Baker Hughes has teamed up with Dallas-based Frontier Infrastructure and has been selected by the U.S. Air Force and the Department of Defense for global clean energy projects. Photo via bakerhughes.com.

Energy tech company Baker Hughes announced two major clean energy initiatives this month.

The Houston-based company has teamed up with Dallas-based Frontier Infrastructure to develop carbon capture and storage (CCS), power generation and data center operations in the U.S.

Baker Hughes will supply technology for Frontier’s nearly 100,000-acre CCS hub in Wyoming, which will provide open-access CO2 storage for manufacturers and ethanol producers, as well as future Frontier projects. Frontier has already begun drilling activities at the Wyoming site.

“Baker Hughes is committed to delivering innovative solutions that support increasing energy demand, in part driven by the rapid adoption of AI, while ensuring we continue to enable the decarbonization of the industry,” says Lorenzo Simonelli, chairman and CEO of Baker Hughes.

Additionally, Baker Hughes announced this week that it was selected by the U.S. Air Force and the Department of Defense’s Chief Digital and Artificial Intelligence Office (CDAO) to develop utility-scale geothermal power plants that would power global U.S. military bases.

Baker Hughes was granted an "awardable," or eligible, status through the CDAO's Tradewinds Solutions Marketplace, which aims to accelerate "mission-critical technologies," including AI, machine learning and resilient energy technologies. The potential geothermal plants would provide cost-effective electricity, even during a grid outage.

“The ability of geothermal to provide reliable, secure baseload power makes it an ideal addition to America’s energy mix,” Ajit Menon, vice president of geothermal, oilfield services and equipment at Baker Hughes, said in a news release. “Baker Hughes has been a pioneer in this field for more than 40 years and our unique subsurface-to-surface expertise and advanced technology across the geothermal value chain will help the U.S. military unlock this critical domestic energy source, while simultaneously driving economic growth and energy independence.”

The deal will enable transportation of ExxonMobil’s low-carbon hydrogen through Air Liquide’s pipeline network. Photo via exxonmobil.com

ExxonMobil’s low-carbon hydrogen project in Baytown adds Air Liquide as partner

team work

Spring-based energy giant ExxonMobil has enlisted Air Liquide as a partner for what’s being billed as the world’s largest low-carbon hydrogen project.

The deal will enable transportation of ExxonMobil’s low-carbon hydrogen through Air Liquide’s pipeline network. Furthermore, Air Liquide will build and operate four units to supply 9,000 metric tons of oxygen and up to 6,500 metric tons of nitrogen each day for the ExxonMobil project.

Air Liquide’s U.S. headquarters is in Houston.

ExxonMobil’s hydrogen production facility is planned for the company’s 3,400-acre Baytown refining and petrochemical complex. The project is expected to produce 1 billion cubic feet of low-carbon hydrogen daily from natural gas and more than 1 million tons of low-carbon ammonia annually while capturing more than 98 percent of the associated carbon emissions.

“Momentum continues to build for the world’s largest low-carbon hydrogen project and the emerging hydrogen market,” Dan Ammann, president of ExxonMobil Low Carbon Solutions, says in a news release.

The hydrogen project is expected to come online in 2027 or 2028.

ExxonMobil says using hydrogen to fuel its olefins plant at Baytown could reduce sitewide carbon emissions by as much as 30 percent. Meanwhile, the carbon capture and storage (CSUS) component of the project would be capable of storing 10 million metric tons of carbon each year, the company says.

Two Rice University researchers just received DOE funding for carbon storage research. Photo by Gustavo Raskosky/Rice University

Research team lands DOE grant to investigate carbon storage in soil

planting climate change impact

Two researchers at Rice University are digging into how soil is formed with hopes to better understand carbon storage and potential new methods for combating climate change.

Backed by a three-year grant from the Department of Energy, the research is led by Mark Torres, an assistant professor of Earth, environmental and planetary sciences; and Evan Ramos, a postdoctoral fellow in the Torres lab. Co-investigators include professors and scientists with the Brown University, University of Massachusetts Amherst and Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.

According to a release from Rice, the team aims to investigate the processes that allow soil to store roughly three times as much carbon as organic matter compared to Earth's atmosphere.

“Maybe there’s a way to harness Earth’s natural mechanisms of sequestering carbon to combat climate change,” Torres said in a statement. “But to do that, we first have to understand how soils actually work.”

The team will analyze samples collected from different areas of the East River watershed in Colorado. Prior research has shown that rivers have been great resources for investigating chemical reactions that have taken place as soil is formed. Additionally, research supports that "clay plays a role in storing carbon derived from organic sources," according to Rice.

