Concerns about the Appalachian Regional Hydrogen Hub’s (ARCH2) health and safety risks, technical viability, economic impacts, and commitment to community engagement dominated the US Department of Energy’s virtual ARCH2 listening session on Wednesday, March 27.

Dozens of community members, many representing organizations throughout ARCH2’s  three-state footprint, registered to attend the virtual listening session.

Prior to the listening session, DOE granted twenty three registrants the opportunity to voice their feedback on the ARCH2 project for up to three minutes. However, thirteen other speakers were consigned to the waitlist, including several prominent environmental organizations.

“Transparency has to be the number one issue, but we’re disappointed that DOE is using the same disrespectful approach to ‘public comment’ meetings that were perfected by the most predatory big-energy developers,” said John Detwiler, a member of Pittsburgh-area grassroots group North Braddock Residents for Our Future, said during the listening session.

[Read John Detwiler’s full testimony here.]

"Families in La Belle, Pennsylvania have been left in the dark about the health risks, environmental impacts, and even site locations of Appalachian Hydrogen Hub projects," said Melissa Marshall, Esq., Community Advocate with the Mountain Watershed Association. "The tiny town in our community that could host a main ARCH2 facility is already the site of a massive toxic coal waste dump. The area's residents already struggle under the enormous burden of impacts to their air and water. More polluting industry in this tiny town is the last thing we need."

“The Appalachian Hydrogen Hub is a vehicle for environmental racism, threatening Black communities already overburdened by air and water pollution with even more harmful fossil fuel and carbon capture infrastructure," said Archbishop Marcia Dinkins, Founder and Executive Director of the Black Appalachian Coalition. "In a region where Black Appalachians have been historically erased from the cultural narrative, we demand visibility from the Department of Energy and an end to fossil fuel colonialism.

“Our communities deserve better than this project that doles out more subsidies and tax credits to fossil fuel operators and other companies for false solutions and unproven and unreliable technology while bringing residents few actual benefits and a host of harms,” added Lisa DePaoli, Communications Director for the Center for Coalfield Justice, during the meeting.

[Read Lisa DePaoli’s full testimony here.]

"From coal to oil and natural gas to petrochemical production, I have seen my fair share of manipulation from energy developers and public officials and the rhetoric used to push this hydrogen hub project is one of the most elaborately greenwashed performances I have ever seen," said Kat Finneran, resident of an ARCH2 host community. "But the fact is that this hub would prolong polluting fracking operations for decades and possesses very little in the way of community benefits."

[Read Kat Finneran’s full testimony here.]

“Hydrogen has the potential to provide clean fuel for hard-to-decarbonize uses, but I am particularly concerned about the upstream and downstream impacts of some of the proposed ARCH2 facilities,” commented James Kotcon, Chair of the West Virginia Sierra Club, who was initially waitlisted by the DOE. “Using fossil gas from fracking will impact more land, water and air in communities distant from the facilities being proposed, and we need DOE to consider these impacts more broadly. The risks from carbon capture and sequestration, from waste water disposal, from methane leaks, and from chemicals used in fracking have to be considered in deciding which of the proposed facilities to fund, or the dream of clean hydrogen will turn into a nightmare for our neighbors. People desperately need to have a say in decisions that will affect their lives, and this is one that will have impacts for many years to come.”

"Developers are being allowed to move forward with hydrogen and carbon capture and sequestration proposals before gaining the necessary experience and understanding of the technology and its infrastructure," said Katie Jones, Ohio River Valley Coordinator with FracTracker Alliance. "Efforts should instead be focused on energy alternatives including electrification that would be cheaper, cleaner, and better for the economy."

[Read Katie Jones’ full testimony here.]

“Any project that requires fossil fuels as a feedstock — greenwashed blue hydrogen or chemical recycling — in ARCH2 will perpetuate our climate emergency and especially will lock West Virginia into being an extraction state for decades to come,” said Morgan King, West Virginia Regional Organizer with the Climate Reality Project. “It’s not too late to learn from our toxic past and carve a path toward a life saving climate future that actually integrates the needs of our communities.”

[Read Morgan King’s full testimony here.]

