Helium has been a headache for North American labs for over a decade — but the nature of that headache has changed. Organomation sat down with Claind Sales Director Nazzareno Irrera, who brings a global perspective on nitrogen and hydrogen gas generation, to unpack why the conversation is shifting from cost to supply security, and what's actually holding labs back from making the switch to hydrogen.
Not every application requires the highest purity gas on the market. For many routine lab workflows — general purge and trap analysis, routine LC-MS, and even some advanced QTOF or Time-of-Flight applications — ultra-high purity nitrogen and hydrogen supply isn't mandatory.
Other applications, however, absolutely require it. "Some other lab applications absolutely need in a mandatory way the 5.0 in nitrogen supply, up to the 6.0 in hydrogen supply," Irrera explains, pointing to high-sensitivity gas chromatography trace analysis and ultra-pure mass spectrometry performance — including GC carrier gas applications and ECD detection — as the use cases where this level of purity becomes essential.
Rather than starting with the generator itself, Irrera frames compliance around the instrument's actual requirements. Claind's hydrogen generator for GC and nitrogen lines are engineered around three parameters that matter most to analytical instrumentation: purity, pressure stability, and flow capacity.
Each generator is selected to meet those three requirements under the instrument's specific operating conditions, with Claind managing that selection directly rather than leaving customers to guess at part numbers. Irrera cites specific platform compatibility to make the point concrete:
- Thermo Fisher TSQ and Orbitrap systems
- Agilent triple quadrupole instruments
- AB Sciex Triple Quad and Q-Trap systems
- Bruker impact and TIMS TOF systems
- Shimadzu LC-MS series
"We can cope with this kind of different requirements... giving to end users basically not just products, but specifically solutions under our expertise and responsibility," Irrera says. The distinction matters: Claind positions itself as delivering complete, instrument-matched bundles rather than a catalog of standalone part numbers.
For labs still running on compressed gas cylinders, Irrera breaks the case for switching into three areas.
The COVID-19 pandemic exposed how dependent cylinder supply really is on the delivery network behind it. "Delayed deliveries, transportation issues, or cylinder shortages and emergency orders can all affect and interrupt the continuity of the analytical work," Irrera notes. On-site nitrogen generation versus cylinders removes that dependency entirely — the lab produces gas exactly when it's needed.
Replacing high-pressure cylinders reduces manual handling, in-lab transportation, regulator connections, and the need to continuously manage stored gas inventory. Generators produce only the gas volume needed at the point of use, rather than storing large quantities on-site — a meaningful advantage for labs focused on improving EHS metrics.
Long-term savings come from eliminating cylinder rental fees, delivery charges, administrative purchasing costs, and wastage from unused cylinder residuals. Once installed, ongoing costs are largely limited to electricity, routine maintenance, and periodic consumables.
Here's the part that surprises a lot of lab managers: cost is usually what starts the conversation, but it's rarely what ends it. "Customers initially consider on-site generation for cost saving... but after the installation, they usually assign a bigger value to uninterrupted gas supply and improved laboratory safety, even more than cost savings simply," Irrera says.
Helium supply disruptions have affected roughly 30% of global production, and that reality has fundamentally reshaped how labs talk about the gas. "A few years ago, this kind of conversation was mostly about cost saving. Today, we can say that this kind of discussion is more about supply security and the strategic management of the risk behind this kind of supply," Irrera explains.
That shift has widened who's in the room for these decisions. The conversation is "no longer limited to GC and lab scientists," Irrera says — it now regularly involves procurement departments, sustainability and ESG teams, and EHS managers. The message resonating most with U.S. labs today, in his words: on-site generators can turn gas "from a delivered consumable into a utility."
Given the supply and safety case, why hasn't every lab already made the switch? According to Irrera, it's rarely about cost or performance. "Most lab managers understand that the business case for hydrogen is there. What often stops them is the concern."
That concern shows up in two specific ways:
Even though modern hydrogen generators include dedicated safety features and produce hydrogen on demand rather than storing large volumes, many labs still associate hydrogen with risk in ways that aren't always technically justified. Lab managers ask whether EHS or building safety teams will approve the change, what happens in the event of a leak, and how auditors will view the shift — turning what should be a technical decision into a safety policy discussion.
In heavily regulated environments — pharmaceutical testing, food testing, environmental testing, and contract labs — the bigger hurdle is often how much validation work must be repeated, even when hydrogen delivers equivalent or better GC performance than helium.
Claind's CEO Giovanni Cogotzi adds an important note of transparency here: "We have to admit that helium cannot be completely substituted by hydrogen. There are cases where it's not possible, and we have these cases. We are completely transparent with our customers." Claind works with method consultants and publishes comparative studies to help customers understand exactly where hydrogen is — and isn't — the right fit.
A decade ago, cost drove the helium to hydrogen conversion conversation for GC. Today, it's speed. Hydrogen can cut GC analysis time by roughly 1.5 to 2 times with minimal loss in separation efficiency — a productivity gain Irrera describes as "a kind of physics," not a marketing claim.
In practice, Irrera walks customers through a three-question framework that tends to move a project from consideration to decision:
Can I reduce helium spending?
Can I eliminate supply risk?
Can I run more samples per day?
"By the time all of those are answered positively, the project often becomes much easier and justified internally," Irrera says.
The real barrier to helium-to-hydrogen conversion isn't technology — it's confidence. Labs need a partner who's transparent about where hydrogen fits and where it doesn't, and who can support the revalidation and safety-approval process rather than leaving a lab to navigate EHS and auditor questions alone.
As Claind's authorized representative in the United States, Organomation can help North American labs work through exactly that process — from instrument-specific generator matching using a hydrogen generator for GC to method consultation for a helium-to-hydrogen transition.
This is the second post in our series based on Organomation's conversations with Claind leadership. Read the first installment on Claind's origin story and Italian engineering DNA with CEO Giovanni Cogotzi.
Q: When is ultra-high purity nitrogen or hydrogen required in a lab?
A: Ultra-high purity gas (5.0-grade nitrogen or 6.0-grade hydrogen) is typically required for high-sensitivity gas chromatography trace analysis and ultra-pure mass spectrometry applications, such as GC carrier gas use and ECD detection. Routine applications like general purge and trap or standard LC-MS usually don't require this level of purity.
Q: What's really stopping labs from switching from helium to hydrogen?
A: It's rarely cost or performance. The main barriers are perceived safety risk around hydrogen (despite modern generators' on-demand production and built-in safety features) and the revalidation work required in regulated environments like pharma, food, and contract testing labs.
Q: Is hydrogen a safe replacement for helium as a GC carrier gas?
A: Modern hydrogen generators are designed with dedicated safety features and produce hydrogen on demand rather than storing large volumes, making them safer than many lab managers perceive. However, hydrogen cannot fully replace helium in every application, and labs should evaluate method-specific compatibility with expert guidance.
Q: What are the main advantages of on-site gas generation over gas cylinders?
A: On-site generation improves supply chain reliability by eliminating dependency on cylinder delivery networks, improves lab safety by reducing high-pressure cylinder handling and storage, and lowers long-term costs by eliminating rental fees, delivery charges, and cylinder wastage.