ADVERTISEABOUT USSUBMIT A STORYSUBSCRIBETERMS OF USEPRIVACY POLICY
Visit our family of Brands

Hydrogen industry could have major impact on Texas water resources, study says

water works

A new study from the University of Texas at Austin shows that new hydrogen production facilities could account for 2 percent to nearly 7 percent of the state's water demand by 2050. Photo via Getty Images.

Just as the data center industry thrives on electricity, the hydrogen industry thrives on water.

A new study from researchers at the University of Texas at Austin found that by 2050, new hydrogen production facilities could account for 2 percent to nearly 7 percent of water demand in the state. The impact could be especially dramatic along the Gulf Coast, where most of the state’s hydrogen production facilities are already built or are being planned.

The research was published in the journal Sustainability.

The study reported that "most existing and proposed hydrogen production infrastructures are within projected water-strained cities and counties, such as Houston in Harris County and Corpus Christi in Nueces County."

Compared with municipal water supplies or irrigation systems, the hydrogen industry’s demand for water is comparatively small, the study’s lead author, Ning Lin, an energy economist at UT’s Bureau of Economic Geology, said in a news release. But hydrogen-fueled demand could strain communities that already are grappling with current and future water shortages.

“Where you put a project can make a huge difference locally,” Lin says. “With multiple hydrogen facilities planned in water-stressed Gulf Coast counties, this study highlights the urgent need for integrated water and energy planning and provides a solid foundation to help policymakers, industry, and communities make informed decisions about hydrogen and water management.”

To forecast water demand, Lin and her colleagues crunched data from a 2024 National Petroleum Council study that estimated the regional hydrogen demand from 2030 to 2050 based on two energy policy scenarios.

As part of the study, researchers reviewed water use and water quality for various hydrogen production methods that affect whether water remaining from production can be recycled.

“In order to plan for water needs, somebody has to figure out what those future demands might look like, and this paper puts some numbers to (it) that, I think, will be very helpful,” Robert Mace, executive director of the Meadows Center for Water and the Environment at Texas State University, who was not part of the study, added in the release.

From Your Site Articles
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

Meta to buy all power from new ENGIE Texas solar farm

power purchase

Meta, the parent company of social media platform Facebook, has agreed to buy all of the power from a $900 million solar farm being developed near Abilene by Houston-based energy company ENGIE North America.

The 600-megawatt Swenson Ranch solar farm, located in Stonewall County, will be the largest one ever built in the U.S. by ENGIE. The solar farm is expected to go online in 2027.

Meta will use electricity generated by the solar farm to power its U.S. data centers. All told, Meta has agreed to purchase more than 1.3 gigawatts of renewable energy from four ENGIE projects in Texas.

“This project marks an important step forward in the partnership between our two companies and their shared desire to promote a sustainable and competitive energy model,” Paulo Almirante, ENGIE’s senior executive vice president of renewable and flexible power, said in a news release.

In September, ENGIE North America said it would collaborate with Prometheus Hyperscale, a developer of sustainable liquid-cooled data centers, to build data centers at ENGIE-owned renewable energy and battery storage facilities along the I-35 corridor in Texas. The corridor includes Austin, Dallas-Fort Worth, San Antonio and Waco.

The first projects under the ENGIE-Prometheus umbrella are expected to go online in 2026.

ENGIE and Prometheus said their partnership “brings together ENGIE's deep expertise in renewables, batteries, and energy management and Prometheus' highly efficient liquid-cooled data center design to meet the growing demand for reliable, sustainable compute capacity — particularly for AI and other high-performance workloads.”

Fervo named to prestigious list of climate tech companies to watch

top honor

Houston-based Fervo Energy has received yet another accolade—MIT Technology Review named the geothermal energy startup to its 2025 list of the 10 global climatetech companies to watch.

Fervo, making its second appearance on the third annual list, harnesses heat from deep below the ground to generate clean geothermal energy, MIT Technology Review noted. Fervo is one of four U.S. companies to land on the list.

Fervo “uses fracking techniques to create geothermal reservoirs capable of delivering enough electricity to power massive data centers and hundreds of thousands of homes,” MIT Technology Review said.

MIT Technology Review said it produces the annual list to draw attention to promising climatetech companies that are working to decarbonize major sectors of the economy.

“Though the political and funding landscape has shifted dramatically in the US since the last time we put out this list,” MIT Technology Review added, “nothing has altered the urgency of the climate dangers the world now faces — we need to rapidly curb greenhouse gas emissions to avoid the most catastrophic impacts of climate change.”