“ARCH2 will neither protect public health nor the environment as it will produce hydrogen almost exclusively using methane extracted from shale gas underlying Appalachia,” said Environmental Health Project Field Manager Talor Musil during the listening session. “Continuing our dependency on the shale gas industry means more families will be exposed to a variety of toxic pollutants released during all phases of production. This exposure raises the risk of asthmas, heart issues, birth defects, and cancers, among other health impacts. To protect the public from the increased risk, the DOE must develop detailed plans to accurately assess the potential environmental and health impacts and make them available to the public.”

“Hydrogen holds enormous potential, but it matters how we get it,” explained Eric Engle, Board President of Mid-Ohio Valley Climate Action. “My son works in the allied trades and I’m a public sector union steward and membership coordinator. I was excited to learn about investments in the green hydrogen-powered Constellium aluminum facility in the Ravenswood area, which offers incredible opportunities for a local manufacturing renaissance using clean energy and far cleaner fuels, in addition to creating well-paying union jobs with great benefits that sustain families and communities. Green hydrogen, derived from a renewable energy-powered electrolysis process that splits water molecules, will be cheaper than blue hydrogen derived from fracked gas by 2030, posing significant risk of stranded assets in blue hydrogen investments like ARCH2. Blue hydrogen is absolutely not the path we should be taking.”

[Read Eric Engle’s full testimony here.]

“Clean Air Council is frustrated by the lack of community engagement from the Department of Energy related to public money for regional hydrogen hub projects, including those in Pennsylvania,” said Clean Air Council Advocacy Director Matt Walker. “A lack of transparency has left impacted communities out of the negotiation process and without critical information about polluting projects, such as KeyState to Zero, that would lock Pennsylvania into fossil gas production at a time when we need real climate solutions."

[Read Clean Air Council Advocacy Coordinator Susan Volz’s full testimony here.]

“We would like to bring forward three concerns around ARCH2 — the conflicts of interest with the hub in West Virginia, the extension of the lifespan of climate change-causing and environmentally detrimental fossil fuels, and the need for more thorough community engagement,” said Quenton King, Vice President of the West Virginia Environmental Council. “We’ve seen already the West Virginia state legislature adjust the regulatory environment to accommodate ARCH2’s plans and the state administration incentivise and advertise ARCH2’s development through forgivable loans to hub projects. Hub buildout will prolong hydraulic fracturing for gas for decades and the associated environmental and public health risks associated with fracking. Our state is still experiencing, and unequipped to deal with, the harmful legacy of fossil fuels, and we cannot see that legacy extended with this hydrogen hub.”

[Read Quenton King’s full testimony here.]

“Much of what is promised by OCED and industry in the development of ARCH2 is an experiment. There is a history of energy industry experiments in West Virginia that have left generations of unresolved health impacts and economic burdens,” said Heather Sprouse, Community Engagement Manager for the West Virginia Rivers Coalition. “We need scientifically grounded solutions to improve the economy and reduce greenhouse gas emissions, not more experiments. And before we lock West Virginia into decades of new infrastructure, we need our officials to take swift, effective action to implement regulations that protect citizens from existing harms from the oil and gas industry, including PFAS contamination and radioactive waste products.”

[Read Heather Sprouse’s full testimony here.]

In October 2023, DOE announced plans to award up to $925 million from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law to ARCH2, which spans Ohio, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia.

The hub is expected to produce natural gas-derived “blue” hydrogen using carbon capture technology.

Independent research suggests the ARCH2 hydrogen hub project is a “boondoggle in the making” likely to raise costs for Appalachian families and perpetuate a gas-based regional economy that has failed to deliver promised job growth and prosperity.

Despite an industry-sponsored reputation as “clean,” blue hydrogen in fact relies on the continued extraction of natural gas, a fossil fuel produced in the Ohio River Valley by means of hydraulic fracturing.

The myriad issues associated with shale gas development include asthma and respiratory diseases, cardiovascular issues, low birth weights, and more.

Visit US DOE’s Hydrogen Hub Local Engagement webpage for more information on participation opportunities.

NewsClip:

-- Post-Gazette - Anya Litvak: Pittsburgh Companies Want A Place For Coal Gas And State’s Other Resources In Hydrogen Incentives 

[Posted: March 28, 2024]

4/1/2024