The $7 billion clean hydrogen hub initiative, introduced as part of the Biden administration’s ambitious climate agenda, is facing criticism from community and environmental justice advocates, who argue that there is insufficient transparency and public involvement. These advocates emphasize the importance of meaningful community engagement in projects that could significantly impact local economies and environments. The initiative aims to establish regional hubs for hydrogen production, a fuel touted for its potential to reduce reliance on fossil fuels, yet concerns about its production methods and the lack of detailed communication with affected communities remain significant obstacles.
When the U.S. Department of Energy announced funding for seven regional clean hydrogen hubs in October 2023, it was met with cautious optimism from environmentalists. Yet, past information highlighted similar issues where large-scale energy projects often proceeded with minimal public input, resulting in adverse effects on local communities. The current dissatisfaction echoes prior instances where local voices were overshadowed by broader government objectives.
Is Public Engagement Sufficient?
Critics, including Tom Torres from the Ohio River Valley Institute, express dissatisfaction with current engagement efforts, stating that genuine involvement requires more than superficial consultations.
“Engagement isn’t merely leading people into a process that’s going to happen with or without them,” Torres commented, emphasizing the need for substantial input from communities potentially affected by these initiatives.
Advocates demand clarity on the production methods, usage, and transportation of hydrogen, including where carbon from carbon capture processes would be stored.
Spokespeople for the Department of Energy have acknowledged these concerns but indicated that plans are still being developed, hinting at more comprehensive community involvement in the future. However, frustrations persist as advocates fear that any forthcoming opportunities for community input may come too late to significantly influence the project’s development.
What Are the Main Concerns?
The production of hydrogen, often derived from fossil fuels, raises environmental concerns. While hydrogen burns cleanly, producing it without greenhouse gas emissions is challenging. Current projects, like the Appalachian Regional Hydrogen Hub (ARCH2), plan to use steam methane reforming and carbon capture, combining natural gas and electrolysis. However, these methods have environmentalists questioning their overall climate benefits.
“It is literally like building the natural gas infrastructure that we have all over the place again for hydrogen,” remarked Shawn Bennett from Battelle, illustrating the scale and impact of these developments.
Regional hubs such as MachH2, spanning multiple Midwestern states, will rely on a mix of energy sources, including nuclear and renewable energy, to produce hydrogen.
Community groups have attempted to engage the Department of Energy for over a year, seeking transparency and meaningful discussions about the projects and their potential impacts. A significant concern is the exclusion of pipeline discussions from community engagement sessions, which, according to Lauren Piette from Earthjustice, are integral to the MachH2 hub.
“Our jaws were on the table,” said Susan Thomas from Just Transition Northwest Indiana, highlighting the unexpected nature of the Department of Energy’s MachH2 funding announcement.
This lack of preparedness for community discussions, coupled with the absence of a clear budget for outreach activities, has fueled apprehension among local stakeholders.
The Biden administration’s hydrogen hub initiative represents a significant effort to transition towards cleaner energy solutions. However, the approach to public engagement and transparency has drawn considerable scrutiny, mirroring past challenges faced by large-scale energy projects. Ensuring effective communication and community involvement is crucial for the initiative’s success and public acceptance. As the initiative progresses, addressing these concerns will be vital to balance the potential environmental benefits of clean hydrogen with the needs and rights of local communities.
