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

Property Showcase

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 30–50% 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.

View All Listings

ENERGYCAPITALHTX EMAILS ARE AWESOME