"We want to know when and how clay minerals form because they’re these big, platy, flat minerals with a high surface area that basically shield the organic carbon in the soil," Ramos said in the statement. "We think they protect that organic carbon from breakdown and allow it to grow in abundance.”

Additionally, the researchers plan to create a model that better quantifies the stabilization of organic carbon over time. According to Torres, the model could provide a basis for predicting carbon dioxide changes in Earth's atmosphere.

"We’re trying to understand what keeps carbon in soils, so we can get better at factoring in their role in climate models and render predictions of carbon dioxide changes in the atmosphere more detailed and accurate,” Torres explained in the statement.

The DOE and Rice have partnered on a number of projects related to the energy transition in recent months. Last week, Rice announced that it would host the Carbon Management Community Summit this fall, sponsored by the DOE, and in partnership with the city of Houston and climate change-focused multimedia company Climate Now.

In July the DOE announced $100 million in funding for its SCALEUP program at an event for more than 100 energy innovators at the university.

Rice also recently opened its 250,000-square-foot Ralph S. O’Connor Building for Engineering and Science. The state-of-the-art facility is the new home for four key research areas at Rice: advanced materials, quantum science and computing, urban research and innovation, and the energy transition.

The world can't keep on with what it's doing and expect to reach its goals when it comes to climate change. Radical innovations are needed at this point, writes Scott Nyquist. Photo via Getty Images

Only radical innovation can get the world to its climate goals, says this Houston expert

guest column

Almost 3 years ago, McKinsey published a report arguing that limiting global temperature rises to 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels was “technically achievable,” but that the “math is daunting.” Indeed, when the 1.5°C figure was agreed to at the 2015 Paris climate conference, the assumption was that emissions would peak before 2025, and then fall 43 percent by 2030.

Given that 2022 saw the highest emissions ever—36.8 gigatons—the math is now more daunting still: cuts would need to be greater, and faster, than envisioned in Paris. Perhaps that is why the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) noted March 20 (with “high confidence”) that it was “likely that warming will exceed 1.5°C during the 21st century.”

I agree with that gloomy assessment. Given the rate of progress so far, 1.5°C looks all but impossible. That puts me in the company of people like Bill Gates; the Economist; the Australian Academy of Science, and apparently many IPCC scientists. McKinsey has estimated that even if all countries deliver on their net zero commitments, temperatures will likely be 1.7°C higher in 2100.

In October, the UN Environment Program argued that there was “no credible pathway to 1.5°C in place” and called for “an urgent system-wide transformation” to change the trajectory. Among the changes it considers necessary: carbon taxes, land use reform, dietary changes in which individuals “consume food for environmental sustainability and carbon reduction,” investment of $4 trillion to $6 trillion a year; applying current technology to all new buildings; no new fossil fuel infrastructure. And so on.

Let’s assume that the UNEP is right. What are the chances of all this happening in the next few years? Or, indeed, any of it? President Obama’s former science adviser, Daniel Schrag, put it this way: “ Who believes that we can halve global emissions by 2030?... It’s so far from reality that it’s kind of absurd.”

Having a goal is useful, concentrating minds and organizing effort. And I think that has been the case with 1.5°C, or recent commitments to get to net zero. Targets create a sense of urgency that has led to real progress on decarbonization.

The 2020 McKinsey report set out how to get on the 1.5°C pathway, and was careful to note that this was not a description of probability or reality but “a picture of a world that could be.” Three years later, that “world that could be” looks even more remote.

Consider the United States, the world’s second-largest emitter. In 2021, 79 percent of primary energy demand (see chart) was met by fossil fuels, about the same as a decade before. Globally, the figures are similar, with renewables accounting for just 12.5 percent of consumption and low-emissions nuclear another 4 percent. Those numbers would have to basically reverse in the next decade or so to get on track. I don’t see how that can happen.

No alt text provided for this image

Credit: Energy Information Administration

But even if 1.5°C is improbable in the short term, that doesn’t mean that missing the target won’t have consequences. And it certainly doesn’t mean giving up on addressing climate change. And in fact, there are some positive trends. Many companies are developing comprehensive plans for achieving net-zero emissions and are making those plans part of their long-term strategy. Moreover, while global emissions grew 0.9 percent in 2022, that was much less than GDP growth (3.2 percent). It’s worth noting, too, that much of the increase came from switching from gas to coal in response to the Russian invasion of Ukraine; that is the kind of supply shock that can be reversed. The point is that growth and emissions no longer move in lockstep; rather the opposite. That is critical because poorer countries are never going to take serious climate action if they believe it threatens their future prosperity.

