The facility in Baytown is expected to produce 28.3 million cubic meters of low-carbon hydrogen daily. Photo via exxonmobil.com

ExxonMobil selected Australia-based engineering and professional services company Worley to provide engineering, procurement and construction services for a proposed hydrogen and ammonia production facility in Baytown, which is expected to have a production capacity of 1 billion cubic feet of blue hydrogen per day. ExxonMobil expects the facility will be the largest of its kind in the world.

“We are delighted to continue our strategic, global relationship with ExxonMobil in its execution of upcoming projects, particularly in delivering this EPC project on the US Gulf Coast, which contributes significantly to strengthening Worley’s backlog,” Chris Ashton, CEO of Worley, states, according to Offshore Energy.

The facility in Baytown is expected to produce 28.3 million cubic meters (1 billion cubic feet) of low-carbon hydrogen daily and nearly 1 million metric tonnes (more than 1 million tons) of ammonia per year, which will also capture more than 98 percent of the associated CO2 emissions.

The facility will leverage advanced carbon capture and storage technologies to reduce emissions associated with hydrogen production. ExxonMobile also said its carbon capture and storage system would be available for use by third-party CO2 emitters in the area.

A final investment decision is expected in 2025 , and an anticipated startup in 2029. “Blue” hydrogen is expected to be a top energy driver in 2025 according to global consultancy Wood Mackenzie who predicts that at least three large-scale blue hydrogen projects in the U.S will reach FID by next year.

The company hopes the new facility will help in creating U.S. jobs and supporting community development initiatives throughout the Houston area, and the state.

The new initiative will take stranded natural gas and turn it into hydrogen. Photo via Getty Images

New York financial firm partners with Houston O&G co. to turn natural gas into blue hydrogen

teamwork

A new partnership between an energy and sustainability investor and a Houston-based company that focuses on cleaner solutions in the oil and gas industry will look into turning stranded natural gas into blue hydrogen.

New York-based Double Zero Holdings and SJ Environmental announced their new partnership this week in an effort to move forward the energy transition. According to the companies, stranded natural gas — mostly methane — usually remains unused where it is not economically viable to transport. By turning these gasses into into blue hydrogen, "the partnership mitigates methane and CO2 emissions while producing hydrogen—a clean fuel that could revolutionize multiple industries," reads the news release.

The initiative will use existing technologies, which can be reduced to the size of a standard shipping container, per the release.

"We're thrilled to partner with SJ Environmental to tackle one of the most pressing environmental issues today," Raja Ramachandran, managing partner of Double Zero Holdings, says in the release. "This collaboration allows us to turn stranded natural gas—a significant environmental liability—into a valuable resource, supporting the global shift toward cleaner energy."

The plan is to lower the amount of natural gas left wasted and provide a low-carbon alternative across transportation, manufacturing, and power generation.

"Our collaboration with Double Zero Holdings reflects our commitment to innovative, sustainable solutions," SJ Environmental Director John Chappell adds. "Together, we're setting a new standard for energy production, delivering hydrogen and food-grade CO₂ where natural gas would typically be flared."

Blue, green, gold — what do all the colors of hydrogen even mean? Photo via Getty Images

Hydrogen's many colors, Houston companies that are focused on it, and more

Guest column

Repeated association of specific colors in defined contexts deeply reinforces themes in the human brain. It’s why most students and alumni of Texas A&M University scoff at the sight of burnt orange, and you’d be hard-pressed to find the home of a Longhorn adorned in shades of crimson or maroon.

The color-coding of hydrogen energy production exemplifies one such ambiguous classification methodology, as the seemingly innocuous labeling of hydrogen as green (for hydrogen produced from renewable sources) and black (for hydrogen produced from coal) initially helped to quickly discern which sources of hydrogen are environmentally friendly or not.

