    [Senate Hearing 118-324]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                                                            S. Hrg. 118-324

       OPPORTUNITIES AND CHALLENGES ASSOCIATED WITH DEVELOPING GEOLOGIC
                         HYDROGEN IN THE UNITED STATES

    =======================================================================

                                    HEARING

                                   BEFORE THE

                                  COMMITTEE ON
                          ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
                              UNITED STATES SENATE

                        ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS

                                 SECOND SESSION

                                   __________

                               FEBRUARY 28, 2024

                                   __________

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                           Printed for the use of the
                   Committee on Energy and Natural Resources

            Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov

                                       _______

                     U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

    55-886                    WASHINGTON : 2025

                   COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES

                    JOE MANCHIN III, West Virginia, Chairman
    RON WYDEN, Oregon                    JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming
    MARIA CANTWELL, Washington           JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho
    BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont             MIKE LEE, Utah
    MARTIN HEINRICH, New Mexico          STEVE DAINES, Montana
    MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii              LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska
    ANGUS S. KING, JR., Maine            JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota
    CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO, Nevada       BILL CASSIDY, Louisiana
    JOHN W. HICKENLOOPER, Colorado       CINDY HYDE-SMITH, Mississippi
    ALEX PADILLA, California             JOSH HAWLEY, Missouri

                          Renae Black, Staff Director
                          Sam E. Fowler, Chief Counsel
                   Levi Patterson, Professional Staff Member
         Justin J. Memmott, Republican Staff Director and Chief Counsel
             Leah Schaefer, Republican Senior Legislative Assistant

                                C O N T E N T S

                                  ----------

                               OPENING STATEMENTS

                                                                       Page
    Manchin III, Hon. Joe, Chairman and a U.S. Senator from West
      Virginia.......................................................     1
    Barrasso, Hon. John, Ranking Member and a U.S. Senator from
      Wyoming........................................................     5

                                   WITNESSES

    Wang, Hon. Dr. Evelyn N., Director, Advanced Research Projects
      Agency-Energy, U.S. Department of Energy.......................    10
    Ellis, Dr. Geoffrey S., Energy Resources Program Lead for
      Geologic Hydrogen, U.S. Geological Survey, U.S. Department of
      the Interior...................................................    15
    Johnson, Pete, CEO and co-founder, Koloma........................    21

              ALPHABETICAL LISTING AND APPENDIX MATERIAL SUBMITTED

    Barrasso, Hon. John:
        Opening Statement............................................     5
        Economist article entitled ``The Rush for Colourless Gold''
          published on December 23, 2023.............................     7
    Ellis, Dr. Geoffrey S.:
        Opening Statement............................................    15
        Written Testimony............................................    17
        Responses to Questions for the Record........................    45
    Johnson, Pete:
        Opening Statement............................................    21
        Written Testimony............................................    23
        Responses to Questions for the Record........................    52
    Manchin III, Hon. Joe:
        Opening Statement............................................     1
        Chart entitled ``Selected Regional Clean Hydrogen Hubs''.....     3
    Wang, Hon. Dr. Evelyn N.:
        Opening Statement............................................    10
        Written Testimony............................................    12
        Responses to Questions for the Record........................    40

       OPPORTUNITIES AND CHALLENGES ASSOCIATED WITH DEVELOPING GEOLOGIC
                         HYDROGEN IN THE UNITED STATES

                                  ----------

                          WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 28, 2024

                                           U.S. Senate,
                     Committee on Energy and Natural Resources,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:00 a.m. in
    Room SD-366, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Joe Manchin
    III, Chairman of the Committee, presiding.

              OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOE MANCHIN III,
                    U.S. SENATOR FROM WEST VIRGINIA

        The Chairman. Today we are here to discuss the
    opportunities and challenges of developing geologic hydrogen,
    and that is hydrogen produced below the Earth's surface. We
    have not talked about geologic hydrogen in this Committee
    before, but it is gaining momentum and we must ensure the
    United States continues to lead the world in advanced energy
    technologies by using all of our abundant resources in the
    cleanest way possible, including all types of hydrogen to
    safeguard our country's energy security. I want to thank our
    witnesses for being here to provide their valuable perspective
    from the Administration and private sector on the opportunities
    for geologic hydrogen to become a part of America's energy
    system.
        We have talked a lot about how hydrogen can give us the
    same horsepower as our baseload fossil fuels for industrial
    manufacturing, transportation, dispatchable electric power, and
    more. And industry knows it. In fact, the Department of Energy
    predicts demand for hydrogen to increase tenfold by 2030 in the
    United States, and it has the potential to decarbonize up to 25
    percent of global energy emissions. The development of the
    hydrogen industry is also expected to promote new economic
    opportunities for Americans and create over 100,000 new good-
    paying jobs, particularly exciting for the areas that have
    historically carried the load of powering our nation such as
    West Virginia and Wyoming and New Mexico and Colorado. Now,
    hydrogen is not a new concept, but it was not nurtured in the
    same way some other energy technologies have been to get to
    maturity. Congress acted to rectify that and support
    exponential growth for the hydrogen industry by providing tools
    and incentives in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and the
    Inflation Reduction Act to help make all types of hydrogen cost
    competitive.
        Specifically, this Committee provided DOE with $8 billion
    to pursue hydrogen hub projects, and I think--do you want to
    put that up? We are going to keep this up for you all to see
    where they are located.
        [Displayed chart follows:]