Another implication is that limiting emissions means addressing the use of fossil fuels. As noted, even with the substantial rise in the use of renewables, coal, gas, and oil are still the core of the global energy system. They cannot be wished away. Perhaps it is time to think differently—that is, making fossil fuels more emissions efficient, by using carbon capture or other technologies; cutting methane emissions; and electrifying oil and gas operations. This is not popular among many climate advocates, who would prefer to see fossil fuels “stay in the ground.” That just isn’t happening. The much likelier scenario is that they are gradually displaced. McKinsey projects peak oil demand later this decade, for example, and for gas, maybe sometime in the late 2030s. Even after the peak, though, oil and gas will still be important for decades.

Second, in the longer term, it may be possible to get back onto 1.5°C if, in addition to reducing emissions, we actually remove them from the atmosphere, in the form of “negative emissions,” such as direct air capture and bioenergy with carbon capture and storage in power and heavy industry. The IPCC itself assumed negative emissions would play a major role in reaching the 1.5°C target; in fact, because of cost and deployment problems, it’s been tiny.

Finally, as I have argued before, it’s hard to see how we limit warming even to 2°C without more nuclear power, which can provide low-emissions energy 24/7, and is the largest single source of such power right now.

None of these things is particularly popular; none get the publicity of things like a cool new electric truck or an offshore wind farm (of which two are operating now in the United States, generating enough power for about 20,000 homes; another 40 are in development). And we cannot assume fast development of offshore wind. NIMBY concerns have already derailed some high-profile projects, and are also emerging in regard to land-based wind farms.

Carbon capture, negative emissions, and nuclear will have to face NIMBY, too. But they all have the potential to move the needle on emissions. Think of the potential if fast-growing India and China, for example, were to develop an assembly line of small nuclear reactors. Of course, the economics have to make sense—something that is true for all climate-change technologies.

And as the UN points out, there needs to be progress on other issues, such as food, buildings, and finance. I don’t think we can assume that such progress will happen on a massive scale in the next few years; the actual record since Paris demonstrates the opposite. That is troubling: the IPCC notes that the risks of abrupt and damaging impacts, such as flooding and crop yields, rise “with every increment of global warming.” But it is the reality.

There is one way to get us to 1.5°C, although not in the Paris timeframe: a radical acceleration of innovation. The approaches being scaled now, such as wind, solar, and batteries, are the same ideas that were being discussed 30 years ago. We are benefiting from long-term, incremental improvements, not disruptive innovation. To move the ball down the field quickly, though, we need to complete a Hail Mary pass.

It’s a long shot. But we’re entering an era of accelerated innovation, driven by advanced computing, artificial intelligence, and machine learning that could narrow the odds. For example, could carbon nanotubes displace demand for high-emissions steel? Might it be possible to store carbon deep in the ocean? Could geo-engineering bend the curve?

I believe that, on the whole, the world is serious about climate change. I am certain that the energy transition is happening. But I don’t think we are anywhere near to being on track to hit the 1.5°C target. And I don’t see how doing more of the same will get us there.

------

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.

In M&A news, Buckeye Partners has acquired a carbon capture and storage company from Oklahoma. Photo via Getty Images

Houston energy services company acquires carbon capture, storage biz

M&A Moves

Another Houston energy company has announced an acquisition in the carbon capture space.

Buckeye Partners, a Houston-headquartered energy infrastructure and logistics provider, announced this week that it has acquired Oklahoma City-based Elysian Carbon Management from EnCap Flatrock Midstream. The terms of the deal were not disclosed.

Elysian, founded in 2018, secured an initial capital commitment of $350 million from EnCap Flatrock Midstream in 2021. The company's technology includes end-to-end carbon capture and storage solutions.

“This acquisition reflects Buckeye’s commitment to continue to provide essential infrastructure and logistics solutions to meet our customers’ evolving needs in the energy transition,” say Buckeye CEO Todd Russo in a news release. “Rapidly developing CCS-related technologies and solutions offer abundant synergies across Buckeye’s project development capabilities and existing pipeline network and are essential to enabling the energy transition’s success."

With the acquisition, Russo continues, the Elysian team will join the Buckeye platform to integrate the two companies' expertise. Per the release, Buckeye hopes to become a net-zero energy business by 2040, across scope 1 and 2 GHG emissions.

