ExxonMobil, Worley to bring low-carbon hydrogen project to Baytown

big deal

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

Property Showcase

Houston companies scoop up $31 million in funds from DOE, EPA methane emissions program

fresh funds

The U.S. Department of Energy and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency announced the selection of seven projects from Houston companies to receive funding through the Methane Emissions Reduction Program.

The projects are among 43 others nationwide, including 12 from Texas, that reduce, monitor, measure, and quantify methane emissions from the oil and gas sector. The DOE and EPA awarded $850 million in total through the program.

The Houston companies picked up $31.7 million in federal funding through the program in addition to more than $9.5 million in non-federal dollars.

“I’m excited about the opportunities these will create internally but even more so the creation of jobs and training opportunities for the communities in which we work,” Scott McCurdy, Encino Environmental Services CEO, said in a news release. His company received awards for two projects.

“These projects will allow us to further support and strengthen the U.S. Energy industry’s ability to deliver clean, reliable, and affordable energy globally,” he added.

The Houston-area awards included:

DaphneTech USA LLC

Total funding: $5.8 million (approximately $4.5 million in federal, $1.3 million in non-federal)

The award was granted for the company’s Daphne and Williams Methane Slip Abatement Plasma-Catalyst Scale-Up project. Daphne will study how its SlipPure technology, a novel exhaust gas cleaning system that abates methane and exhaust gas pollution from natural gas-fueled engines, can be economically viable across multiple engine types and operating conditions.

Baker Hughes Energy Transition LLC

Total funding: $7.47 million (approximately $6 million in federal, $1.5 million in non-federal)

The award was granted for the company’s Advancing Low Cost CH4 Emissions Reduction from Flares through Large Scale Deployment of Retrofittable and Adaptive Technology project. The project aims to develop a scalable, integrated methane emissions reduction system for flares based on optical gas imaging and estimation algorithms.

Encino Environmental Services

Total funding: $15.17 million (approximately $11 million in federal, $4.17 million in non-federal)

The award was granted for two projects. The Advanced Methane Reduction System: Integrating Infrared and Visual Imaging to Assess Net Heating Value at the Combustion Zone and Determine Combustion Efficiency to Enhance Flaring Performance project aims to develop and deploy an advanced continuous emissions monitoring system. It’s Advancing Methane Emissions Reduction through Innovative Technology project will develop and deploy a technology using sensors and composite materials to address emissions originating in storage tanks.

Envana Software Solutions

Total funding: $5.26 million (approximately $4.2 million in federal, $1 million in non-federal)

The award was granted for the company’s Leak Detection and Reduction Software to Identify Methane Emissions and Trigger Mitigation at Oil and Gas Production Facilities Based on SCADA Data project. It aims to improve its Recon software for monitoring methane emissions and develop partnerships with local universities and organizations.

Capwell Services Inc.

Total funding: $4.19 million (approximately $3.3 million in federal, $837,000 in non-federal)

The award was granted for its Methane Emissions Abatement Technology for Low-Flow and Intermittent Emission Sources project. It aims to to deploy and field-test a methane abatement unit and improve air quality and health outcomes for communities near production facilities and establish field technician internships for local residents.

Blue Sky Measurements

Total funding: $3.41 million (approximately $2.7 million in federal, $683,000 in non-federal)

The award was granted for its Field Validation of Novel Fixed Position Optical Sensor for Fugitive Methane Emission Detection Quantification and Location with Real-Time Notification for Rapid Mitigation project. It aims to field test an optical sensing technology at six well sites in the Permian Basin.

Southern Methodist University, The University of Texas at Austin, Texas A&M Engineering Experiment Station and Hyliion Inc. were other Texas-based organizations to earn awards. See the full list of projects here.

Texas university's 'WaterHub' will dramatically reduce water usage by 40%

Sustainable Move

A major advancement in sustainability is coming to one Texas university. A new UT WaterHub at the University of Texas at Austin will be the largest facility of its kind in the U.S. and will transform how the university manages its water resources.

It's designed to work with natural processes instead of against them for water savings of an estimated 40 percent. It's slated for completion in late 2027.

The university has had an active water recovery program since the 1980s. Still, water is becoming an increasing concern in Austin. According to Texas Living Waters, a coalition of conservation groups, Texas loses enough water annually to fill Lady Bird Lake roughly 89 times over.

