Abstract
As the world embarks on a transition towards a sustainable, carbon-neutral energy future, hydrogen has emerged
as a promising alternative energy carrier. However, the safe handling and storage of hydrogen is a challenge due
to its unique properties and associated hazards. In this work, a review of the state of the art on the availability and
quality of data for quantitative risk analysis is performed. Gaps and needs in data collection are identified with
the aim to understand what the challenges for the safe use of hydrogen are. To ensure and demonstrate the safe
and reliable operation of hydrogen systems, it is crucial to understand their equipment classes, failure modes, and
safety equipment performance. However, from the comprehensive review of the literature and existing industry
practices, a significant lack of standardization in the definitions of these classes and modes is highlighted. This
can lead to inconsistent data collection and interpretation, limiting the ability of researchers and practitioners to
identify and mitigate safety risks. Additionally, the data available is incomprehensive and low-quality. The
current gaps in data may stem from a variety of factors, including the novelty of some types of hydrogen
equipment, proprietary concerns, and a lack of centralized data collection and sharing platforms. Several solutions
are proposed for the identified gaps and needs for data collection of hydrogen systems. These include the
development of universal definitions of hydrogen equipment classes and failure modes, the establishment of
centralized data collection and sharing platforms, and the creation of detailed guidelines for the selection of safety
equipment. This work is intended to inform future research and standards development efforts, thereby
contributing to the safe and successful deployment of hydrogen energy systems. It emphasizes the importance of
collaboration and data sharing between researchers, industry practitioners, regulators, and standardization bodies
to overcome these challenges. In conclusion, the safe and effective deployment of hydrogen systems requires a
rigorous and comprehensive approach to data collection, equipment classification, failure mode definition, and
safety equipment selection. Addressing these gaps and needs will require concerted efforts from all stakeholders
in the hydrogen community.
KEYWORDS: Failure modes, Hydrogen, Equipment Classes, Safety Equipment, HIAD 2.0
as a promising alternative energy carrier. However, the safe handling and storage of hydrogen is a challenge due
to its unique properties and associated hazards. In this work, a review of the state of the art on the availability and
quality of data for quantitative risk analysis is performed. Gaps and needs in data collection are identified with
the aim to understand what the challenges for the safe use of hydrogen are. To ensure and demonstrate the safe
and reliable operation of hydrogen systems, it is crucial to understand their equipment classes, failure modes, and
safety equipment performance. However, from the comprehensive review of the literature and existing industry
practices, a significant lack of standardization in the definitions of these classes and modes is highlighted. This
can lead to inconsistent data collection and interpretation, limiting the ability of researchers and practitioners to
identify and mitigate safety risks. Additionally, the data available is incomprehensive and low-quality. The
current gaps in data may stem from a variety of factors, including the novelty of some types of hydrogen
equipment, proprietary concerns, and a lack of centralized data collection and sharing platforms. Several solutions
are proposed for the identified gaps and needs for data collection of hydrogen systems. These include the
development of universal definitions of hydrogen equipment classes and failure modes, the establishment of
centralized data collection and sharing platforms, and the creation of detailed guidelines for the selection of safety
equipment. This work is intended to inform future research and standards development efforts, thereby
contributing to the safe and successful deployment of hydrogen energy systems. It emphasizes the importance of
collaboration and data sharing between researchers, industry practitioners, regulators, and standardization bodies
to overcome these challenges. In conclusion, the safe and effective deployment of hydrogen systems requires a
rigorous and comprehensive approach to data collection, equipment classification, failure mode definition, and
safety equipment selection. Addressing these gaps and needs will require concerted efforts from all stakeholders
in the hydrogen community.
KEYWORDS: Failure modes, Hydrogen, Equipment Classes, Safety Equipment, HIAD 2.0
