Dirty Hydrogen
Hydrogen is being hailed as the future of clean energy: a flexible, abundant element that could power cars, planes, and heavy industry while helping us move away from fossil fuels. Projects like ARCHES (Alliance for Renewable Clean Hydrogen Energy Systems), backed by Gavin Newsom, the Department of Energy, and the University of California, promise massive job creation and billions in healthcare savings due to improved air quality. With up to $1.2 billion in federal funding on the table, hydrogen certainly sounds like the green dream.
But the reality is more complicated.
What Is Hydrogen Fuel and Why the Colors?
Hydrogen fuel is often marketed using a color system that classifies how the hydrogen is produced. For example:
- Green hydrogen is made using renewable energy like wind or solar to split water into hydrogen and oxygen. It is considered the cleanest option.
- Blue hydrogen is made from natural gas with carbon capture systems to reduce emissions.
- Gray and brown hydrogen are produced from fossil fuels like coal or methane, with little or no effort to capture the resulting pollution.
The problem? There is no legal standard or regulating body overseeing this color-coded system. Companies are essentially self-reporting what color their hydrogen is, and many experts believe the system was invented not by scientists or regulators but by industry marketers to make fossil fuel–derived hydrogen seem cleaner than it really is.
Why “Clean” Isn’t Always Clean
Take blue hydrogen as an example. On paper, it sounds like a step in the right direction: capture the carbon emissions from natural gas processing and you have a cleaner product. But in reality, carbon capture is expensive, energy-intensive, and far from 100 percent effective. A 2021 peer-reviewed study even found that blue hydrogen could result in more greenhouse gas emissions than simply burning fossil fuels directly.
And while projects like ARCHES promise thousands of jobs and economic benefits, much of the hydrogen produced through these initiatives will not be green. Even hydrogen labeled “green” or “blue” isn’t automatically clean. Many of these projects still rely on electricity from fossil fuels, meaning they continue to generate significant emissions. These color-coded labels can create a false sense of sustainability, masking the real environmental costs. Without strict regulations and independent oversight, the hydrogen industry risks becoming a greenwashing machine, promising progress while continuing harmful practices. For frontline communities already burdened by pollution, it’s essential to look past the labels and demand real transparency and accountability.
What This Means for Communities
For frontline communities already facing disproportionate environmental harms, such as those living near refineries, ports, or highways, hydrogen production can mean more pollution, not less. Even “clean” hydrogen produced from natural gas still relies on fracked methane, a potent greenhouse gas, and leaves behind a toxic trail in already overburdened areas.
North Richmond and other frontline communities should be cautious. Despite lofty promises, hydrogen is not automatically clean, and without transparency and oversight, these “green” energy projects could reproduce the same environmental injustices they claim to fix.