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        The Chairman. Those are the seven that have been awarded,
    the hydrogen hubs, which we are excited about--$1.5 billion for
    hydrogen technology research and development and $750 million
    for small- and medium-sized businesses to manufacture clean
    energy technologies like hydrogen in coal communities. We
    doubled down in the Inflation Reduction Act with the creation
    of the first-ever Clean Hydrogen Production Tax Credit to
    incentivize the production of clean hydrogen. Fast forward to
    today, and seven hydrogen hub projects have been chosen across
    16 states representing ground zero of what will be a national
    clean hydrogen industry. West Virginia is proud to be partnered
    with the Appalachian Regional Clean Hydrogen Hub, known as
    ARCH2, as part of the DOE's hydrogen hub program. The impact of
    ARCH2 is substantial, with the project expected to result in
    over $5 billion of new investment, thousands of new high-paying
    jobs, and public-private partnerships that will create a
    network for hydrogen manufacturing and production in West
    Virginia, and each of the other hubs have the same outcome,
    basically--expedition and expansion--that we are all expecting.
        Now, I know many of our Committee members are excited about
    similar benefits that they are going to expect also. But the
    laws we passed will only be successful if this Administration
    implements them as written and abandons its efforts to impose
    extreme limitations on the hydrogen tax credit that weren't
    included--were never considered, were never even talked about
    in the law. They were all made up. And we are not going to
    stand for it. This is an egregious example of an agency
    overstepping the authorities Congress has provided for them.
    Nowhere, as I said before, in the IRA will you find language
    authorizing Treasury to limit hydrogen credits only to those
    producers who get energy from additional new power plants, or
    to require producers to match the hour of power generation with
    the hour of hydrogen production, or to restrict the location
    where electricity for hydrogen is sourced from. Can you imagine
    building and investing the billions of dollars it will take for
    the electrolyzers that run 24/7 and expecting wind and solar to
    power them 24 hours a day? It doesn't make any sense at all.
    And unfortunately, the hydrogen tax credit is just one example
    in a long line of the Administration trying to implement the
    law that they wanted, not the one that we passed.
        The Administration takes the most liberal view possible for
    credits that benefit the industries the extreme Left likes--
    like EVs and solar--and the most restrictive view possible when
    it comes to incentives for industries that these activists
    oppose--like hydrogen and critical mineral production credits.
    In this case, the Administration initially celebrated the
    announcement of the hub awards, and we all have, and the jobs
    that are going to be created. However, now they have bent to
    pressure to obstruct hydrogen development, which will kill
    every one--every one of these and the progress that was
    intended and that was being made. Just this week, all seven
    hydrogen hubs, again, representing major investments in 16
    states, wrote to the Administration urging them to change
    course on proposed rules for the hydrogen tax credits that
    threaten the success of the hubs. I want you to know, this is
    the first time, I think, in my long line of public service that
    I have ever had California--a hydrogen hub in California agree
    with the hydrogen hub in Appalachia. It has never happened
    before. So, to have all of us on the same page tells you how
    serious this is. I am glad the hubs are making their concerns
    known. I am going to support them every step of the way,
    pushing back on the Administration's unlawful proposal. And I
    think all of us that represent these areas where the hubs are
    located feel the same.
        Let me now pivot back to geologic hydrogen and the spur of
    new activity we are seeing, both to map and access naturally
    occurring hydrogen underground, and to develop ways of
    producing hydrogen underground. Knowing where the hydrogen
    reserves are is fundamental to advancing geologic hydrogen as
    an energy source to help meet the nation's future energy needs.
    The USGS Energy Resources Program maps and conducts scientific
    research on geological resources and their supply chains,
    including geologic hydrogen. Specifically, Earth MRI, the USGS
    mapping program that was authorized in the Bipartisan
    Infrastructure Law, provides essential data for identifying
    areas with mineral and geological hydrogen potential.
    Meanwhile, the Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy at the
    Department of Energy, better known by its acronym ARPA-E,
    recently announced 16 new geologic hydrogen projects awarded to
    universities, national labs, and companies that will propel
    innovation and growth in the geologic hydrogen industry. I am
    pleased to say that Shepherdstown, West Virginia will be
    hosting ARPA-E's Geologic Hydrogen Kickoff event in May. This
    event will serve as the launch point for numerous new ARPA-E
    and other federally funded geological hydrogen projects. As
    America's energy powerhouse, West Virginia is excited to be
    supporting these advanced energy technologies.
        With all that we have accomplished through recent
    legislation, I know this Committee remains committed to
    fostering the growth of hydrogen in the United States due to
    its potential to reshape our energy landscape, create economic
    opportunities, and contribute to ensuring our energy security.
    We look forward to continuing our work with the DOE, the USGS,
    and the private sector in this area, and I look forward to
    hearing our witnesses' perspectives today on advancing geologic
    hydrogen.
        With that, I am going to turn to Ranking Member Barrasso
    for his opening remarks.

               OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN BARRASSO,
                       U.S. SENATOR FROM WYOMING

        Senator Barrasso. Well, thank you so much, Mr. Chairman,
    and thank you for holding today's hearing.
        The Energy Information Administration projects that the
    world demand for energy is going to increase by 34 percent by
    the year 2050. To meet this demand, our nation is going to need
    more of every type of energy, and that includes hydrogen.
    Hydrogen offers many advantages. It is light and abundant. It
    is especially energy dense. Hydrogen, also, is very clean. When
    combusted with oxygen, hydrogen emits only water vapor and warm
    air. It is widely believed that we will need hydrogen in order
    to reduce emissions in sectors of the economy that use large
    amounts of energy. That includes steel, concrete production,
    transportation, and electricity generation. For years, our
    attention on hydrogen production has been focused on using
    natural gas or cracking water through a process called
    electrolysis. Today, we are going to look at the potential to
    tap underground deposits of pure hydrogen, also known as
    geologic hydrogen.
        Geologic hydrogen is formed when water reacts with iron-
    rich rock at high temperatures underground. Scientists have
    long known that water and iron-rich rock produce hydrogen.
    Until recently, they believed that hydrogen would not remain in
    a pure state for very long. They believed hydrogen would bond
    with other elements like oxygen to form water or carbon to form
    hydrocarbons. They believed that hydrogen would be eaten by
    microbes or escape to the surface and into the atmosphere.
    Scientists have recently found that in some areas, deposits of
    pure hydrogen can remain trapped. When this happens, the
    hydrogen accumulates. And if enough hydrogen accumulates, the
    hydrogen can be extracted, like oil and gas. The scientific
    community and private sector are cautiously optimistic that the
    world contains large reserves of geologic hydrogen. Dr. Ellis,
    one of our witnesses, has estimated that even if just a small
    fraction of these reserves is economically recoverable, it
    would meet the world's projected demand for hydrogen for
    hundreds of years.
        In December, The Economist ran an article about geologic
    hydrogen. Mr. Chairman, right here--``The Rush for Colourless
    Gold.'' The Economist has a diagram of how they do that. It is
    a very, very thorough, good article.
        [The article referred to follows:]

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Senator Barrasso. It quotes the leader of one geologic
    hydrogen company stating that he holds the ``unpopular view
    that science and innovation are likely to come to our rescue on
    climate as they did over COVID.'' Republicans have advocated
    for reducing carbon emissions through innovation, and quoting
    you, ``innovation, not regulation.''
        The Chairman. Or elimination.
        Senator Barrasso. And without elimination. Geologic
    hydrogen is purely an area that we should pursue. Companies
    exploring for geologic hydrogen use many of the same
    technologies that are used in the oil and gas industry. In
    fact, many of the people exploring for hydrogen today spent
    their careers exploring for oil and gas. These are many of the
    same people in technologies that have made the United States
    the world leader in oil and gas production. In my view,
    geologic hydrogen, unlike wind, solar, and electric batteries,
    plays to America's strengths, not those of China. Scientists
    and companies exploring for geologic hydrogen are looking to
    make hydrogen production as affordable, reliable, and clean as
    possible. I am glad to say the University of Wyoming is
    participating in these efforts. While there is still much to
    learn, today's hearing will shed light on the opportunities and
    challenges ahead.
        I want to thank our witnesses for joining us here today and
    I look forward to hearing the testimony.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Barrasso.
        And now, we are going to have our three witnesses. We have
    the Honorable Dr. Evelyn Wang. She is Director at the Advanced
    Research Projects Agency-Energy.
        We have Dr. Geoffrey Ellis, Energy Resources Program Lead
    for Geologic Hydrogen at the U.S. Geological Survey.
        And then we have Mr. Pete Johnson, co-founder and CEO of
    Koloma.
        And we will start with Dr. Wang. And if you have any of
    your family members here, we would like for you to introduce
    them. It would be very nice.
        Okay, Doctor, go ahead.

     STATEMENT OF HON. EVELYN N. WANG, DIRECTOR, ADVANCED RESEARCH
           PROJECTS AGENCY-ENERGY, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