“Buckeye continues to demonstrate resiliency and emissions-reduction results across its increasingly diversified energy solutions portfolio,” says Elysian CEO Bret Logue in the release. “We’re fully aligned with their decarbonization mission and look forward to adding immediate value to Buckeye’s customer base and their momentum in the energy transition by integrating CCS technologies across the energy value chain.”

Less than a week before Buckey's M&A news, ExxonMobil announced its acquisition of a carbon capture company in a $4.9 billion deal.

Ad Placement 300x100
Ad Placement 300x600

CultureMap Emails are Awesome

Houston climatech company signs on to massive carbon capture project in Malaysia

big deal

Houston-based CO2 utilization company HYCO1 has signed a memorandum of understanding with Malaysia LNG Sdn. Bhd., a subsidiary of Petronas, for a carbon capture project in Malaysia, which includes potential utilization and conversion of 1 million tons of carbon dioxide per year.

The project will be located in Bintulu in Sarawak, Malaysia, where Malaysia LNG is based, according to a news release. Malaysia LNG will supply HYCO1 with an initial 1 million tons per year of raw CO2 for 20 years starting no later than 2030. The CCU plant is expected to be completed by 2029.

"This is very exciting for all stakeholders, including HYCO1, MLNG, and Petronas, and will benefit all Malaysians," HYCO1 CEO Gregory Carr said in the release. "We approached Petronas and MLNG in the hopes of helping them solve their decarbonization needs, and we feel honored to collaborate with MLNG to meet their Net Zero Carbon Emissions by 2050.”

The project will convert CO2 into industrial-grade syngas (a versatile mixture of carbon monoxide and hydrogen) using HYCO1’s proprietary CUBE Technology. According to the company, its CUBE technology converts nearly 100 percent of CO2 feed at commercial scale.

“Our revolutionary process and catalyst are game changers in decarbonization because not only do we prevent CO2 from being emitted into the atmosphere, but we transform it into highly valuable and usable downstream products,” Carr added in the release.

As part of the MoU, the companies will conduct a feasibility study evaluating design alternatives to produce low-carbon syngas.

The companies say the project is expected to “become one of the largest CO2 utilization projects in history.”

HYCO1 also recently announced that it is providing syngas technology to UBE Corp.'s new EV electrolyte plant in New Orleans. Read more here.

Tackling methane in the energy transition: Takeaways from Global Methane Hub and HETI

The view from heti

Leaders from across the energy value chain gathered in Houston for a roundtable hosted by the Global Methane Hub (GMH) and the Houston Energy Transition Initiative (HETI). The session underscored the continued progress to reduce methane emissions as the energy industry addresses the dual challenge of producing more energy that the world demands while simultaneously reducing emissions.

The Industry’s Shared Commitment and Challenge

There’s broad recognition across the industry that methane emissions must be tackled with urgency, especially as natural gas demand is projected to grow 3050% by 2050. This growth makes reducing methane leakage more than a sustainability issue—it’s also a matter of global market access and investor confidence.

Solving this issue, however, requires overcoming technical challenges that span infrastructure, data acquisition, measurement precision, and regulatory alignment.

Getting the Data Right: Top-Down vs. Bottom-Up

Accurate methane leak monitoring and quantification is the cornerstone of any effective mitigation strategy. A key point of discussion was the differentiation between top-down and bottom-up measurement approaches.

Top-down methods such as satellite and aerial monitoring offer broad-area coverage and can identify large emission plumes. Technologies such as satellite-based remote sensing (e.g., using high-resolution imagery) or airborne methane surveys (using aircraft equipped with tunable diode laser absorption spectroscopy) are commonly used for wide-area detection. While these methods are efficient for identifying large-scale emission hotspots, their accuracy is lower when it comes to quantifying emissions at the source, detecting smaller, diffuse leaks, and providing continuous monitoring.

In contrast, bottom-up methods focus on direct, on-site detection at the equipment level, providing more granular and precise measurements. Technologies used here include optical gas imaging (OGI) cameras, flame ionization detectors (FID), and infrared sensors, which can directly detect methane at the point of release. These methods are more accurate but can be resource and infrastructure intensive, requiring frequent manual inspections or continuous monitoring installations, which can be costly and technically challenging in certain environments.

The challenge lies in combining both methods: top-down for large-scale monitoring and bottom-up for detailed, accurate measurements. No single technology is perfect or all-inclusive. An integrated approach that uses both datasets will help to create a more comprehensive picture of emissions and improve mitigation efforts.

From Detection to Action: Bridging the Gap

Data collection is just the first step—effective action follows. Operators are increasingly focused on real-time detection and mitigation. However, operational realities present obstacles. For example, real-time leak detection and repair (LDAR) systems—particularly for continuous monitoring—face challenges due to infrastructure limitations. Remote locations like the Permian Basin may lack the stable power sources needed to run continuous monitoring equipment to individual assets.