But the coding system quickly became more complicated, as the realization that hydrogen extracted from natural gas (aka grey hydrogen) or coal (again, black hydrogen, or sometimes, brown hydrogen, depending on the carbon content and energy density of the source coal) could be extracted in a less harmful way, by introducing methods of carbon capture and storage.

These cleaner methods for hydrogen extraction earned the lofty color coding of blue, just one shade away from green in the rainbow spectrum and a safe distance from the less delightful and inspiring colors grey, brown, and black.

Then along came pyrolysis — a method for producing hydrogen through methane cracking, plainly, the decomposition of methane, CH4, into solid carbon and hydrogen gas, without the introduction of oxygen. This method results in significantly less (if any) creation of carbon dioxide as a by-product. Logic would lead one to categorize this process with a color that lies further away from black than exalted cousin, green hydrogen.

However, the solid carbon that remains after pyrolysis retains over one-third of the original energy available from methane and could tip the GHG scales negatively if not utilized in an environmentally responsible manner, so it’s not a clear-cut winner in the game of lower-carbon energy production. Thus, it is nestled between green and blue and often referred to as “turquoise hydrogen” production.

Other hydrogen production methods — pink, purple, and red — defy rainbow logic as they have all proven to result in higher GHG emissions than the original “clean” queen, green hydrogen, despite following a similar electrolysis process to separate hydrogen and oxygen from one another in its original composition as water. The source of electricity used in the electrolysis process determines the color-code here, as pink hydrogen is generated from nuclear power, red hydrogen is generated from nuclear thermal power, and purple hydrogen is generated from a combination of nuclear power and nuclear thermal power.

Yellow hydrogen seems to not yet have found a clear definition. Some argue it refers to green hydrogen produced exclusively from solar-powered electrolysis, while others claim it to be the child of mixed green/gray hydrogen. Artists should probably keep a far distance from this conversation, unless the energy produced from the steam coming out of their ears could perform electrolysis more cleanly than any of the green hydrogen solutions.

Finally, we have white hydrogen, the naturally occurring, zero-carbon emitting, plentiful element found in the earth’s crust – which is also the least understood of all the hydrogen extraction methodologies.

Remember, hydrogen is the first element in the periodic table, meaning it’s density is very low. Hydrogen knows no bounds, and once it escapes from its natural home, it either floats off into outer space or attaches itself to another element to form a more containable compound, like water.

Many believe white hydrogen to be the unquestionable solution to a lower-carbon energy future but there is still much to be understood. Capturing, storing, and transporting white hydrogen remain mostly theoretical, despite recent progress, which includes one recently announced Houston lab dedicated to hydrogen transport. Another Houston company, Syzygy has raised millions with its light-based catalyst for hydrogen production.

For example, Cemvita, a local Houston chemical manufacturing company, predicts a future powered by gold hydrogen: white hydrogen sourced from depleted oil and gas wells. Many wildcatters believe strongly in a new era of exploration for white hydrogen using techniques refined in oil and gas exploration, including reservoir analysis, drilling, and fracking.

Without a doubt, investigating further the various hydrogen extraction theories is surely a craveable new challenge for the sciences. But perhaps the current color-coding nomenclature for hydrogen needs refinement, as well.

Unless used in the scientific context of wavelength, color-based labels represent an ambiguous classification tool, as the psychology of color depends on modern societal norms. The association of colors with the various hydrogen production methodologies does very little to distinguish the climate impact each method produces. Additionally, the existing categorizations do not consider any further distribution or processing of the produced hydrogen — a simple fact that could easily negate any amount of cleanliness implied by the various production methods — and a topic for a future article.

For now, hydrogen represents one of the front-running sources for a lower-carbon energy future, but it’s up to you if that’s best represented by a blue ribbon, gold medal, white star, or cold-hard greenbacks.

------

Lindsey Ferrell is a contributing writer to EnergyCapitalHTX and founder of Guerrella & Co.

Scott Nyquist debates both sides of the hydrogen argument in this week’s ECHTX Voices of Energy guest column. Photo courtesy of Aramco.