        Dr. Wang. Thank you, Chairman Manchin, Ranking Member
    Barrasso, and distinguished members of this Committee. It is my
    privilege to appear before you today to represent the
    Department of Energy as Director of Advanced Research Projects
    Agency-Energy, commonly known as ARPA-E. Our agency is tasked
    with supporting the research and development of high-risk,
    high-reward energy technologies that have the potential to
    fundamentally change the way we generate, use, and store
    energy. Today, I am pleased to appear before you to discuss
    this important topic of geologic hydrogen. ARPA-E's support of
    this topic aligns with our mission of disrupting learning
    curves and creating new markets.
        Hydrogen is an element that could be used to cleanly
    produce heat and electricity, and is relevant to reducing
    harmful emissions from some of the most energy-intensive
    sectors of the economy, such as chemical industrial processes
    like ammonia and steel, and heavy-duty transportation. It can
    be produced from a variety of domestic resources, such as
    natural gas, nuclear power, biomass, and renewable power, like
    solar and wind. Hydrogen has end-uses across almost all
    sectors, from industrial to commercial, transportation,
    agriculture and more.
        Historically, hydrogen can store and deliver usable energy
    as a carrier, but as an element, not much is found in the
    atmosphere due to its reactivity and light weight.
    Consequently, it is typically produced from compounds that
    contain it. Geologic hydrogen presents a unique opportunity
    where advanced technologies can stimulate and extract hydrogen
    directly from the Earth's subsurface. The realization of these
    technologies would make hydrogen a primary energy source in
    addition to a carrier of energy, potentially increasing the
    domestic supply of hydrogen and lowering costs of this form of
    energy for millions of Americans. Given recent interest in the
    discovery of naturally accumulating deposits of subsurface
    hydrogen, ARPA-E is interested in accessing these deposits and
    exploring the possibility of developing this source of
    hydrogen. By advancing transformative technologies that would
    enable the stimulation and extraction of this hydrogen, we
    could potentially yield larger quantities of it than are
    currently produced.
        To that end, in September 2023, ARPA-E announced $20
    million in available support for teams to be a part of this
    historic effort to advance the research and development of this
    technology. ARPA-E selected 18 projects across 9 states as part
    of this funding opportunity announcement. While simply
    extracting the current supply of naturally accumulating
    hydrogen, in and of itself, can enhance the U.S. energy
    economy, ARPA-E is committing research support to explore a
    potentially disruptive step in the process. Through
    understanding how we can artificially stimulate these deposits,
    there is a theoretical potential to produce enough clean
    hydrogen to impact U.S. energy demand. Therefore, the funding
    announced in September is part of two ARPA-E exploratory
    topics. The first explores research into the stimulation
    processes. The second focuses on technologies relevant to the
    management and extraction of hydrogen from geologic reservoirs.
    The historic significance of this moment is clear, with this
    being the first time that the U.S. Government has competitively
    selected teams to research this technology.
        The potential for geologic hydrogen represents a paradigm
    shift in the way we think about hydrogen as an energy source.
    If our programs show success, this new source of hydrogen could
    lower energy costs and increase our nation's energy security
    and supply chains. In addition, existing technology,
    infrastructure, and workforce capabilities from industries such
    as geothermal, oil, gas, and mining may be leveraged for the
    stimulation and extraction of geologic hydrogen. We understand
    the inherent risks of this early-stage research, and recognize
    this risk is essential in ARPA-E's mission to enhance American
    innovation. Thank you for the opportunity to appear before the
    Committee today, and I look forward to your questions.
        [The prepared statement of Dr. Wang follows:]

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        The Chairman. Thank you, Doctor.
        And now we will have Dr. Geoffrey Ellis. He is our Energy
    Resources Program Lead for Geologic Hydrogen at the U.S.
    Geological Survey. Thank you, Dr. Ellis.

     STATEMENT OF DR. GEOFFREY S. ELLIS, ENERGY RESOURCES PROGRAM
       LEAD FOR GEOLOGIC HYDROGEN, U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, U.S.
                       DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

        Dr. Ellis. Good morning, Chairman Manchin, Ranking Member
    Barrasso, and members of the Committee. Thank you for inviting
    me to testify before you today on the opportunities and
    challenges associated with developing geologic hydrogen
    resources. My name is Geoff Ellis and I lead the research
    efforts into understanding the resource potential of geologic
    hydrogen in the U.S. Geological Survey, or USGS.
        The existence of naturally occurring hydrogen is well
    documented in many geologic environments, with the notable
    exception of petroleum reservoirs. Out of millions of oil and
    gas wells that have been drilled around the globe, only a few
    dozen oil fields have been documented to contain more than
    trace levels of hydrogen. This led many geoscientists to
    conclude that economic accumulations of hydrogen in the
    subsurface are non-existent. However, the accidental discovery
    of geologic hydrogen gas accumulation in Mali, West Africa
    about 12 years ago brought about a re-examination of this
    notion. There are now a growing number of geoscientists who
    recognize that we simply have not looked for geologic hydrogen
    in the right places with the right tools.
        The geologic setting of the hydrogen accumulation in Mali
    is not unique, which suggests that geologic hydrogen
    accumulations could be widespread. In the wake of this
    discovery, active exploration for geologic hydrogen has begun
    in Brazil, Colombia, and elsewhere, and research into this
    potential low-carbon energy resource has taken off,
    particularly in France and Australia. In the United States, the
    first well specifically targeting a geologic hydrogen
    accumulation was drilled in the State of Nebraska in 2019.
    Several additional hydrogen exploration wells have been drilled
    in the United States since then and more are planned for later
    this year. The USGS began investigating geologic hydrogen
    resource potential in 2021.
        The USGS recently developed a model of global hydrogen
    resource potential based on known properties of hydrogen and
    well-understood accumulations of other geologic resources, such
    as petroleum, geothermal energy, and noble gases like helium.
    According to the model, the estimated in-place global geologic
    hydrogen resource ranges from thousands to potentially billions
    of megatons, or million metric tons. However, the model makes
    no prediction about the spatial distribution of this resource.
    Given our understanding of other geologic resources, the vast
    majority of the in-place hydrogen is likely to be in
    accumulations that are too deep, too far offshore, or too small
    to ever be economically recovered. However, if even a small
    fraction of this amount could be recovered, that would
    constitute a significant resource.
        More geoscience research and data collection is needed to
    better understand where natural accumulations of hydrogen might
    be found. Fortunately, we have extensive experience from
    petroleum, geothermal, and hydrothermal mineral resource
    exploration that can be applied to understanding geologic
    hydrogen resources. Building on that experience, the USGS is
    developing a conceptual geologic model to refine our
    understanding of the potential for hydrogen accumulation in the
    subsurface. The USGS model will initially be applied to mapping
    the relative likelihood of the presence of geologic hydrogen
    resources across the Lower 48 states of the U.S. In addition to
    our mapping efforts, we are collaborating with the Colorado
    School of Mines and a consortium of industry partners to
    advance the geoscience related to geologic hydrogen and to
    investigate exploration methods needed to develop this
    potential resource.
        Another significant area of research is the potential to
    stimulate hydrogen generation in the subsurface, which is
    distinct from its natural occurrence. We are partnering with
    the U.S. Department of Energy to identify the geologic
    conditions under which new technologies may be applied in ways
    that are effective, safe, and protective of local communities'
    health and the environment. Advancement of stimulation
    technologies could substantially add to our current estimate of
    the global potential for economically recoverable geologic
    hydrogen.
        In summary, our current understanding suggests that the
    amount of naturally occurring hydrogen in the Earth's interior
    is likely to be large. However, the potential for this hydrogen
    to be present in accumulations that could be economically,
    safely, and responsibly recovered is currently unknown.
    Research is now underway at the USGS to improve our
    understanding of this novel resource that can help provide a
    low-carbon and secure supply of energy to our nation. Thank you
    for the opportunity to testify today. I look forward to
    answering any questions that you might have.
        [The prepared statement of Dr. Ellis follows:]

