guest column

Expert: Houston is the energy capital of the world now — but can it stay that way?

Can Houston stay a leader in the future of energy? Scott Nyquist weighs in. Photo via Getty Images

Houston has a legacy in in the energy industry — but can it remain the energy capital of the world? In short, yes.

That may sound counterintuitive, given that the energy system is transitioning — slowly, but inexorably — away from the city’s strengths in oil and gas. But that is the point: to an extent that may be overlooked, the O&G industry is critical to the transition, in two ways. Houston is well placed to take the lead on both.

First, there is the simple fact that oil and gas are essential, and will be for decades to come. About 99 percent of vehicles on the road right now use fossil fuels, and there are no readily available substitutes for their uses as feedstock for other industries, such as chemicals. Oil and gas account for almost 70 percent of US primary energy demand.

I do believe that their influence will diminish, as the energy system transitions to cleaner, lower-emission sources. McKinsey’s most recent Global Energy Perspective projected demand for oil will peak by 2027 and for gas a decade later. The International Energy Agency (IEA) sees the same evolution, but somewhat more slowly. Even after demand peaks, whenever that is, oil and gas will still be used, just not as much. I don’t see any reasonable scenario in which oil and gas disappears or is left in the ground for decades to come.

Second, and more interestingly, the O&G industry itself is essential to the goal of reducing greenhouse-gas emissions. If that sounds counterintuitive, too—well, it is. But bear with me. Under almost all emissions-reduction scenarios, carbon capture and storage (CCS), including direct air capture, and hydrogen play huge roles--accounting for more than 20 percent of future cuts in the IEA’s projection, for example. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change also sees a big role for CCS, while noting that “global rates of CCS deployment are far below those in modelled pathways limiting global warming to 1.5°C or 2°C.” In other words, it matters, and there’s not enough of it. Hydrogen has been many people’s favorite technology of the future since at least the 1990s; the World Energy Council says it could account for as much as 25 percent of total final energy consumption by 2050, though likely less.

Let’s consider CCS first. This refers to reducing carbon-dioxide (CO2) emissions, particularly from industry, by capturing it on-site and then storing it underground: it is therefore never released into the atmosphere. Direct air capture sucks out carbon from the atmosphere, and then stores it. There is more than enough storage capacity, according to the IEA, and the technologies work.

No alt text provided for this image

Credit: Global CCS Institute

The problem has been regulation and economics—CCS is relatively expensive. About half of US emissions come from power generation and industry, such as cement; carbon capture works for both. And that is just what is possible now. Eventually, captured CO2 could be used to make a wide array of products, including building materials, carbon fiber, synthetic fuels, and plastics.

The Biden Administration is allocating $3.5 billion for direct air capture projects and $8 billion for hydrogen; those are not huge sums, given how costly large-scale energy projects are, but it just might be the beginning of bigger things. In addition, companies that have committed to net zero are beginning to put serious money behind carbon capture—almost $2 billion so far this year, compared to just $50 million in the past.

All this is relevant to Houston because Texas is the largest single US producer of both oil and gas, and these are the only players that now routinely use CCS, for gas processing and enhanced oil recovery. Houston is, by far, the national leader in carbon capture. Moreover, CCS can help to scale up “blue” or lower-emissions hydrogen, which could be an even bigger opportunity.

Hydrogen is not a source of energy, but a carrier of it. Once the hydrogen is produced—that is, separated from other elements, such as the oxygen in water—it can be stored and then released, either through combustion or via a fuel cell that converts hydrogen into electricity. Hydrogen could be used in a wide variety of ways, including powering vehicles, heating buildings, and fueling industry. Indeed, its potential is so broad and deep that the Hydrogen Council (with help from McKinsey) estimated late last year that hydrogen could contribute more than 20 percent of emissions abatement to 2050. The Council is a trade group and may therefore be a little optimistic (or a lot), but no one questions the potential of hydrogen in cutting emissions.

Right now, the primary use of hydrogen is in oil refining, which is one of Houston’s major industries. In addition, O&G companies are already looking into the conversion of methane in natural gas to hydrogen as well as the possibility of blending hydrogen into natural gas to lower the carbon content.

The Houston region already produces and consumes a third of the nation’s hydrogen, and is home to most of its dedicated hydrogen pipelines; its massive and efficient pipeline and transport system for gas can be adapted to move hydrogen. For the production of “green” or very-low emissions hydrogen, Houston also has a significant—and growing--renewable energy infrastructure. Indeed, if Texas was a country, it would be the world’s fifth-largest generator of wind power, and it is second in solar in the United States.

In short, when it comes to hydrogen, Houston is well ahead of the competitive pack, not only in physical terms, but in the human expertise that will count most of all to turn hydrogen from boutique to big. According to a recent report by the Center for Houston’s Future, Houston-based hydrogen assets could abate 220 million tons of carbon emissions by 2050, or more than half of Texas’s current emissions. Plus, it could create $100 billion in economic value.