Will 2023 be hydrogen’s year?

GUEST COLUMN

Yes and no.

Yes, because there is real money, and action, behind it.

Globally, there are 600 projects on the books to build electrolyzers, which separate the oxygen and hydrogen in water, and are critical to creating low-emissions “green hydrogen.” That investment could drive down the cost of low-emissions hydrogen, making it cost competitive with conventional fuels—a major obstacle to its development so far.

In addition, oil companies are interested, too. The industry already uses hydrogen for refining; many see hydrogen as supplemental to their existing operations and perhaps, eventually, supplanting them. In the meantime, it helps them to decarbonize their refining and petrochemical operations, which most of the majors have committed to doing.

Indeed, hydrocarbon-based companies and economies could have a big opportunity in “blue hydrogen,” which uses fossil fuels for production, but then captures and stores emissions. (“Green hydrogen” uses renewables; because it is expensive to produce, it is more distant than blue. “Gray hydrogen” uses fossil fuels, without carbon capture; this accounts for most current production and use.) Oil and gas companies have a head start on related infrastructure, such as pipelines and carbon capture, and also see new business opportunities, such as low-carbon ammonia.

Houston, for example, which likes to call itself the "energy capital of the world,” is going big on hydrogen. The region is well suited to this. It has an extensive pipeline infrastructure, an excellent port system, a pro-business culture, and experience. The Greater Houston Partnership and McKinsey—both of whom I am associated with—estimate that demand for hydrogen will grow 6 to 8 percent a year from 2030 to 2050. No wonder Houston wants a piece of that action.

There are promising, near-term applications for hydrogen, such as ammonia, cement, and steel production, shipping, long-term energy storage, long-haul trucking, and aviation. These bits and pieces add up: steel alone accounts for about 8 percent of global carbon-dioxide emissions. Late last year, Airbus announced it is developing a hydrogen-powered fuel cell engine as part of its effort to build zero-emission aircraft. And Cummins, a US-based engine company, is investing serious money in hydrogen for trains and commercial and industrial vehicles, where batteries are less effective; it already has more than 500 electrolyzers at work.

Then there is recent US legislation. The Infrastructure, Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) of 2021 allocated $9.5 billion funding for hydrogen. Much more important, though, was last year’s Inflation Reduction Act, which contains generous tax credits to promote hydrogen production. The idea is to narrow the price gap between clean hydrogen and other, more emissions-intensive technologies; in effect, the law seeks to fundamentally change the economics of hydrogen and could be a true game-changer.

This is not without controversy: some Europeans think this money constitutes subsidies that are not allowed under trade rules. For its part, Europe has the hydrogen bug, too. Its REPowerEU plan is based on the idea of “hydrogen-ready infrastructure,” so that natural gas projects can be converted to hydrogen when the technology and economics make sense.

So there is a lot of momentum behind hydrogen, bolstered by the ambitious goals agreed to at the most recent climate conference in Egypt. McKinsey estimates that hydrogen demand could reach 660 million tons by 2050, which could abate 20 percent of total emissions. Total planned production for lower-emission green and blue hydrogen through 2030 has reached more than 26 million metric tons annually—quadruple that of 2020.

No, because major issues have not been figured out.

The plans in the works, while ambitious, are murky. A European official, asked about the REPowerEU strategy, admitted that “it’s not clear how it will work.” The same can be said of the United States. The hydrogen value chain, particularly for green hydrogen, requires a lot of electricity, and that calls for flexible grids and much greater capacity. For the United States to reach its climate goals, the grid needs to grow an estimated 60 percent by 2030.That is not easy: just try siting new transmission lines and watch the NIMBY monsters emerge.