In addition to MIT Technology Review’s companies-to-watch list, Fervo has appeared on similar lists published by Inc.com, Time magazine and Climate Insider.

In an essay accompanying MIT Technology Review’s list, Microsoft billionaire Bill Gates said his Breakthrough Energy Ventures investment group has invested in more than 150 companies, including Fervo and another company on the MIT Technology Review list, Redwood Materials.

In his essay, Gates wrote that ingenuity is the best weapon against climate change.

Yet climate technology innovations “offer more than just a public good,” he said. “They will remake virtually every aspect of the world’s economy in the coming years, transforming energy markets, manufacturing, transportation, and many types of industry and food production. Some of these efforts will require long-term commitments, but it’s important that we act now. And what’s more, it’s already clear where the opportunities lie.”

In a recent blog post highlighting Fervo, Gates predicted geothermal will eventually supply up to 20 percent of the world’s electricity, up from his previous estimate of as much as 5 percent.

Fervo is one of the pioneers in geothermal energy. Gates and other investors have pumped $982 million into Fervo since its founding in 2017. With an estimated valuation of $1.4 billion, Fervo has achieved unicorn status, meaning its valuation as a private company exceeds $1 billion.

Aside from Breakthrough Energy Ventures, oilfield services provider Liberty Energy is a Fervo investor. U.S. Energy Secretary Chris Wright was chairman and CEO of Denver-based Liberty Energy before assuming his federal post.

Axios reported on Oct. 1 that Fervo is raising a $300 million series E round, which would drive up the startup’s valuation. News of the $300 million round comes as the company gears up for a possible IPO, according to Axios.

Fervo co-founder and CEO Tim Latimer told Axios this spring that a potential IPO is likely in 2026 or 2027. Ahead of an IPO, the startup is aiming for a $2 billion to $4 billion valuation, Axios reported.

The first phase of Fervo’s marquee Cape Station geothermal energy plant in Utah is scheduled to go online next year, with the second phase set to open in 2028. Once it’s completed, the plant will be capable of generating 500 megawatts of power. This summer, the startup said it secured $205.6 million in capital to finance construction of the plant.

Rice University team develops eco-friendly method to destroy 'forever chemicals' in water

clean water research

Rice University researchers have teamed up with South Korean scientists to develop the first eco-friendly technology that captures and destroys toxic “forever chemicals,” or PFAS, in water.

PFAS have been linked to immune system disruption, certain cancers, liver damage and reproductive disorders. They can be found in water, soil and air, as well as in products like Teflon pans, waterproof clothing and food packaging. They do not degrade easily and are difficult to remove.

Thus far, PFAS cleanup methods have relied on adsorption, in which molecules cling to materials like activated carbon or ion-exchange resins. But these methods tend to have limited capacity, low efficiency, slow performance and can create additional waste.

The Rice-led study, published in the journal Advanced Materials, centered on a layered double hydroxide (LDH) material made from copper and aluminum that could rapidly capture PFAS and be used to destroy the chemicals.

The study was led by Rice professor Youngkun Chung, a postdoctoral fellow under the mentorship of Michael S. Wong. It was conducted in collaboration with Seoktae Kang, professor at the Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, and Keon-Ham Kim, professor at Pukyung National University, who first discovered the LDH material.

The team evaluated the LDH material in river water, tap water and wastewater. And, according to Rice, that material’s unique copper-aluminum layers and charge imbalances created an ideal binding environment to capture PFAS molecules.

“To my astonishment, this LDH compound captured PFAS more than 1,000 times better than other materials,” Chung, lead author of the study and now a fellow at Rice’s WaTER (Water Technologies, Entrepreneurship and Research) Institute and Sustainability Institute, said in a news release. “It also worked incredibly fast, removing large amounts of PFAS within minutes, about 100 times faster than commercial carbon filters.”

Next, Chung, along with Rice professors Pedro Alvarez and James Tour, worked to develop an eco-friendly, sustainable method of thermally decomposing the PFAS captured on the LDH material. They heated saturated material with calcium carbonate, which eliminated more than half of the trapped PFAS without releasing toxic by-products.

The team believes the study’s results could potentially have large-scale applications in industrial cleanups and municipal water treatments.

“We are excited by the potential of this one-of-a-kind LDH-based technology to transform how PFAS-contaminated water sources are treated in the near future,” Wong added in the news release. “It’s the result of an extraordinary international collaboration and the creativity of young researchers.”

---

This article originally appeared on our sister site, InnovationMap.

View All Listings