2025 supports continued upward drift. Holding firm on interpretation (median across 4 scenarios including non-net-zero Falling Behind at 0 GW) — this matches the resolution criteria language and FES 2025 structure; fact-checker only flagged minor rounding (HT 26.082, EE 27.52, HE 29.963, FB 0; median = (26.082+27.52)/2 ≈ 26.8 GW). Final distribution puts 63% in the 25-35 GW range, consistent with the ensemble signal of 57.7% and matching the central-tendency-with-modest-upward-drift hypothesis.

forecast_sdk | 620.8s | research $2.1771 + reviewers $0.0094 + reconcile $0.1852 = $2.4130

Extracted Percentile Values: {0.1: 0, 1.0: 0, 5.0: 0, 10.0: 0, 15.0: 11, 20.0: 14, 25.0: 15.5, 30.0: 16.5, 35.0: 17.5, 40.0: 18.3, 45.0: 19, 46.0: 19.2, 47.0: 19.4, 48.0: 19.6, 49.0: 19.8, 50.0: 20, 51.0: 20.2, 52.0: 20.4, 53.0: 20.6, 54.0: 20.8, 55.0: 21, 60.0: 22, 65.0: 23.5, 70.0: 25, 75.0: 26.5, 80.0: 28, 85.0: 30, 90.0: 32, 95.0: 36, 99.0: 43, 99.9: 50}

Model’s Answer:

Analysis of NESO 2050 Hydrogen-to-Power Capacity Forecast

Understanding the Question

This question asks what 2050 hydrogen-to-power capacity (in GW) NESO will assume in official material released between May 22, 2026 and August 11, 2026. If multiple scenarios are provided, the resolution uses the median across qualifying pathways.

Key Factors to Consider

Probability of Eligible Material Release

NESO (formerly National Grid ESO) has historically released Future Energy Scenarios (FES) annually in early-to-mid July. This timing falls squarely within the resolution window. The research indicates:

• FES 2025 was released July 2025 with three net-zero pathways
• Historical data workbooks have included installed capacity figures by technology
• The Strategic Spatial Energy Plan (SSEP) is targeted for Q4 2026, likely after the August 11 cutoff

I estimate approximately 85-90% probability that eligible FES/FEP 2026 material will be released in the window with resolvable hydrogen-to-power capacity figures. The main risks are delays past August 11 or a shift to reporting only TWh rather than GW capacity.

Historical Hydrogen-to-Power Capacity Ranges

Based on research:

• FES 2023 net-zero scenarios: “several tens of GW” for 2050 hydrogen-to-power
• Non-net-zero scenarios: very low or near-zero
• FES 2025 moved to three pathways (Holistic Transition, Electric Engagement, Hydrogen Evolution) - all net-zero aligned
• Hydrogen Evolution pathway features significantly higher hydrogen for power generation

Expected Distribution if Material Released

If FES 2026 follows the three net-zero pathway structure:

• Hydrogen Evolution: High (~25-30 GW)
• Holistic Transition: Moderate (~18-22 GW)
• Electric Engagement: Lower hydrogen emphasis (~12-18 GW)
• Median of three pathways would be the middle value, likely ~18-22 GW

Risk Assessment

Key Assumptions:

1. FES 2026 releases within the window (~90% confidence)
2. Methodology includes explicit installed capacity figures (~85% confidence)
3. Scenario structure remains similar to FES 2025 (~80% confidence)

Low Outcome Scenario: No eligible material released (0 GW resolution), or material released with very low median across scenarios if non-net-zero pathways are reintroduced. Probability: ~12-15%

High Outcome Scenario: All scenarios heavily weighted toward hydrogen, with median exceeding 30 GW. Could occur if policy pushes toward Hydrogen Evolution-type assumptions across the board. Probability: ~8-10%

Distribution Rationale

• Bottom ~10% captures 0 GW (no eligible material)
• Transition from 0 to positive values around 10-12 GW at ~P.12-P.15
• Central mass around 18-22 GW reflecting likely median of net-zero pathways
• Upper tail extending to ~35 GW for hydrogen-heavy scenarios
• Extreme tail to 45-50 GW for unprecedented hydrogen emphasis

Percentile .1: 0 Percentile 1: 0 Percentile 5: 0 Percentile 10: 0 Percentile 15: 11 Percentile 20: 14 Percentile 25: 15.5 Percentile 30: 16.5 Percentile 35: 17.5 Percentile 40: 18.3 Percentile 45: 19 Percentile 46: 19.2 Percentile 47: 19.4 Percentile 48: 19.6 Percentile 49: 19.8 Percentile 50: 20 Percentile 51: 20.2 Percentile 52: 20.4 Percentile 53: 20.6 Percentile 54: 20.8 Percentile 55: 21 Percentile 60: 22 Percentile 65: 23.5 Percentile 70: 25 Percentile 75: 26.5 Percentile 80: 28 Percentile 85: 30 Percentile 90: 32 Percentile 95: 36 Percentile 99: 43 Percentile 99.9: 50

Long-lived capacity choices and statutory planning cycles set slow-moving bounds on 2050 hydrogen-to-power deployment.

Capacity needs for low‑carbon firm power and stable institutional timelines limit the feasible upper and lower envelopes.

NESO’s latest full pathways cluster in the mid‑20s of GW for hydrogen‑fired generation, so a roughly 27 GW anchor is decision-relevant.

The 2025 pathway update narrowed earlier high‑hydrogen outcomes and shifted capacity toward gas‑CCS in many scenarios, compressing central estimates.