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        The Chairman. Thank you, Doctor.
        Now we have Mr. Pete Johnson. I believe you have some
    family members here, sir.
        Mr. Johnson. Yes, I would like to introduce my mother, who
    was born in DC and came here to witness the event. Stand up,
    Mom.
        The Chairman. Stand up. Thank you for being here.
        Mr. Johnson. I bring her to every important meeting I go
    to.
        The Chairman. Well, it is always good to have your mom with
    you, especially in these meetings.

                      STATEMENT OF PETE JOHNSON,
                       CEO AND CO-FOUNDER, KOLOMA

        Mr. Johnson. Thank you, Chairman Manchin, Ranking Member
    Barrasso, and other distinguished members of the Committee for
    the opportunity to speak to you about geologic hydrogen and its
    potential to benefit the United States.
        My name is Pete Johnson. I am the co-founder and CEO of
    Koloma. I am the father of four active kids and I love nothing
    more than spending time with my wife and them outside, enjoying
    the forests, the mountains, and coastlines of this beautiful
    country. I am passionate about clean energy and I believe I
    have a moral responsibility to do what I can to benefit the
    health of both my children and the planet. I am also a
    pragmatist. I am an engineer by training and I am an
    entrepreneur. I have designed and built clean energy facilities
    in the Southwest United States, in Australia, in India along
    the Pakistan border, and most recently in Nebraska. I have
    founded and built multiple clean energy companies, including
    another successful clean hydrogen business, and I have also
    worked as an investor in a traditional energy fund focused on
    energy transition opportunities.
        I first learned about the concept of geologic hydrogen
    three years ago while working in the investment industry. I was
    very skeptical. Everybody is looking for a silver bullet in the
    clean energy business. This one seemed too good to be true. In
    the last 12 months, Science magazine, the New York Times, the
    Wall Street Journal, the Economist, which Senator Barrasso
    lifted up--they have all featured this and they have
    highlighted this field and its potential. But three years ago,
    there was very, very little to go by. I was curious enough back
    then, and I dug into as much data as I could find. And it
    became clear to me that the science of hydrogen formation in
    the subsurface was real. It was indisputable. The reaction
    between water and iron-rich rock happens, and hydrogen seeps
    are present on all six continents and have been well studied.
    Hydrogen is seeping out of the mid-Atlantic sea floor. Hydrogen
    is coming out in the steam in Iceland and the Geysers
    Geothermal Field in California.
        I have worked in the hydrogen business for a long time and
    I did the math. If geologic hydrogen accumulations can be
    found, this would change the hydrogen business dramatically and
    have a massive advantage in terms of cost and availability. It
    would open up new avenues for decarbonization that just are not
    possible now. But the key questions remained: Are there
    accumulations that are large enough to matter? Are they close
    enough to markets? Can we find them with a high enough hit rate
    to justify the high cost of exploration activities?
        During this process, I was introduced to Dr. Tom Darrah, a
    tenured geology and geochemistry professor at the Ohio State
    University. Tom had spent the better part of 20 years
    collecting and analyzing data around geologic hydrogen from six
    continents, and was widely recognized as the world expert in
    the field. I saw that the analytical tools and technology that
    Tom had developed could be further honed to create a strong
    advantage in finding commercially relevant geologic hydrogen
    reserves. We brought in other experts in resource exploration
    who agreed that the technical advantages we had would help de-
    risk the effort. At that point, Tom and I, along with another
    co-founder, Paul Harraka, invested our personal capital
    alongside a seed investor and founded Koloma in 2021 as a data-
    driven technology-enhanced geologic hydrogen exploration
    company.
        Today, Koloma has 35 employees who are a unique mix of
    geologists, data scientists, traditional energy resource
    professionals, and hydrogen experts. Koloma has offices and
    facilities in Denver, Colorado and at the Ohio State
    University. We have been actively gathering and analyzing data,
    conducting lab experiments, leasing mineral rights, and
    exploring in prospective regions in the United States. We are
    very excited about the opportunity in what we are seeing.
        I would like to share a few key points about geologic
    hydrogen's potential impact on U.S. efforts toward
    decarbonization. First, geologic hydrogen is domestic primary
    energy. All other forms of hydrogen require more energy to
    produce than the hydrogen itself holds. The geologic hydrogen
    is a source of energy. Senator Barrasso pointed out that demand
    increasing is just going up. Adding energy into the system is a
    critical element of decarbonization. Second, this is incredibly
    clean energy. In multiple third-party life-cycle analyses and
    peer-reviewed journal articles, geologic hydrogen has been
    found to have a very low carbon footprint, akin to renewables-
    powered electrolyzers. In addition, geologic hydrogen will
    result in lower land use and lower water consumption than any
    other form of hydrogen. And last, this is a great way to
    leverage the enormous talent base and talent advantage the U.S.
    has built in resource exploration and production. Downstream
    facilities will leverage that as well.
        I would like to conclude by noting that this will not be
    easy. This will take time, money, and effort to figure out.
    Nobody has all the answers today, but the early data looks
    promising, and I believe that geologic hydrogen can play a very
    large role as we decarbonize the U.S. energy economy. The
    efforts we put in now to commercialize this will be worth it.
    Thank you.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Johnson follows:]

