Will 2023 be hydrogen’s year?

GUEST COLUMN

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

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

Texas Gov. Abbott broadens crackdown on data centers by halting all permits

data center crackdown

Responding to public outcry, Gov. Greg Abbott has stepped up his campaign against data centers by temporarily halting approval of environmental permits for data center projects.

This and previous moves by Abbott essentially amount to a temporary freeze on the development of new data centers in Texas. His actions come at a time when Texas’ stature as a data center hub has been soaring.

On Monday, Abbott directed the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality to stop issuing permits for data center developments until the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) and Public Utility Commission of Texas complete their review of projects seeking power grid connections.

With regulatory reviews underway and environmental permitting now frozen, state regulators currently cannot approve or deny requests from data center developers, Abbott said.

In a letter to the environmental quality commission’s executive director, Kelly Keel, Abbott said this directive is “consistent with my whole-of-government approach to ensure Texans’ natural resources and way of life are protected.”

Abbott previously ordered the Texas Water Development Board to require data centers to meet reporting requirements for water use. He also told the board to impose penalties for failure to comply with those requirements and to collaborate with ERCOT on its review.

Abbott launched his crackdown on data centers in August by ordering the Public Utility Commission and ERCOT to review data center projects in Texas. The audits will examine all data centers in the queue for interconnections before any more projects can move forward. Interconnections enable data centers to share power, data and computing resources.

In calling for those audits, Abbott cited concerns over data centers’ use of water and electricity, and the centers’ effect on infrastructure expenses and consumers’ utility rates.

“Simply put, Texans must come first,” the governor said.

During next year’s legislation session, Abbott will push for the elimination of state financial incentives for data center projects.

Ed Hirs, an energy fellow ⁠at the University of Houston, told Reuters that Abbott was backtracking on “his earlier pronouncements about data centers leading to lower electricity prices.”

Abbott’s actions come amid growing public backlash over data centers. A recent University of Houston survey found that nearly 63 percent of Houston-area residents opposed construction of a data center within a mile of their home.

Only 8 of 160 utility companies in Texas have filed wildfire response plans

Utility News

Only eight of 160 utility companies that operate in fire-prone areas of Texas have complied with a law that helps mitigate wildfires, lawmakers recently learned. The revelation comes on the heels of a chaotic wildfire season that has continued through the summer.

Lawmakers learned about the slow progress last week during a House State Affairs committee hearing, led by Rep. Ken King, who led the charge on the new law last year. The law under House Bill 145 requires utility companies to file wildfire mitigation plans to the Public Utility Commission.

The plans must include emergency protocols in the case of a wildfire, utility operating plans during high-risk weather conditions, management of grass, shrubs and other vegetation in areas that are at risk of wildfires, inspection of poles and other electric equipment and identified areas of wildfire risks within a utility’s service territory.

King, a Republican from Canadian where much of the wildfire damage occurred during the Panhandle wildfires, pressed utility companies on the lack of compliance.

“I’m very, very disappointed with the industry,” King said. “I think it’s imperative for anybody that has not filed that report to realize January is coming. You will file that wildfire mitigation plan, and if you’re dragging your feet, there’s no excuse good enough for me.”

Last year, King filed a slew of bills in response to the devastating Smokehouse Creek wildfires in the Texas Panhandle and parts of Oklahoma in 2024. It was the largest wildfire in Texas history, started when a decayed power pole owned by Xcel Energy snapped and landed in dry grass.

It was one of a spate of fires, the majority of which were linked to electrical ignitions.

This year alone has been a very active wildfire season. Nim Kidd, chief for the Texas Division of Emergency Management, said the state has helped local governments respond to more than 1,200 fires since the start of the year. The Ross Fire, which burned for more than three weeks in North Texas, was finally contained by firefighters last week. It’s now the second largest wildfire in the region’s history.

Two wildfires have broken out on Craig Cowden’s Panhandle ranch this year, both ignited by electrical equipment used by oil and gas companies. Cowden extinguished them, before they could spread beyond 5 acres — a fraction of the 20,000 acres he lost to wildfires in 2024.

Cowden was one of many ranchers who worked with lawmakers last year to address the problem. Over the years, several fires have started on Cowden’s land, most of which were the result of faulty or damaged electrical equipment.

“It’s kind of discouraging that there hasn’t been more proactively submitting their wildfire plan,” Cowden said.

Slow progress

There has been progress since the bill was filed. According to King, six fires have been linked to electrical issues this year, a significant decrease from 80 in 2024.

Connie Corona, director at the PUC, explained the lag in filings to lawmakers, stating that on top of the eight who have submitted, four more have given the PUC a date for when they intend to file their plans. Corona said another 135 have indicated to the PUC they are in the process of preparing their plan. This leaves 13 who have not communicated their plans to the PUC.

“We’ve asked for a heads-up notice of when the utility plans to file, and try to ensure that meets with the resources we have available,” Corona told lawmakers.

Corona said PUC staff had created a model wildfire mitigation plan that utility companies can use as a template. The model is intended to support smaller utility companies that lack sufficient resources to make their own plan. King asked Corona for a list of entities who complied with the requirement.