Policy, Incentives, and Regulatory Alignment

Another critical aspect of the conversation was the need for policy incentives that both promote best practices and accommodate operational constraints. Methane fees, introduced to penalize emissions, have faced widespread resistance due to their design flaws that in many cases actually disincentivize methane emissions reductions. Industry stakeholders are advocating for better alignment between policy frameworks and operational capabilities.

In the United States, the Subpart W rule, for example, mandates methane reporting for certain facilities, but its implementation has raised concerns about the accuracy of some of the new reporting requirements. Many in the industry continue to work with the EPA to update these regulations to ensure implementation meets desired legislative expectations.

The EU’s demand for quantified methane emissions for imported natural gas is another driving force, prompting a shift toward more detailed emissions accounting and better data transparency. Technologies that provide continuous, real-time monitoring and automated reporting will be crucial in meeting these international standards.

Looking Ahead: Innovation and Collaboration

The roundtable highlighted the critical importance of advancing methane detection and mitigation technologies and integrating them into broader emissions reduction strategies. The United States’ 45V tax policy—focused on incentivizing production of low-carbon intensity hydrogen often via reforming of natural gas—illustrates the growing momentum towards science-based accounting and transparent data management. To qualify for 45V incentives, operators can differentiate their lower emissions intensity natural gas by providing foreground data to the EPA that is precise and auditable, essential for the industry to meet both environmental and regulatory expectations. Ultimately, the success of methane reduction strategies depends on collaboration between the energy industry, technology providers, and regulators.

The roundtable underscored that while significant progress has been made in addressing methane emissions, technical, regulatory, and operational challenges remain. Collaboration across industry, government, and technology providers is essential to overcoming these barriers. With better data, regulatory alignment, and investments in new technologies, the energy sector can continue to reduce methane emissions while supporting global energy demands.

———

HETI thanks Chris Duffy, Baytown Blue Hydrogen Venture Executive, ExxonMobil; Cody Johnson, CEO, SCS Technologies; and Nishadi Davis, Head of Carbon Advisory Americas, wood plc, for their participation in this event.

This article originally appeared on the Greater Houston Partnership's Houston Energy Transition Initiative blog. HETI exists to support Houston's future as an energy leader. For more information about the Houston Energy Transition Initiative, EnergyCapitalHTX's presenting sponsor, visit htxenergytransition.org.

Houston battery recycling company signs 15-year deal to supply Texas flagship facility

green team

Houston- and Singapore-headquartered Ace Green Recycling, a provider of sustainable battery recycling technology solutions, has secured a 15-year battery material supply agreement with Miami-based OM Commodities.

The global commodities trading firm will supply Ace with at least 30,000 metric tons of lead scrap annually, which the company expects to recycle at its planned flagship facility in Texas. Production is expected to commence in 2026.

"We believe that Ace's future Texas facility is poised to play a key role in addressing many of the current challenges in the lead industry in the U.S., while helping the country meet the growing domestic demand for valuable battery materials," Nishchay Chadha, CEO and co-founder of Ace, said in a news release. "This agreement with OM Commodities will provide us with enough supply to support our Texas facility during all of its current planned phases, enabling us to achieve optimal efficiencies as we deploy our solutions in the U.S. market. With OM Commodities being a U.S.-based leader in metals doing business across the Americas and Asia with a specialty in lead batteries, we look forward to leveraging their expertise in the space as we advance our scale-up efforts."

The feedstock will be sufficient to cover 100 percent of Ace's phase one recycling capacity at the Texas facility, according to the statement. The companies are also discussing future lithium battery recycling collaborations.

"Ace is a true pioneer when it comes to providing an environmentally friendly and economically superior solution to recycle valuable material from lead scrap," Yiannis Dumas, president of OM Commodities, added in the news release. "We look forward to supporting Ace with lead feedstock as they scale up their operations in Texas and helping create a more circular and sustainable battery materials supply chain in the U.S."

Additionally, ACE shared that it is expected to close a merger with Athena Technology Acquisition Corp. II (NYSE: ATEK) in the second half of 2025, after which Ace will become a publicly traded company on the Nasdaq Stock Market under the ticker symbol "AGXI."

"As we continue to scale our lead and lithium battery recycling technologies to help support the markets for both internal combustion engines and electric vehicles, we expect that our upcoming listing will be a key accelerator of growth for Ace,” Chada said.