The bottom line: there is no practical emissions reduction on the scale that the United States has committed to—net zero by 2050—without the development of CCS and hydrogen. And the O&G industry is leading the way in both these technologies. That puts Houston in an enviable position to both be part of the transition and to benefit from it. All told, according to the Houston Energy Transition Initiative, which includes 17 major energy-industry players, the region could gain up to 400,000 jobs in an accelerated scenario of adopting lower-carbon technologies. (McKinsey helped with this research, too.) To use a term beloved of consultants, that looks like a win-win.

Houston calls itself the “energy capital of the world”—and this isn’t a case of all hat and no cattle. The city is home to a critical mass of capital, innovation, expertise, and entrepreneurship. To continue to deserve that title, however, will require Houston to embrace the challenge of the energy transition: providing the reliable energy the world needs while also reducing emissions.

------

Scott Nyquist is a senior advisor at McKinsey & Company and vice chairman, Houston Energy Transition Initiative of the Greater Houston Partnership. The views expressed herein are Nyquist's own and not those of McKinsey & Company or of the Greater Houston Partnership. This article originally ran on LinkedIn.

Trending News

A View From HETI

Greenhouse gases continue to rise, and the challenges they pose are not going away. Photo via Getty Images

For the past 40 years, climate policy has often felt like two steps forward, one step back. Regulations shift with politics, incentives get diluted, and long-term aspirations like net-zero by 2050 seem increasingly out of reach. Yet greenhouse gases continue to rise, and the challenges they pose are not going away.

This matters because the costs are real. Extreme weather is already straining U.S. power grids, damaging homes, and disrupting supply chains. Communities are spending more on recovery while businesses face rising risks to operations and assets. So, how can the U.S. prepare and respond?

The Baker Institute Center for Energy Studies (CES) points to two complementary strategies. First, invest in large-scale public adaptation to protect communities and infrastructure. Second, reframe carbon as a resource, not just a waste stream to be reduced.

Why Focusing on Emissions Alone Falls Short

Peter Hartley argues that decades of global efforts to curb emissions have done little to slow the rise of CO₂. International cooperation is difficult, the costs are felt immediately, and the technologies needed are often expensive. Emissions reduction has been the central policy tool for decades, and it has been neither sufficient nor effective.

One practical response is adaptation, which means preparing for climate impacts we can’t avoid. Some of these measures are private, taken by households or businesses to reduce their own risks, such as farmers shifting crop types, property owners installing fire-resistant materials, or families improving insulation. Others are public goods that require policy action. These include building stronger levees and flood defenses, reinforcing power grids, upgrading water systems, revising building codes, and planning for wildfire risks. Such efforts protect people today while reducing long-term costs, and they work regardless of the source of extreme weather. Adaptation also does not depend on global consensus; each country, state, or city can act in its own interest. Many of these measures even deliver benefits beyond weather resilience, such as stronger infrastructure and improved security against broader threats.

McKinsey research reinforces this logic. Without a rapid scale-up of climate adaptation, the U.S. will face serious socioeconomic risks. These include damage to infrastructure and property from storms, floods, and heat waves, as well as greater stress on vulnerable populations and disrupted supply chains.

Making Carbon Work for Us

While adaptation addresses immediate risks, Ken Medlock points to a longer-term opportunity: turning carbon into value.

Carbon can serve as a building block for advanced materials in construction, transportation, power transmission, and agriculture. Biochar to improve soils, carbon composites for stronger and lighter products, and next-generation fuels are all examples. As Ken points out, carbon-to-value strategies can extend into construction and infrastructure. Beyond creating new markets, carbon conversion could deliver lighter and more resilient materials, helping the U.S. build infrastructure that is stronger, longer-lasting, and better able to withstand climate stress.

A carbon-to-value economy can help the U.S. strengthen its manufacturing base and position itself as a global supplier of advanced materials.

These solutions are not yet economic at scale, but smart policies can change that. Expanding the 45Q tax credit to cover carbon use in materials, funding research at DOE labs and universities, and supporting early markets would help create the conditions for growth.

Conclusion

Instead of choosing between “doing nothing” and “net zero at any cost,” we need a third approach that invests in both climate resilience and carbon conversion.

Public adaptation strengthens and improves the infrastructure we rely on every day, including levees, power grids, water systems, and building standards that protect communities from climate shocks. Carbon-to-value strategies can complement these efforts by creating lighter, more resilient carbon-based infrastructure.

CES suggests this combination is a pragmatic way forward. As Peter emphasizes, adaptation works because it is in each nation’s self-interest. And as Ken reminds us, “The U.S. has a comparative advantage in carbon. Leveraging it to its fullest extent puts the U.S. in a position of strength now and well into the future.”

-----------

Scott Nyquist is a senior advisor at McKinsey & Company and vice chairman, Houston Energy Transition Initiative of the Greater Houston Partnership. The views expressed herein are Nyquist's own and not those of McKinsey & Company or of the Greater Houston Partnership. This article originally appeared on LinkedIn.

Trending News