“When eight out of 160 have complied, and we’re sitting here in September, that doesn’t sound like a very good response to me,” King said.

A looming deadline

Brad Baldridge, interim president of Southwestern Public Service Company, which operates as Xcel Energy, told lawmakers what his company is doing to mitigate wildfires. The company was heavily criticized in the wake of the fires and has since deployed 97 wildfire detection cameras across its service territory. The cameras use AI to detect smoke and provide that information in real-time to utility personnel, local fire responders and emergency managers. It also uses Public Safety Power Shutoffs to turn off power in certain areas during critical wildfire conditions to prevent an electrical start. Baldridge said since 2024, the company has had to shut off power five times.

When King asked if the company had submitted its wildfire mitigation plans, Baldridge said it was submitted last month. It would have been submitted earlier, he said, but there was “tremendous” vegetation that grew from rain earlier in the year.

“All of our experts were focusing on wildfire mitigation,” Baldridge said. “Which delayed us a little bit in our filing.”

Mark Bell, CEO for the Association of Electric Companies of Texas, said they are using remote cameras and sensors to detect wildfires and are taking a more aggressive approach to manage vegetation. They also use power shutoffs in extreme conditions to minimize the risk. Bell testified that their utility companies were on track to file their wildfire mitigation plans.

“I think all the plans are going to be filed by the end of the year,” Bell said.

King reminded Bell that it’s September, and many haven’t filed yet.

“That’d be 148 (plans) approved before January,” King said.

Bell assured King that five of them have filed their plans and one is scheduled to file in October.

Corona, with the PUC, said there are also pole and maintenance plans due in January that will detail a complete inventory of those assets owned by utilities. King said the plan is to have the companies list everything they own in Texas, where it is and how old it is. However, he said they aren’t being compliant and lawmakers will see what happens in January.

Cowden, the rancher in the Panhandle, told the Tribune that while it’s not technically fire season anymore, there are still small fires that ignite around the area.

Cowden sees the amount of work being done by Xcel Energy to upgrade their electrical poles and infrastructure in the area. He said it’s different than before the wildfires in 2024. He thinks the fires got their attention.

“You can tell they’re making a conscious effort to try to upgrade their infrastructure,” Cowden said.

__

This story was originally published by The Texas Tribune and distributed through a partnership with The Associated Press.

Houston-based ‘grid in a box’ provider Branch Energy raises $33M

fresh funding

Houston-based startup Branch Energy, which offers a self-contained “grid in a box,” has collected $33 million in a Series B round.

Piva Capital and Clean Energy Ventures led the round, according to a news release. Active Impact Investments, Whitecap Venture Partners, Prelude Ventures, Zero Infinity Partners and Inovia Capital also contributed to the round.

In 2024, Branch raised $10.8 million in an oversubscribed Series A round.

Branch’s business model

Branch, which launched in 2021, says its proprietary Arc “grid in a box” contains everything needed to store and supply electricity. A container about the size of a parking space holds an industrial-grade battery, grid connection equipment, cooling capabilities, autonomous controls and cloud-based management software.

The startup installs Arc systems at warehouses, hotels, factories, stores and other commercial properties. Each system arrives on a flatbed truck and can be online within two days, Branch says.

Under Branch’s business model, a property owner avoids upfront payment for an Arc system.

Aside from equipping a host business with an Arc system, Branch serves as the business’ power provider. The startup says it guarantees savings on the host’s energy bills and delivers backup power during outages.

Branch generates revenue by sending the battery’s stored power to the grid or to customers like hyperscale data centers. It also benefits by shifting energy from low-cost periods at night to high-cost periods during daily power peaks.

The startup handles permitting, installation, insurance and operations for each Arc system. The host provides a parking-lot-sized plot of land for the system.

Alex Ince-Cushman, co-founder and CEO of Branch, says the startup’s “grid in a box” can quickly meet the substantial power requirements of hyperscale data centers.

“We can do it on the timeline of a delivery, not a construction project. Our customers don’t lift a finger, don’t pay a dime and get guaranteed savings,” Ince-Cushman said in the release.

Entering the Illinois market

Branch already operates in Texas and is entering the Illinois market.

PJM, which operates Illinois’ power grid, recently paved the way for major energy users like data centers to connect to the grid sooner when they rely on their own electricity generation. PJM’s territory covers roughly 1.2 million commercial buildings and represents 20 percent of U.S. power demand, according to Branch.

“Grids around the country need the distributed capacity that [the Arc] system can supply, especially in states with fast-growing power demand like Texas and Illinois,” Lee Larson, principal at Piva Capital added in the release.

To keep up with that demand, Branch plans to build tens of thousands of Arc systems in the U.S.

A multibillion-dollar company in the making?

Daniel Goldman, co-founder and managing partner of Clean Energy Ventures, said Branch holds the potential to become a multibillion-dollar competitor in the emerging market for distributed power.

“With utility-scale generation and storage challenged by interconnect and siting constraints, behind-the-meter commercial, and industrial storage sites have become the ultimate market opportunity with ease of interconnect, ability to combine distributed AI data centers, and identifiable savings in rapidly growing markets,” Goldman said.