Salt-Cavern Hydrogen Storage Patents: Top Companies & Trends 2026
Filing growth compares 2021 (18 records) with 2024 (56) — a three-year span. 2024 is the most recent year we treat as complete: publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, so 2025 onwards are still filling in and any growth rate that ends there would understate the field. Top-5 share is the combined record count of the five largest assignees divided by all 284 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What the salt-cavern hydrogen storage patent record shows
Salt-cavern hydrogen storage sits at the intersection of underground energy storage and hydrogen containment engineering: solution-mined caverns lined or conditioned to hold hydrogen at scale, plus the surface equipment, monitoring and material science that make that possible. The 284 records in scope span 2015 through the partial-year 2026 cut-off, and the technology composition confirms the field is not just a geology problem — F17C pressure-vessel and gas-storage claims and B65G conveying and material-handling claims each cover roughly a fifth of records, ahead of the drilling-specific E21B class.
Filing activity was negligible before 2021, then climbed sharply through the 2021–2024 window before the most recent two years understate themselves due to the usual 18-month publication lag. Reading the trend at face value for 2025 or 2026 would be a mistake; the growth that matters is the +211% run already banked between 2021 and 2024.
Let an AI agent run this analysis on your own technology
Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.
Filing trend, technology mix and where applications are filed
The figures below use the same denominators throughout: 284 records in scope for shares of the whole, and the ranked assignee list of 100 companies for concentration figures. Publication lag means the final one to two years will keep filling in after this cut-off.
From a single filing in 2017 to a peak of 56 in 2024
The trend line is flat and thin through 2017–2020, then accelerates: 2021 recorded 18 filings and 2024 recorded 56, a +211% increase over that three-year span. Treat 2025 and 2026 as still-arriving data rather than a slowdown.
Pressure vessels and material handling lead, drilling and electrolysis follow
F17C (pressure vessels & gas storage, 21.8% of records) and B65G (conveying & material handling, 21.5%) are the two densest classes, ahead of E21B (earth & rock drilling, 16.5%) and C01B (non-metallic elements & inorganic compounds, 15.1%). C25B electrolytic production, G06F digital data processing and G01N material testing each sit near 8%, and E21F mine safety and ventilation covers 7.7% — a reminder that safety and monitoring claims are a real, if smaller, slice of the field.
Shares are the percentage of the 284 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Hydrogen Storage — Salt-Cavern Hydrogen Storage Patent Landscape with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about hydrogen storage — salt-cavern hydrogen storage patent landscape and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe most-cited records and a representative recent filing
Coupling numerical simulation method for site selection of underground salt cavern hydrogen storage (US20240289521A1)
The application, filed by Sichuan University, sets out a coupling numerical simulation method for siting an underground salt cavern hydrogen storage facility. It obtains geological data for a candidate area, builds and meshes a three-dimensional model, establishes and balances an initial coupling field, then simulates cavern excavation and imports the post-excavation geological model and parameters into TOUGH2MP software for further stress and field analysis.Published 2024-08-29 — filed at a point where site-selection modelling was already becoming a distinct claim category rather than an afterthought to drilling claims.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20090322090A1 | Energy storage system and method for storing and supplying energy | 70 |
| 2 | US20140161533A1 | Methods for storing hydrogen in a salt cavern with a permeation barrier | 41 |
| 3 | US20130315669A1 | Method and system for storing hydrogen in a salt cavern with a permeation barrier | 39 |
| 4 | US8690476B2 | Method and system for storing hydrogen in a salt cavern with a permeation barrier | 37 |
| 5 | US20160060038A1 | System and method for treating hydrogen to be stored in a salt cavern and supplying therefrom | 29 |
| 6 | EP2138678A1 | Energy storage system and method for storing and supplying energy | 25 |
| 7 | CN112253118A | 一种盐穴储气库注气排卤装置及方法 | 24 |
| 8 | US20160089705A1 | System and method for purging contaminants from a salt cavern | 19 |
| 9 | US20170174512A1 | Method of supplying hydrogen through an integrated supply system | 17 |
| 10 | US20220221220A1 | Methods and systems for hydrogen liquefaction | 16 |
Citation counts favour older filings simply because they have had more time to be cited — read them as a signal of influence on the field, not as a ranking of current technical importance.
Patent titles are shown in the language they were filed in, not translated, so that each record stays verifiable against the original filing — a translated title will not match in Eureka or in any national register. Each row carries its publication number; clicking a row searches Eureka by that number.
Put your own technology through the same analysis
Eureka on the web
When you want the answer in the next five minutes.
The agent works the prompt against patents and technical literature, citing every source.
Run your analysis now →MCP server & REST API
When it has to run inside your own pipeline.
Patent search, landscape analysis and assignee resolution as MCP tools. Drop them into any agent framework, or call REST directly.
Browse MCP servers →Reading the concentration and growth numbers correctly
Three figures from the dataset matter more than the raw counts: how concentrated the leaderboard is, how fast the field grew before the publication lag kicks in, and which classes carry the bulk of claim density.
The top of the field is compact, the rest is a long tail
One assignee leads with 41 records, and the top 5 combined hold 89 records — 31.3% of everything in scope. The top 10 extend that to 47.9%. Below that the ranking of 100 companies thins quickly into single- and double-digit filers, which means most organisations in this space hold a handful of records rather than a portfolio.
The field's real acceleration happened in three years
Filings were close to nonexistent before 2021 (18 that year) and reached 56 by 2024, the peak year so far. That three-year run is the growth figure to cite; the 2025–2026 numbers will keep revising upward as publications catch up with filing dates.