Permitting can be a nightmare, often requiring separate approvals from local, state, interstate, and federal authorities, and from different authorities for each (air, land, water, endangered species, and on and on); money does not solve this. Even a state like Texas, which isn’t allergic to fossil fuels and has a relatively light regulatory touch, can get stuck in permitting limbo. Bill Gates recently noted that “over 1,000 gigawatts worth of potential clean energy projects [in the United States] are waiting for approval—about the current size of the entire U.S. grid—and the primary reason for the bottleneck is the lack of transmission.”

Then there is the matter of moving hydrogen from production site to market. Pipeline networks are not yet in place and shifting natural gas pipelines to hydrogen is a long way off. Liquifying hydrogen and transporting is expensive. In general, because hydrogen is still a new industry, it faces “chicken or egg” problems that are typical of the difficulties big innovations face, such as connecting hydrogen buyers to hydrogen producers and connecting carbon emitters to places to store the carbon dioxide. These challenges add to the complexity of getting projects financed.

Finally, there is money. McKinsey estimates that getting on track to that 600 million tons would require investment of $950 billion by 2030; so far, $240 billion has been announced.

Where I stand: in the middle.

I believe in hydrogen’s potential. More than 3 years ago, I wrote about hydrogen, arguing that while there had been real progress, “many things need to happen, in terms of policy, finance, and infrastructure, before it becomes even a medium-sized deal.” Now, some of those things are happening.

So, I guess I land somewhere in the middle. I think 2023 will see real progress, in decarbonizing refining and petrochemicals operations and producing ammonia, specifically. I am also optimistic that a number of low-emissions electrolysis projects will move ahead. And while such advances might seem less than transformative, they are critical: hydrogen, whether blue or green, needs to prove itself, and 2023 could be the year it does.

Because I take hydrogen’s potential seriously, though, I also see the barriers. If it is to become the big deal its supporters believe it could be, that requires big money, strong engineering and construction project management, sustained commitment, and community support. It’s easy to proclaim the wonders of the hydrogen economy; it’s much more difficult to devise sensible business models, standardized contracts, consistent incentives, and a regulatory system that doesn’t drive producers crazy. But all this matters—a lot.

My conclusion: there will be significant steps forward in 2023—but take-off is still years away.

------

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.

Ad Placement 300x100
Ad Placement 300x600

CultureMap Emails are Awesome

Chevron eyes $7B Texas power plant for Microsoft data center campus

power deal

Software giant Microsoft is negotiating exclusively with Houston-based oil and gas titan Chevron and investment firm Engine No. 1 about the development of a $7 billion power plant in West Texas that would supply electricity for a Microsoft data center campus.

The proposed natural-gas-fired plant initially would generate 2,500 megawatts of electricity, Bloomberg reports. The plant would be built near Pecos, a Permian Basin city, in an area where Microsoft plans to build a 2,500-megawatt data center campus on a 7,000-acre site.

A deal with Microsoft would secure a long-term customer for the plant’s output and help finance its construction, Bloomberg says. The project, expected to be producing power by 2030, still requires tax and environmental approvals as well an agreement to terms among Chevron, Engine No. 1, and Microsoft.

In a statement issued after Bloomberg reported the news, Chevron acknowledged it was in exclusive talks with Engine No. 1 and Microsoft, but the oil and gas company offered no details.

Chevron says the proposed plant “reflects an emerging shift in how power for AI is being developed, bringing energy supply closer to demand through co-located, behind-the-meter generation to deliver reliability while helping avoid added strain on regional electricity systems. It pairs sustained, always-on demand from advanced computing with proven capability to design, build, and operate large-scale energy infrastructure.”

Development of gas-powered electrical plants for AI data centers represents a new—and potentially lucrative— business line for Chevron. In 2025, Chevron, Engine No. 1 and GE Vernova announced a partnership to produce natural gas for AI data centers in the U.S.

Chevron’s collaboration with Engine No. 1 has already secured an order for seven large natural gas turbines from GE Vernova, according to Bloomberg.