As Austin continues to expand and face water shortages, the region's water supply faces increased pressure. The UT WaterHub plans to address this challenge by recycling water for campus energy operations, helping preserve water resources for both the university and local communities.

The 9,600-square-foot water treatment facility will use an innovative filtration approach. To reduce reliance on expensive machinery and chemicals, the system uses plants to naturally filter water and gravity to pull it in the direction it needs to go. Used water will be gathered from a new collection point near the Darrell K Royal Texas Memorial Stadium and transported to the WaterHub, located in the heart of the engineering district. The facility's design includes a greenhouse viewable to the public, serving as an interactive learning space.

Beyond water conservation, the facility is designed to protect the university against extreme weather events like winter storms. This new initiative will create a reliable backup water supply while decreasing university water usage, and will even reduce wastewater sent to the city by up to 70 percent.

H2O Innovation, UT’s collaborator in this project, specializes in water solutions, helping organizations manage their water efficiently.

"By combining cutting-edge technology with our innovative financing approach, we’re making it easier for organizations to adopt sustainable water practices that benefit both their bottom line and the environment, paving a step forward in water positivity,” said H2O Innovation president and CEO Frédéric Dugré in a press release.

The university expects significant cost savings with this project, since it won't have to spend as much on buying water from the city or paying fees to dispose of used water. Over the next several years, this could add up to millions of dollars.

---

A version of this story originally appeared on our sister site, CultureMap Austin.

Report: Texas solar power, battery storage helped stabilize grid in summer 2024, but challenges remain

by the numbers

Research from the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas shows that solar power and battery storage capacity helped stabilize Texas’ electric grid last summer.

Between June 1 and Aug. 31, solar power met nearly 25 percent of midday electricity demand within the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) power grid. Rising solar and battery output in ERCOT assisted Texans during a summer of triple-digit heat and record load demands, but the report fears that the state’s power load will be “pushed to its limits” soon.

The report examined how the grid performed during more demanding hours. At peak times, between 11 a.m. and 2 p.m. in the summer of 2024, solar output averaged nearly 17,000 megawatts compared with 12,000 megawatts during those hours in the previous year. Between 6 p.m. and 9 p.m., discharge from battery facilities averaged 714 megawatts in 2024 after averaging 238 megawatts for those hours in 2023. Solar and battery output have continued to grow since then, according to the report.

“Batteries made a meaningful contribution to what those shoulder periods look like and how much scarcity we get into during these peak events,” ERCOT CEO Pablo Vegas said at a board of directors conference call.

Increases in capacity from solar and battery-storage power in 2024 also eclipsed those of 2023. In 2023 ECOT added 4,570 megawatts of solar, compared to adding nearly 9,700 megawatts in 2024. Growth in battery storage capacity also increased from about 1,500 megawatts added in 2023 to more than 4,000 megawatts added in 2024. Natural gas capacity also saw increases while wind capacity dropped by about 50 percent.

Texas’ installation of utility-scale solar surpassed California’s in the spring of last year, and jumped from 1,900 megawatts in 2019 to over 20,000 megawatts in 2024 with solar meeting about 50 percent of Texas' peak power demand during some days.

While the numbers are encouraging, the report states that there could be future challenges, as more generating capacity will be required due to data center construction and broader electrification trends. The development of generating more capacity will rely on multiple factors like price signals and market conditions that invite more baseload and dispatchable generating capacity, which includes longer-duration batteries, and investment in power purchase agreements and other power arrangements by large-scale consumers, according to the report.

Additionally, peak demand during winter freezes presents challenges not seen in the summer. For example, in colder months, peak electricity demand often occurs in the early morning before solar energy is available, and it predicts that current battery storage may be insufficient to meet the demand. The analysis indicated a 50% chance of rolling outages during a cold snap similar to December 2022 and an 80% chance if conditions mirror the February 2021 deep freeze at the grid’s current state.

The report also claimed that ERCOT’s energy-only market design and new incentive structures, such as the Texas Energy Fund, do not appear to be enough to meet the predicted future magnitude and speed of load growth.

Read the full report here.

View All Listings

ENERGYCAPITALHTX EMAILS ARE AWESOME