Encouraged by the possibility of new federal subsidies, across the U.S., companies have proposed at least 24 projects to build new plants to manufacture hydrogen for fuel and the chemical industry out of natural gas.

Oil & Gas Watch’s examination of available public records for these projects show that nearly all of them – about 90 percent – are in or near low-income neighborhoods or disadvantaged communities, including communities of color.

This proposed growth of the hydrogen industry in disadvantaged neighborhoods poses an environmental justice problem because these facilities release not only greenhouse gases, but also air pollutants that can threaten the health of local communities, including microscopic particulate matter (which can trigger heart and asthma attacks), as well as volatile organic compounds and nitrogen oxides (both of which contribute to smog and lung disease.)

In recent years, some advocates of clean energy have turned to hydrogen as an alternative to fossil fuels and possible method of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Hydrogen, a flammable and explosive gas, has a myriad of potential uses, from generating electricity to fueling vehicles and supplying industry with necessary chemical ingredients, including for manufacturing fertilizer.

In theory, hydrogen fuel – which does not release carbon dioxide when burned -- could be useful in the fight against climate change. But only if it is produced without fossil fuels -- using only clean energy sources like solar and wind, as well as water as a primary ingredient.

But this clean form of hydrogen production is relatively new and rare in the United States.  Less than 1 percent of U.S. hydrogen production today uses just renewable energy and water feedstock, according to MIT researchers, although more of these clean projects are now being proposed.

More commonly, hydrogen is produced by heating methane-rich natural gas with steam and/or oxygen. This process releases about 12 kilograms of greenhouse gases for every kilogram of hydrogen produced, according to MIT. It also releases a variety of health-threatening air pollutants like nitrogen dioxide.

Some natural gas-based hydrogen projects use dirty fossil fuels but describe themselves as “clean” because they say they plan to capture their carbon dioxide emissions and pump them underground for permanent sequestration. But carbon capture is an expensive and largely untested technology, at a large scale. And the few projects that are operational  don’t capture as much carbon dioxide as promised or do anything to control other harmful air pollutants.  

The United States recently placed a multi-billion dollar bet on the hydrogen industry.  In October 2023 the Department of Energy (DOE) announced that $7 billion  in taxpayer dollars would go towards launching seven regional hydrogen “hubs” - networks of hydrogen producers, consumers, and connective infrastructure in close proximity.

Cumulatively, the Biden administration expects that these hydrogen hubs will produce over three million metric tons of hydrogen annually and create hundreds of thousands of jobs. But how clean will these hydrogen hubs really be? At least four of the seven selected hydrogen hubs include plans for natural gas-based hydrogen production, and they are expected to receive over $4 billion from the DOE.

Many of the details surrounding these regional hubs have not yet been announced, including exactly which companies and hydrogen plants in what locations will receive federal funding.

But at a more local level, Oil & Gas Watch has been able to obtain records for 24 proposed projects to build new hydrogen plants that would make hydrogen out of natural gas, including several in Louisiana and Texas, but also in Ohio, Michigan, West Virginia and other states.  

When Oil & Gas Watch compared the locations of these proposed projects to the White House Council on Environmental Quality’s map of disadvantaged communities, we found that about 58 percent of them – 14 of the 24 – are in what the council considers “disadvantaged” census tracts, meaning areas that are either low-income, have substandard housing, poor health, heavy pollution burdens, or other factors.

Examining a slightly wider area, Oil & Gas Watch found that 92 percent of these hydrogen projects (22 of 24) are in or within three miles of a disadvantaged community. And looking at only income, 88 percent (21of 24) are in or within 3 miles of a low-income census tract, according to EPA’s data. Air pollution from these industrial sites can drift miles downwind.  

Oil & Gas Watch also analyzed proposed new hydrogen plants that would use strictly clean energy sources – such as solar and wind – to make hydrogen fuel out of water, a process which tends to release substantially less pollution than making hydrogen out of natural gas.  Many of these 18 proposed clean (meaning, non fossil-fuel) hydrogen projects would also be in or near disadvantaged communities, with eight of them located directly in disadvantaged census tracts and 15 of the 18 within three miles of a disadvantaged census tract.  

Recognizing the potential impacts on nearby communities, the Biden Administration and U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) pledged that a robust community engagement process would accompany the clean hydrogen hub projects.

At a press conference last fall Shalanda Baker, Director of DOE’s Office of Economic Impact and Diversity, promised that the agency would provide communities “with the . . . information you need to participate in this historic development moment.”  

But eight months later, a lack of publicly available information has severely hindered any meaningful community engagement.

Despite pledging to summarize community impact information for each hub, DOE often does not provide this information to the public. Specific evaluation criteria used by DOE to select hubs for funding is not publicly available. Moreover, it is still unclear exactly where hydrogen hub facilities will be constructed.  