“Energy is the key to America’s AI dominance,” Chris James, founder and chief investment officer of Engine No. 1, said last year. “By using abundant domestic natural gas to generate electricity directly connected to data centers, we can secure AI leadership, drive productivity gains across our economy, and restore America’s standing as an industrial superpower.”

8 CERAWeek 2026 takeaways from a new Houston energy leader

guest column

My first CERAWeek was a blur.

Having top energy executives, policymakers, and technologists all gathered in Houston—over 11,000 of them this year—was both overwhelming and energizing. The theme was “Convergence and Competition: Energy, Technology, and Geopolitics,” and walking through the George R. Brown Convention Center, it was immediately clear that this was no ordinary industry conference.

As a first-timer with a Greentown Labs lens, here’s what really stuck with me.

Disruption is the new normal

CERAWeek 2026 was set against the backdrop of conflict in the Middle East, the continued race to power AI, and a clear throughline: disruption is increasingly the new normal. You could feel it in every hallway conversation. The ongoing conflict in the Middle East, specifically Iran’s attacks on Qatar’s Ras Laffan facility and the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, affected roughly 20% of the world’s liquified natural gas supply, and that was woven into nearly every conversation throughout the week.

Secretary of Energy Chris Wright opened the conference with “Energy is life,” then quickly turned to natural gas. “America’s superpower is natural gas,” he said, pointing to its role in industry, heat, electricity, fertilizer, exports, and leading AI and manufacturing. That set the tone early and it never really shifted.

AI is still everywhere, but the conversation has shifted

No surprise that AI dominated the agenda. But what struck me as a first-timer was how much the conversation had matured. The AI discussion has moved from general enthusiasm to a much more practical focus on real use cases and measurable outcomes.

NVIDIA, Anthropic, and CyrusOne joined the established tech presences of Microsoft, Google, and AWS, occupying the Innovation Agora’s new AI Hub, which displaced the hydrogen hub from prior years. That detail alone tells you something about where the energy conversation has shifted. Annual global investment in data centers reached $771 billion in 2025, nearly on par with oil and gas ($835 billion) and renewable energy ($798 billion). We are not talking about a niche technology story anymore. This is a capital story, an infrastructure story, and an energy story all at once.

The prevailing tone was uncertain; the gap between what is being announced and what can actually be delivered was the subtext of almost every conversation. Transmission takes over a decade to build. The new generation takes five to nine years. AI infrastructure moves on three-to-five-year timelines. The math doesn’t work yet, and everyone is aware.

Pitch competitions still draw crowds

The Energy Venture Day and Pitch Competition at the McKinney Balcony was one of my favorite events of the week. Seeing Greentown members on that stage never gets old, but what really energized me was the broader mix: students, new founders, and veteran entrepreneurs in one space, all talking about how what they’re building is going to impact the world. S&P Global launched the NextGen cohort with 100+ graduate students from around the country getting a front-row seat to the energy sector.

Geothermal may have stolen the show

If I had to pick the most surprising theme of my first CERAWeek, it was geothermal. It drew the most consistent endorsement of the week, with Department of Energy representatives, oil and gas majors, and operators broadly aligned on its potential. Project InnerSpace hosted a dedicated Geothermal House for the first time, launching a standardized resource classification framework with the Society of Petroleum Engineers and an XPRIZE collaboration targeting surface-plant supply chain breakthroughs. For a sector that has lived in the shadows of wind and solar for years, CERAWeek 2026 was geothermal’s time to shine.

Wow, was I impressed with Melanie Nakagawa

Melanie Nakagawa, chief sustainability officer at Microsoft, delivered an impressive keynote during her fireside chat with Brad Burke. Her depth of experience, from the U.S. Department of State and venture capital to her current role at Microsoft, was matched only by her calm, hopeful demeanor. Leaders like her at the helm of climate action inspire genuine confidence in the future.

What about hydrogen?