Containment engineering and material handling, not geology alone, carry the claim density
F17C and B65G each cover roughly a fifth of the 284 records, ahead of E21B drilling claims at 16.5%. Since a record can carry several classes, these figures overlap rather than sum to 100% — but the pattern is clear: surface and containment engineering is as contested as the underground work.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to hydrogen storage — salt-cavern hydrogen storage patent landscape, with the prior art for and against each one.
Turning this landscape into a filing or licensing decision
The dataset flags where claim density sits and who holds it; deciding what to do with that needs a closer read of the actual claim language.
Check freedom-to-operate before drafting
With permeation-barrier and cavern-monitoring claims concentrated among a small set of leading assignees, a new filing in those areas should start with a claim-chart comparison, not a novelty search alone.
Run a freedom-to-operate check in EurekaTrack the leader's continuation activity
A 41-record leader with this filing pace is likely still prosecuting continuations and divisional filings; monitoring their pending applications matters as much as their granted patents.
Set up assignee monitoring in EurekaMap the under-claimed branches against your own R&D
Sensor-based leak monitoring and cyclic fatigue modelling show lower density than pressure-vessel claims — worth checking against internal roadmaps before assuming the space is open.
Explore white space in EurekaFrequently asked questions
The dataset in scope contains 284 published patent records covering 2015 through the mid-2026 cut-off. This counts patent families in the assignee ranking, which is the fairer unit than raw document counts because it neutralises duplicate filings across jurisdictions and continuation applications. The true current total is somewhat higher than 284 because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, so the most recent one to two years are still filling in.
One assignee leads the ranked list with 41 records, well ahead of fifth place at 11 and tenth place at 8, indicating a genuine leader rather than a tightly bunched top tier. The top 5 assignees together hold 31.3% of all 284 records, and the top 10 hold 47.9%, so roughly half the field's filings sit outside even the ten most active organisations. The ranking includes 100 companies in total, spanning energy majors, research institutes and specialist entrants — it should not be read as a top-50 or top-100 exclusive list, since it is simply the full ranking the underlying data returns.
The two densest IPC subclasses are F17C, covering pressure vessels and gas storage, at 21.8% of the 284 records, and B65G, covering conveying and material handling, at 21.5%. E21B (earth and rock drilling for wells) covers 16.5% and C01B (non-metallic elements and inorganic compounds) covers 15.1%, with C25B electrolytic production, G06F digital data processing, G01N material testing and E21F mine safety each in the 7-9% range. Because a single record can carry multiple classes, these percentages add up to more than 100% and should not be summed as if they were mutually exclusive shares.
Filing activity accelerated sharply between 2021 and 2024, growing from 18 records in 2021 to a peak of 56 in 2024 — a +211% increase over that three-year span. Activity before 2021 was minimal, with the earliest tracked filing in 2017 at a single record. The 2025 and 2026 figures in any raw trend chart will look lower, but that reflects the roughly 18-month gap between filing and publication rather than a genuine slowdown, so they should not be read as a decline.
China leads receiving offices with 108 filings, well ahead of the United States at 62. WIPO's PCT route accounts for 23 filings, the European Patent Office for 20, Canada for 14 and Australia for 13. The gap between China and the next-largest office suggests domestic Chinese research institutions and energy companies are driving a large share of near-term filing volume, though PCT and EPO filings indicate meaningful international-protection activity as well.
Composition data points to lower claim density around permeation-barrier liner chemistry, cavern leak-rate monitoring sensors, hydrogen-brine interface material testing, cyclic pressure-fatigue modelling and multi-cavern site-selection software, relative to the core pressure-vessel and drilling classes. These are not confirmed gaps — they are areas with comparatively thinner filing activity in this dataset, so a freedom-to-operate check against the leading assignees' existing claims is a necessary next step before treating any of them as open. Co-filing is also unusually sparse across the field, with only 9 co-assignee pairs identified, suggesting limited joint IP strategy so far outside a small number of institutional partnerships.
Research Hydrogen Storage — Salt-Cavern Hydrogen Storage Patent Landscape in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole hydrogen storage — salt-cavern hydrogen storage patent landscape corpus yourself, in your own scope.
Every answer comes back with patent numbers you can open.
Disclaimer. This page is generated from Patsnap Eureka data drawn from a limited snapshot of global patent and scientific-literature records, and is provided for general information and reference only.
Patent data carries inherent limitations: recent filings (typically the most recent 18–24 months) are under-counted due to standard publication lag; counts may be reported at either a patent-family or a patent-record basis and are not always directly comparable; classification, applicant-name, and citation data may contain errors, duplicates, or omissions; and the underlying search query defines and constrains the scope shown. As a result, the analysis may be incomplete or inaccurate and may not reflect the full technology landscape.
Nothing on this page constitutes an exhaustive prior-art, novelty, freedom-to-operate, or validity search, nor does it constitute legal, financial, investment, or professional advice, and it should not be relied upon as such. Any patent, commercial, or strategic decision should be verified independently and reviewed with qualified patent, legal, and domain professionals. Patsnap makes no warranties, express or implied, as to the accuracy, completeness, or fitness for any particular purpose of the information presented.
Machine translation. Assignee and organisation names originally recorded in Chinese, Japanese or Korean have been rendered into English by an AI translation step so that the tables stay readable. These renderings are best-effort and may not match a company’s registered English name; the original name is what the underlying patent record carries, and it is what any Eureka query launched from this page uses.