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        The Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Johnson.
        Now we are going to start with our questions, and I will
    lead off with--Dr. Wang, this one is going to be for you.
        The Greenhouse gases, Regulated Emissions, and Energy use
    in Technologies model, otherwise called GREET, is a tool used
    to evaluate the emissions of hydrogen production for the 45V
    hydrogen production tax credit. Earlier this month, ARPA-E
    awarded a grant to the Argonne National Laboratory to develop
    the GREET model to include a method for calculating the
    emissions of geologic hydrogen. Can you provide more
    information on when the update to the GREET model will be
    complete so that geologic hydrogen producers can use it to
    determine their tax credit values?
        Dr. Wang. Thank you, Chairman Manchin, for that question.
        Indeed, an important part to be able to make geological
    hydrogen now applicable to the 45V tax credit is indeed having
    the life-cycle analysis to understand the amount of emissions
    from the CO2 emissions from geologic hydrogen. So we
    did fund Argonne National Lab as a part of our exploratory
    topic work to now incorporate geologic hydrogen in doing the
    life-cycle analysis for it. And so, we expect that to be done
    by the end of the year. And so, not only can our researchers
    access it, but make it now open to anyone that wants to access
    that model, to be able to now apply for the--to be able to make
    it applicable for the tax credit.
        The Chairman. What was the time period again?
        Dr. Wang. The time period is by the end of the year.
        The Chairman. End of the year. Okay.
        Mr. Johnson, this will be for you.
        Speaking as you have, and you being, I think, the lead
    company in the country, really, doing what you are doing--
    Committee members, I think that we all agree that to develop
    new energy sources like geologic hydrogen, we are concerned
    about the workers. And a lot of the people, as they transition,
    as we transition our energy portfolio, hydrogen seems to me to
    be the most consistent with what we are doing today, by doing
    it cleaner with hydrogen versus traditional sources that we use
    now. Do you see that transition being with the skill sets we
    have? Do we have to retrain, for the heavy lifting that
    hydrogen can do with trucks, diesels, trains, planes, and
    everything in between?
        Mr. Johnson. I think a big benefit that geologic hydrogen
    brings is that it can really tap into the existing talent base.
    It's not a perfect fit.
        The Chairman. Sure.
        Mr. Johnson. This is a different kind of rock. There are
    different challenges that have to be sorted out, but if you
    just look at our team of geologists, geochemists, reservoir
    engineers, drilling engineers, you know, land professionals,
    this looks and feels a lot like another resource play. We have
    different science going on, but we can put the workforce to
    work doing, you know, clean hydrogen. I would say a lot of
    people in the oil and gas industry who are really interested in
    moving into energy transition, they see this as an incredible
    opportunity.
        The Chairman. Let me ask you this--the hydrogen we have
    right now that you all have been tapped into, you know that we
    have those reserves of clean hydrogen in the ground now that
    can be extracted--can they be put into the market the same as
    natural gas is as we extract that or oil?
        Mr. Johnson. Well, I would say, you know, one of the
    challenges we have, right, that is similar to oil and gas 50 to
    100 years ago, is that there is not a massive distribution
    system for moving hydrogen back and forth. So my view is that
    the initial commercial production reservoirs of geologic
    hydrogen will end up being used near the point of production by
    ammonia plants or other facilities built close by. I think
    that, you know, you might have to wait a period of time to see
    a large enough basin developed to start to see pipelines. So, I
    don't----
        The Chairman. Can the same pipeline system we have now for
    gas--can hydrogen be used in that same type of transportation?
        Mr. Johnson. I would say the jury is out on that. All of
    the pipeline companies are studying this. And there are views
    that you can go up to 5 or 10 or 20 percent. I think the jury
    is out on that. I wouldn't--I am not enough of a metallurgist
    to make more comment than that.
        The Chairman. Thank you.
        Dr. Ellis, the USGS has stated they are actively engaging
    in several endeavors to evaluate the potential of our geologic
    hydrogen reserves. What states or areas in the U.S. have that
    potential geologic hydrogen resources have you identified?
        Dr. Ellis. Thank you for that question, Chairman Manchin.
        At this time, I can't give you an exact answer to that
    question. That's something that we are currently in the process
    of working on. So, the answer will be developing, evolving over
    time as we get more data coming in. But I can tell you, in our
    initial efforts, we see areas along the East Coast of the
    United States, actually all the way from New Jersey down to
    Georgia as being potential----
        The Chairman. Are we talking like the shale play was? I
    mean, we have Marcellus and Utica in our area, and you have the
    Permian and all the different shale plays that are going on. Is
    that what you seem to be able to identify, or not?
        Dr. Ellis. No, this would be independent from the shales.
        The Chairman. Got you.
        Dr. Ellis. This is related to offshore iron-rich rocks that
    could be a source for hydrogen, and then it would be migrating
    toward the coastline.
        And another prospective area is the Mid-Continent Rift,
    where we have ultramafic rocks--these iron-rich rocks that
    extend all the way from northeastern Kansas up through
    Nebraska, Iowa and into Minnesota, and up into Ontario, and
    then down into Michigan are also an area that we think is