Hydrogen was notably absent from the main stage. The AI Hub in the Innovation Agora displaced the hydrogen hub that had been a fixture in prior years. Seems like hydrogen still plays a role, but not as quickly or broadly as hoped. Blue hydrogen is moving forward cautiously. It wasn’t gone from the conversation entirely, but it no longer commands the room.

The label problem isn’t going away

Politics continues to polarize the industry. Climatetech, sustainability, cleantech — some labels carry broad objectives, others have become tribal signals. “Energy transition” for some means a replacement of fossil fuels; for others, it means an evolution across multiple dimensions simultaneously. CERAWeek 2026 showed an industry increasingly focused not on feel-good narratives about the future of energy, but on the harder questions of security, buildout, reliability, affordability, and competitiveness. A pragmatic shift may be the best answer to the label problem.

Collaboration isn’t optional—it’s strategic

The energy transition is no longer primarily an environmental story. It has become a technology and national competitiveness story. The problems are too big for any one company, sector, or country to solve alone. From incubators and investors to utilities and hyperscalers, the message was consistent all week: move together or we don’t move. S&P Global introduced “The Bridge,” a new venue specifically for energy-tech crossover conversations: a small but meaningful signal that even the conference organizers recognize that collaboration will get us further.

The scale and the energy in the room (pun intended) are what stood out most from my first CERAWeek. The industry knows what needs to get built. The question now is whether we can work together to build it fast enough.

See you next year, CERAWeek.

---

Kelsey Kearns is director of Greentown Houston with more than a decade of experience in the technology sector. She served as director of community strategy for Greentown Houston from September 2025 to February 2026. Before that, she was director of business development for Howdy.com.

Houston nuclear startup launches at CERAWeek, plans Texas facility

going nuclear

A new nuclear energy startup launched last month during CERAWeek in the Bayou City.

FluxPoint Energy, the new Houston- and McLean, Virginia-based company, plans to develop the nation’s first new uranium conversion facility in more than 70 years, an effort CEO and founder Mike Chilton says is critical to unlocking the next phase of nuclear energy growth.

"Policymakers, utilities, and developers increasingly point to fuel availability as a limiting factor for America's nuclear reactors—both present and future," Chilton said in a news release. "Uranium conversion has become an unacceptable chokepoint in a global supply chain still dominated by foreign providers."

Chilton has held leadership roles at Pegasus-Global Holdings and GE Verona Hitachi Global Nuclear Fuels. Rodrigo Gonzalez Arbizu serves as COO and Christopher J. Rimel as chief of staff. The Board of Advisors includes energy leaders, including Jeff Lyash, John Sharp, Jane Stricker, Jennifer Skylakos, Leo Weitzenhoff and Jay Wileman.

FluxPoint’s planned facility will convert uranium oxide into uranium hexafluoride (UF6). Although FluxPoit’s new facility is still far off, the company announced it had secured a site and completed both market and feasibility studies. The specific area has not been revealed, only that it will be in Texas.

Discussions at CERAWeek revolved around securing reliable sources of uranium.

Nuclear energy production has been stagnant or even in slight decline since the 1990s. Concerns about nuclear waste and safety, as well as prohibitive costs, have kept new plants from being built, while the widespread availability of cheap natural gas has made investing in nuclear power less profitable. Many see the technology as dangerous and outdated.

However, as energy crises become more common, companies like FluxPoint are looking to restart the nuclear energy sector. The industry got a boost under the Biden Administration thanks to the Inflation Reduction Act, which set goals of adding 35 gigawatts of new capacity by 2035.

Chilton participated in a panel on the best ways to ensure American nuclear plants have access to uranium, most of which is not mined in the United States.

"America cannot lead in nuclear energy while relying on foreign-controlled fuel processing," Chilton added. "FluxPoint was created to restore a critical piece of our nation's energy infrastructure—ensuring that U.S. reactors have access to a secure, domestic fuel supply. This is about energy security, economic strength, and global leadership."