Today (Oct 13), the U.S. Department of Energy announced the recipients of the Regional Clean Hydrogen Hubs (also known as H2Hubs) funding, which includes up to $7 billion across seven regional hydrogen hubs. The recipients of the funding include:
- Appalachian Regional Clean Hydrogen Hub (ARCH2): West Virginia, Ohio, Pennsylvania
- Alliance for Renewable Clean Hydrogen Energy Systems (ARCHES): California
- HyVelocity H2Hub: Texas
- Heartland Hydrogen Hub: Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota
- Mid-Atlantic Clean Hydrogen Hub (MACH2): Pennsylvania, Delaware, New Jersey
- Midwest Alliance for Clean Hydrogen (MachH2): Illinois, Indiana, Michigan
"This is worse than expected," said Clean Energy Group President Seth Mullendore. "We are particularly disappointed in the administration's investment in blue hydrogen, which would more accurately be called fossil hydrogen with carbon capture. The fact that more than half the hubs will be using fossil gas is outrageous."
Clean Energy Group (CEG), along with our environmental justice partners, has previously documented the many issues with the widescale production, distribution, and use of blue and green hydrogen, including our specific concerns with the H2Hubs strategy.
"This reckless buildout of hydrogen infrastructure does nothing to advance climate goals, and the related emissions will harm environmental justice communities. We know that blue hydrogen production can increase air pollution up to 60 percent, and several of these hubs intend to produce hydrogen for combustion, which also leads to high levels of NOx pollution. Many of the communities around the hubs have already suffered from decades of air pollution and will now face even more," said Abbe Ramanan, director of CEG's Hydrogen Information and Public Education initiative.
CEG is strongly opposed to the production of fossil hydrogen with carbon capture (CCS), or so-called blue hydrogen. Multiple peer-reviewed analyses of blue hydrogen have found that, even with CCS, the production and combustion of hydrogen derived from natural gas produces more greenhouse gas emissions than directly burning natural gas (source 1, source 2). Current CCS technology can only capture about 55 percent of carbon emissions in the hydrogen production and combustion cycle, and it does nothing to stop fugitive methane emissions, which have a significant global warming impact (source). CCS also increases harmful particulate matter by up to 60 percent (source). The ARCH2, HyVelocity H2Hub, MACH2 and MachH2 hubs are in regions that have already been devastated by the fossil fuel industry, and all four hubs intend to produce fossil hydrogen with carbon capture. These hubs will only serve to perpetuate the fossil fuel industry and further exacerbate the damage it has caused.
Green hydrogen production has the potential to cause harm as well. Green hydrogen is produced via electrolysis, an extremely water-intensive process (source). The ARCHES Hub in California intends to produce green hydrogen in an area that has already experienced climate change-induced droughts, which are likely to intensify over time. Introducing a new source of intensive water demand to the area will put already stressed water tables at risk. Electrolysis is also a highly inefficient process - about 60 percent of the renewable energy that goes into the process is lost over the life cycle of hydrogen. This diverts valuable renewable energy resources that could be used to directly decarbonize the grid (source).
All hydrogen, regardless of how it is produced, is an indirect greenhouse gas. Due to its small molecular size, hydrogen is extremely leak-prone, and once leaked, will extend the lifetime of methane in the atmosphere (source). Building out these seven hubs, without further research into how to safely and securely transport and store hydrogen, will lead to significant short-term warming (source).
It is egregious that more than half of these hubs will be producing fossil-based hydrogen, while continuing to subject environmental justice communities to damaging pollution. While it is possible that green hydrogen could have a small role in decarbonizing the hardest to reach sectors, such as high-heat industrial processes, a build-out of hydrogen infrastructure at this scope and scale is unnecessary, harmful to public health, and jeopardizes climate change mitigation.
CONTACT: Abbe Ramanan, Project Director, Clean Energy Group, abbe@cleanegroup.org
About Clean Energy Group:
Clean Energy Group (CEG) is a leading national nonprofit advocacy organization focused on accelerating an equitable and inclusive transition to a resilient, sustainable, clean energy future. CEG works at the forefront of energy innovation to address the urgency of the climate crisis while strengthening historically marginalized communities through enabling greater access to and ownership of clean energy technologies. Founded in 1998, CEG has been a thought leader on effective climate and clean energy strategies for more than two decades, filling a critical resource gap by advancing disruptive energy initiatives and serving as a trusted source of technical expertise and independent analysis in support of communities, nonprofit advocates, and government leaders working on the frontlines of climate change. www.cleanegroup.org
Clean Energy Group
www.cleanegroup.org
