System architecture belongs at the beginning of network development—where fundamental questions are answered and a defined basis for proceeding is established
India’s ambitions in green hydrogen and carbon management will require more than individual facilities and promising technologies. They will require regional infrastructure systems in which producers, emitters, hubs, transport links, storage and other participants fit together as a coherent whole. That raises a question that should be addressed early: before a region proceeds towards detailed project development, what defines the system it is trying to build?
The answer begins with system architecture. When a regional network is first conceived, fundamental questions arise: What is the system intended to achieve? What belongs within its boundaries? How should its components and participants relate? Where do responsibilities lie? How can the network expand without losing its defining structure? And what provisions are needed to manage dependencies, risks and change over time?
These questions are not the detailed engineering questions of an individual facility. They concern the organisation of the regional system itself. They must be addressed at the point of conception and continue to guide development thereafter. System architecture provides the structural answers: defining the intended configuration, topology, boundaries, relationships, participation principles and provisions for evolution.
This is where architecture sits in the development process. It follows the recognition of a regional need and the initial conception of a network, but precedes and guides the detailed development of its constituent projects. It connects the fundamental questions to the infrastructure that will eventually be designed, assessed and built.
In that sense, a defined architecture can serve as a green signal to proceed to the next stages of development—not as proof that every project is feasible, but as a clear structural basis on which detailed assessment can begin. It establishes what system is intended and how its parts are meant to fit together. Engineering, safety, capacity, financial, commercial and regulatory assessments must still determine whether particular projects can proceed and under what conditions.
Without this architectural step, individual projects may be advanced on their own merits without a sufficiently clear common structure connecting them. Decisions made separately can shape the eventual network before the system-level relationships, boundaries and development principles have been deliberately established. Architecture instead starts with the intended network and provides the reference against which individual projects can be planned and assessed.
Novonanmek Material Sciences Pvt. Ltd. addresses this system-level requirement through two architecture standards for distinct infrastructure domains: HOPT-AS for regional carbon capture, utilisation and storage (CCUS) networks, and HLAS for hydrogen logistics networks.
HOPT-AS—the Hub-Only Pipeline Topology Architecture Standard—establishes a hub-only pipeline topology for regional CCUS infrastructure. Under its defining principle, emitters participate through solid-carbon logistics rather than direct pipeline connections from individual emitters; the handling and pipeline transportation of gaseous carbon dioxide (CO₂) are concentrated at designated hubs. The standard defines the intended relationships among emitters, hubs and associated infrastructure, creating a structural reference for shared infrastructure and phased participation.
HLAS – the Hydrogen Logistics Architecture Standard addresses hydrogen logistics across production, aggregation, transportation, storage, distribution and export. It establishes Architecture Classes, architectural principles, building blocks, topology rules, system boundaries and stakeholder responsibilities. It also addresses the relationship between infrastructure development and aggregated or demonstrable demand, including the concern that infrastructure may be developed prematurely.
Although their provisions differ, both standards apply architecture at the level of the overall system. Their purpose is not simply to describe a network after projects have been designed. They define the intended structure around which those projects can be organised and the regional network can be developed. The guiding sequence is: fundamental questions, system architecture, then network development.
Architecture is not a substitute for the disciplines that follow. A defined structure does not, by itself, prove technical feasibility, establish capacity, demonstrate commercial demand, justify investment, secure regulatory approval or guarantee successful implementation. Those matters require the relevant project-specific evidence and decisions. Architecture clarifies the system within which those assessments take place; it does not predetermine their outcomes.
Its relevance extends beyond project development. Regional and national planning involves multiple projects, participants, investment decisions and policy initiatives. A defined architecture can provide a common structural reference for considering how these efforts relate to the intended network. It can inform policy formulation without prescribing every policy choice, replacing statutory processes or implying government endorsement.
The distinction is important: system architecture is neither an individual facility design nor a policy instrument. It occupies the system level between the initial conception of a regional network and the detailed development of its component projects, while also providing a reference for wider planning and coordination.
For India’s emerging CCUS and hydrogen infrastructure, this stage deserves explicit attention. The question is not only whether individual projects can be designed and financed, but also whether they are being developed in relation to a clearly defined regional system. Answering the fundamental questions early gives subsequent work a common direction and a basis for coherent decisions.
The principle is straightforward: conceive the regional system, answer its fundamental questions through architecture, and use that architecture as the basis for detailed assessment and development. The architecture provides the green signal to proceed structurally; engineering, commercial, financial and regulatory processes determine how—and whether—individual projects can ultimately be implemented.
The Author of this article is Chief Energy Infrastructure Architect at Novonanmek Material Sciences Private Limited.
Website: https://www.novonanmek.com/