Community members have often been shown only preliminary maps that are subject to change, leaving people wondering whether their community will host a new hydrogen plant or infrastructure.  

“That’s highly unusual,” says Tom Torres, an organizer with the Ohio River Valley Institute that works with communities impacted by the Appalachian Regional Clean Hydrogen Hub (ARCH2), which plans to produce hydrogen using natural gas. “Typically, at this stage in the process we would know where a facility is going to go. For some of the hydrogen hub projects we’re lucky to have a municipality.”  

However, it is not a complete mystery which communities will likely be impacted by some of the projects that may receive funding from DOE’s initiative. Company announcements and permit applications show that there are 24 new natural gas-based hydrogen projects being proposed in populated areas across the country (meaning locations with at least 100 people living within three miles.) And geospatial analysis shows that these facilities are overwhelmingly being sited and constructed in disadvantaged communities.

Using data from the White House Council on Environmental Quality’s Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool, Oil & Gas Watch was able to investigate the environmental, economic, and public health characteristics of the census tracts surrounding these new or expanding hydrogen plants.

The hydrogen plants are plotted as points on the map below. Some of the plants will sell hydrogen as a finished product, others will use it as an ingredient in other industrial processes – like ammonia production. More details about each plant’s production process can be found on Oil & Gas Watch.

Location of Proposed Plants that Would Make Hydrogen Fuel Out of Natural Gas

‍

One of the projects included in the analysis is at ExxonMobil Chemical’s Baytown Olefins Plant. ExxonMobil has proposed building a 900,000 metric ton per year hydrogen plant at the Baytown facility that would make hydrogen out of natural gas to fuel its olefins (chemical) manufacturing plant. Exxon is negotiating funding from DOE’s Industrial Demonstrations Program to help pay for the hydrogen plant.

Exxon is also a partner in the HyVelocity Hub, one of the hydrogen hubs selected for funding from DOE. Exxon and DOE claim the project will benefit the nearby community by reducing greenhouse gas and nitrogen dioxide emissions. But Exxon's proposal involves employing an old-school hydrogen production method, using natural gas, with a pledge to capture carbon emissions. Given the plant’s poor environmental track record and fuzzy regulations around carbon capture and sequestration in the U.S., it is questionable what, if any, environmental benefits will result from this project.  

Location of the Proposed Hydrogen Project at ExxonMobil Chemical's Baytown Olefins Plant

There are 13 census tracts within three miles of the Baytown facility, and nine of them are disadvantaged, with six specifically low-income, according to the Council on Environmental Quality. On average, these nearby census tracts have worse particulate matter (PM2.5) pollution than 80 percent of all census tracts and higher rates of adult diabetes than 74 percent of all census tracts.  

Communities like Baytown want to have a say in the planning process and provide input, according to a survey conducted by the Environmental Defense Fund and Morning Consult.  

Among residents in zip codes hosting hydrogen projects with final stage applications at the U.S. Department of Energy, 72 percent expressed a desire for regular updates on clean hydrogen hub projects. Two thirds said that having opportunities to provide input on these initiatives is “important” or “very important.”  

Dozens of environmental organizations have sent or signed onto letters to the Biden administration and the DOE telling them that change is needed and that more public information and input are needed.

“In the Ohio River Valley, we are concerned about the Appalachian Regional Clean Hydrogen Hub and there are many open questions about even the most basic details regarding the hub,” said Jill Hunkler, Executive Director of Ohio Valley Allies. “Impacted communities deserve to be informed and have their voices included in the negotiation phase.”

Hydrogen projects are also moving forward without backing from federal government, and these project developers are not subject to the Department of Energy’s community engagement commitments. One of these projects is the TransGas Adams Fork Ammonia plant, which plans to make hydrogen from natural gas. The Council on Environmental Quality’s database identifies the census tract in Mingo County, West Virginia as disadvantaged. That’s because this census tract meets the council’s low-income threshold: it has a higher share of individuals whose income is less than or equal to twice the federal poverty level than 65 percent of all census tracts. The tract also meets the asthma burden threshold because it has larger share of individuals diagnosed with asthma than 90 percent of all census tracts.  

Some local residents in Mingo County are protesting the project because they worry the air pollution from the plant will increase the already high number of asthma attacks and occasionally asthma deaths in the area, including among children, according to the Charleston (WV) Gazette- Mail.

During an online public hearing on the project earlier this year, Elizabeth Nawrocki, a resident of Mingo County, said that a local child recently died of an asthma attack and that she worried that increased emissions from the new plant would put respiratory health of area residents at even greater risk, adding to the pollution already burdening the heavily mined region, according to the newspaper.

“Children are dying, and we wonder how many more tragedies we’ll have to face as a community if this Adams Fork ammonia facility is built,” Nawrocki said.

Lead photo: Plumes of smoke rise after a fire at ExxonMobil's Baytown facility, near where the company is planning to build a hydrogen plant (Associated Press.)