An eligible NESO release between late May and 11 August would only move the anchor by a few gigawatts unless it introduces a radically different pathway.

Key inflection points are whether the new publication preserves separate hydrogen‑to‑power reporting and the split between peaking, CHP, and firm hydrogen plant types.

The primary unresolved question is whether any eligible NESO document appears in‑window and presents a clear 2050 hydrogen‑to‑power row.

Secondary sensitivities are substitution with gas‑CCS, reporting taxonomy, and plausible variations of several GW around the central anchor.

Forecast Summary

Median: 26.6 GW

Rationale

• Publication is the dominant gate. NESO has published its Future Energy Scenarios (FES) in mid-July for the past two years (14 July 2025, 15 July 2024). The eligibility window (22 May–11 Aug 2026) covers this typical release date. Probability of publication within the window is ~80–82%; if delayed past 11 August, the question resolves to 0 GW by definition.

• FES 2025 provides the anchor. The most recent FES (July 2025) reports four 2050 hydrogen-to-power pathways: 29.96, 27.52, 26.08, and 0.00 GW. The median of the two middle values is 26.80 GW—the strongest available benchmark for FES 2026 assumptions, absent evidence of major policy shifts.

• Scenario structure matters significantly. The “Falling Behind” pathway (0 GW) pulls the median down by ~0.7 GW relative to a net-zero-only median (~27.5 GW). If NESO restructures to exclude this non-net-zero scenario in FES 2026, the median would rise. However, the four-pathway structure has been stable, making carryover more likely.

• Year-over-year assumption drift is modest. Only FES 2025 hydrogen-to-power values are directly confirmed; earlier editions’ specific values were not retrieved. This limits confidence in trend analysis, but NESO’s modeling tends toward incremental updates rather than large swings absent major policy changes.

• Bimodal distribution reflects binary publication risk. Approximately 18–20% probability mass sits at 0 GW (no publication). The remaining 80–82% concentrates around 25–29 GW, roughly normal in shape

Forecast (percentiles, aggregated):

• p10: 0.0
• p25: 0.1
• p50: 15.0
• p75: 22.0
• p90: 29.0

Per-model forecasts:

• 1: p10=0, p25=0.1, p50=14, p75=21, p90=26
• 2: p10=0, p25=0.1, p50=16, p75=22, p90=28
• 3: p10=0.0, p25=14.0, p50=21.5, p75=27.5, p90=34.0

Rationale: Summary The assessment of NESO’s 2050 hydrogen-to-power capacity assumption is defined by a bimodal distribution: there is a substantial chance (roughly 40 to 45 percent) that no eligible material will be published during the May to August 2026 window (resulting in a 0 GW outcome), and a slightly higher chance that newly released strategic documents will provide an estimate in the 15 to 30 GW range. NESO recently transitioned away from its traditional annual Future Energy Scenarios (FES) publication cycle to a three-year cycle, meaning the next comprehensive FES report will not arrive until 2028. Consequently, any estimate published within the resolution window must come from interim strategic plans, such as the transitional Centralised Strategic Network Plan (tCSNP2) refresh expected in June 2026, or preliminary data from the Strategic Spatial Energy Plan (SSEP) pathway options slated for submission to the government in the summer of 2026. If an eligible document is publicly released, baseline data from the FES 2025 projections suggests the median installed capacity across future pathways would center between 18 and 22 GW. Balancing the high probability of no qualifying publication against the conditional expected capacity results in a central estimate of 15 GW, with the interquartile range stretching from near-zero to 22 GW.

Strongest Arguments for Higher Values

• Precedent from the FES 2025 publication indicates that NESO assumes up to 30 GW of hydrogen-fueled electricity generation capacity by 2050 in its most hydrogen-optimistic scenarios.
• NESO’s SSEP framework explicitly incorporates generation capacity modeling through 2050. If preliminary data or SSEP pathway options are published publicly alongside their summer 2026 submission, the reported median across pathways is highly likely to reflect these substantial historical projections.
• Even if hydrogen evolution is not the dominant pathway, the combined requirement for low-carbon dispatchable power (gas with carbon capture and storage plus hydrogen) remains high at 48 to 55 GW, ensuring hydrogen accounts for a meaningful double-digit capacity share in most net-zero pathways.

Strongest Arguments for Lower Values

• The structural shift away from the annual FES cycle eliminates the most reliable historical source of future capacity projections. The lack of a scheduled 2026 FES publication is the primary driver for a near-zero outcome at the lower end of the distribution.
• Upcoming milestone reports, such as the SSEP pathway options, are planned as internal submissions to the Secretary of State. The actual public consultation for the SSEP is not scheduled until early 2027, creating a high probability that relevant data will not be made public within the strict resolution window.
• In scenarios heavily weighting widespread electrification over hydrogen evolution, hydrogen-to-power capacity projections drop significantly, which would drag down the median scenario average even if published.

Key Uncertainties

• Publication Timing and Public Accessibility: The greatest uncertainty is whether the summer 2026 SSEP pathway options will be published publicly upon submission to the government, or kept internal until the 2027 consultation phase.
• Scope of the tCSNP2 Refresh: The transitional network plan is due in June 2026, but it is unclear if it will provide granular, disaggregated installed capacity figures for hydrogen-to-power through to 2050.
• Evolution of NESO’s Net Zero Modeling: It remains uncertain how NESO will adjust its balance between gas with carbon capture and hydrogen-to-power generation in its updated 2026 modeling compared to its 2025 baseline.