The Legislature just passed SB 162, which authorizes “the director of the Division of Natural Resources to lease state-owned pore spaces underlying state forests, natural and scenic areas, and management areas, and other lands under the jurisdiction and control of the director for carbon sequestration,” though it “prohibit[s] the leasing of pore spaces underlying state parks.”
The bill is lauded as paving the way for hydrogen energy production in West Virginia, and hopefully helping the state land a federal “clean” hydrogen hub. On paper, it looks like a win for both economic development and renewable energy, but in reality … not so much of either.
To just say “hydrogen power” or “hydrogen energy” is a little misleading. There are three main types of hydrogen production, and while they all produce hydrogen for fuel, they use different processes to get there. Green hydrogen uses electricity (preferably from renewable sources like solar or wind) to break water down into hydrogen and oxygen in a process called electrolysis. Gray (or black or brown) and blue hydrogen use the same base process: They use steam, high heat and pressure to break down the methane found in natural gas into hydrogen and carbon dioxide. The hydrogen goes on to be used as a zero-emission fuel.
Here’s the difference between gray and blue: Gray hydrogen allows the resulting carbon dioxide to escape into the atmosphere; blue hydrogen uses carbon capture and sequestration to store the emissions underground, technically making the process “clean.”
So, in fact, SB 162 has paved the way for blue hydrogen in West Virginia. Unfortunately, blue hydrogen has been found to have a larger environmental impact than burning straight natural gas.
According to the peer-reviewed study “How green is blue hydrogen?”: “Far from being low carbon, greenhouse gas emissions from the production of blue hydrogen are quite high, particularly due to the release of fugitive methane. … Perhaps surprisingly, the greenhouse gas footprint of blue hydrogen is more than 20% greater than burning natural gas or coal for heat and some 60% greater than burning diesel oil for heat” based on the study’s default parameters. Methane, for the record, is a more potent and harmful greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide. RMI, a nonpartisan nonprofit focused on clean energy, says the average methane leakage in the U.S. is about 1.5%, but it can jump as high as 9% in “oil-heavy basins.”
Instead of moving toward renewables and clean energy, West Virginia has doubled-down on fossil fuels and the subsequent pollution. In fact, the form of carbon sequestration approved in SB 162, known as geo-sequestration, is basically reverse fracking: Instead of pumping water into the ground to get natural gas, it pumps carbon dioxide gas into the ground after the natural gas has been used. Unfortunately, this method of carbon sequestration carries many of the same risks as fracking, including leakage, environmental contamination and the possibility of seismicity (small, man-made earthquakes).
The short-term issue is that green hydrogen — using renewables and electricity to break down water — is not yet viable on a commercial scale, while blue hydrogen is. After all, we already have all this natural-gas-related technology and equipment. But the future of green hydrogen is already happening here in West Virginia: In October 2021, The Dominion Post reported on a team at WVU that was working on making solid oxide electrolysis cells (the device that creates green hydrogen) a commercially viable option.
The Legislature could have made a long-term investment in West Virginia’s future by paving the way for green hydrogen — which is arguably more attractive if the state wants a hydrogen hub — but it doubled-down on finite fossil fuels and fracking to prioritize blue hydrogen instead.