    highly prospective. This is based on our understanding of where
    the source rocks are most likely to be, but it's complicated.
        The Chairman. Sure.
        Dr. Ellis. We need to have the reservoirs----
        The Chairman. What is your timetable?
        Dr. Ellis. Excuse me?
        The Chairman. What is your timetable to identify them?
    Because we're not going to go out and start drilling until you
    tell us where to go.
        Dr. Ellis. No, well, two things on that. The timetable is
    that we are aiming to get our initial map of prospectivity for
    the U.S. by the end of this year. But the second key point here
    is that once we have this map, it's not going to tell you where
    to drill your wells. This is going to tell us where the best
    places are to start doing more detailed exploration.
        The Chairman. Thank you very much.
        Senator Barrasso.
        Senator Barrasso. Thanks so very much, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Johnson, so a well-known investor backing your company
    recently stated the following about geologic hydrogen: ``It
    could be gigantic or it could be a bust, but if it is really
    there, wow.'' So, would you tell us why you think geologic
    hydrogen has real promise and won't be a bust?
        Mr. Johnson. I think the science of geologic hydrogen
    formation in the subsurface is very clear. There are hydrogen
    seeps all over the planet that have been documented. The
    question that needs to be answered, and to echo Dr. Ellis here,
    is what we don't know is, are there accumulations that are
    large enough to be commercial, right? If you have got a really
    small puff of hydrogen from one well out in a farmer's field,
    that is hard to commercialize, right? So, you know, the bust
    scenario is not that there is no hydrogen under the ground.
    That science is established. The bust scenario is, hey, there
    is nothing big enough, or the only thing that's big is in the
    middle of Greenland. I mean, that's the scenario that we are
    talking about where this ends up not being something that, you
    know, we believe it could be.
        Senator Barrasso. So, Dr. Ellis, following up--I understand
    you are still in the process of modeling the world's reserves
    of the geologic hydrogen and your work isn't finished. Can you
    give us a general sense of the size of the world's reserves of
    geologic hydrogen? And in your estimate, how much of these
    reserves might be economically recoverable?
        Dr. Ellis. Yes, thank you for that question, Senator.
        It is very difficult at this time to answer that with much
    precision. As I mentioned in my opening remarks, we have done
    this global model and it could be anywhere from thousands of
    megatons, which really would not be very important, to
    potentially billions of megatons. And so, I think that at this
    point the best we can do is to say, as Mr. Johnson has said, is
    that it is very likely that there are large quantities in the
    subsurface, and what we need to understand is the potential for
    these accumulations that could be economically developed. But
    the key point, I think, is that even just a small fraction of
    what we think is in the subsurface could constitute a
    significant resource. And so, I think that we absolutely should
    be doing the work, the research, to better understand the
    potential for the accumulations that could answer that
    question.
        Senator Barrasso. Mr. Johnson, I want to expand a little
    bit on one of the things you touched on in your introductory
    remarks. What would you say are the principal advantages of
    geologic hydrogen over other types of hydrogen production? You
    mentioned that in your remarks, and when it comes to land and
    water use, how does geologic hydrogen compare with hydrogen
    production using, say, wind and solar energy?
        Mr. Johnson. So I go back to just pointing out that this is
    a primary source of energy, and that is an additive energy
    source to the system. When you look at, you know, fossil
    hydrogen from natural gas or fossil hydrogen with carbon
    capture or electrolysis, all those take more energy than the
    hydrogen molecule actually carries at the end of the day.
    Geologic hydrogen is essentially decoupled from renewables or
    from natural gas. So you do not have this challenge of this
    turning off when the wind stops blowing or the sun stops
    shining. And that's really critical because hydrogen, as its
    own product, is actually fairly limited. The value of hydrogen
    is that it can be converted into ammonia or can be converted
    into sustainable aviation fuel. That means you have to have an
    expensive facility on the back end taking this hydrogen and
    running. You have to run that facility 24/7 to make that pay.
    So you know, as Senator Manchin said, you can't run an ammonia
    plant on intermittent sunshine hydrogen. So the value of
    geologic hydrogen is the sense that this will be baseload
    hydrogen, 24/7/365.
        The last point I would make here is, the best gas storage
    assets we have in this country are depleted gas reservoirs. So
    if you imagine drilling and producing geologic hydrogen out of
    a reservoir and eventually producing what that reservoir had to
    offer, that reservoir will now contain pore space that could be
    used as geologic storage for other forms of hydrogen converting
    that to baseload. So this really ties into the broader system.
        Senator Barrasso. So what do you see as the biggest threats
    to the commercial production of geologic hydrogen in the months
    and the years ahead?
        Mr. Johnson. You know, I think one key threat that is
    important to talk about is ensuring that we have technology-
    agnostic approaches towards incentives. Geologic hydrogen, we
    see, in the long term, as being something that will be highly
    economic on its own. But as is everything, this will take a lot
    of time and effort to get there, and to incentivize private
    capital to take those risks, it is really critical that
    geologic hydrogen is not on an uneven playing field. So, if
    every other form of hydrogen received tax credits and this did
    not, it would be very challenging to see the amount of private
    investment required to get this going. That's one. I mean, on
    just the true commercial side, it is a matter of finding large
    enough resources at high enough purity close enough to markets.
    We are already quite confident that if we find it, off-takers
    and people who want to utilize that hydrogen to produce energy
    transition materials will be there.
        Senator Barrasso. The Chairman and I were just talking
    about, so, the 45V tax credits, I mean, the issue is the
    government may put its hand on the scale here, because you just
    said you could get by excluding any kind of tax credits, you
    don't need any of that. But if the government gets involved and
    says they want to subsidize one versus another and chooses
    winners or losers, it would seem to be devastating.
        Mr. Johnson. That would be very challenging. That would
    slow things down quite a bit. And I would say, look, long-term,
    I believe that this could stand on its own as an energy source
    with nothing. In the short term, I will tell you right now, the
    first reservoir somebody finds will not be the best. It will
    take a while to find the Permian of hydrogen, right? And so,
    the first time somebody finds it, they might not be achieving
    the ideal optimal cost targets that we will be achieving in 10
    years.
        Senator Barrasso. Thank you.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman. Senator Heinrich.
        Senator Heinrich. Mr. Johnson, can you kind of drill down
    into the weeds on what production, in your view, will actually
    look like? How analogous is it to geothermal production or oil
    and gas production? And talk a little bit about, you know, you
    have been talking a lot about reservoirs, but talk about
    stimulation of hydrogen that is bound up in other compounds
    versus already precipitated hydrogen that is in a reservoir of
    its own, and how we should look at those two things and how
    they are related.
        Mr. Johnson. Yes, thanks for the question. So, Koloma right
    now is focused on finding reservoirs that are naturally filled
    with hydrogen. And to talk about what production would look
    like on that, it would be a series of wells that look very
    similar to the wells that we drill for water, geothermal power,
    oil, and gas, up to wellheads. That hydrogen would then be
    gathered into a central purification facility, much like
    natural gas is. The hydrogen would be further purified and then
    sold to an ammonia plant or a, you know, SAF plant or something
    like that. So, pretty similar to what we see in today's energy
    industry.
        Regarding, you know, a stimulated hydrogen concept, you
    know, that is something that Koloma is involved in on the R&D
    side of. We are pretty far away from conceptualizing what that
    system would look like, and I would actually defer you back to
    the DOE, who has spent more time working on that.
        Senator Heinrich. Dr. Wang, do you want to address that?
        Dr. Wang. Sure, thank you, Senator Heinrich, for that
    question.
        So, the focus of the ARPA-E effort that we are supporting,
    in fact, is very much on the stimulation/extraction side. So
    that is distinct from what my colleagues have been discussing
    related to the natural hydrogen deposits that could exist. And
    we think this could be a ripe opportunity for us because if we
    could actually stimulate it, so actually introduce high-
    pressure steam into the subsurface with these rocks, these
    iron-rich rocks.
        Senator Heinrich. Okay. So, we are talking about similar
    iron ore to what we mined commercially historically in the
    upper Midwest, for example.
        Dr. Wang. That's what we believe right now, and of course,
    there is exploration to be done in terms of the research to
    understand what kinds of rocks will actually produce at the
    rates that we want, the high rates of production of hydrogen
    from that chemical reaction that occurs with these types of
    iron-rich rock formations. So, that's really key, but we have
    to understand that, and that could be an avenue for us to
    pursue moving forward in addition to the natural hydrogen that
    potentially is all around the world.
        Senator Heinrich. Dr. Johnson, back to you. We all know
    that hydrogen itself is not a greenhouse gas, but if you leak
    hydrogen, it changes the abundance of methane, of water vapor,
    of ozone, other very potent greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.
    We are just now getting a handle on methane leakage after 100
    years of just letting it leak out of our pipes. How should we
    be thinking about this now so that we get it right so that
    hydrogen leakage does not become an issue the way that fugitive
    methane has?
        Mr. Johnson. Yes, it is a very good question. I appreciate
    it.
        So, there have been studies come out and there is a
    prevailing view that there is a greenhouse gas impact of
    hydrogen. The degree to which it does that per ton is still
    debated, and there are lots of different papers, but we agree,
    hydrogen leakage is not good for the environment. The good
    thing is, the industrial gas companies have operated hydrogen
    storage, underground hydrogen storage facilities, hydrogen
    wells, hydrogen wellheads, and hydrogen purification for a
    number of decades. And they have actually tracked hydrogen
    leakage through that time. And so, the data on this is actually
    pretty solid. Typically, you see between 0.1 to 1 percent
    hydrogen leakage from the system, storage all the way through
    to distribution, with a well-operated system around 0.25
    percent. That is very low.
        Hydrogen is so valuable, and hydrogen leaks are important
    to match that you really incentivize to monitor and address
    leakage, but again, we are early on this, right? So Koloma, as
    we get into our business, we will commit to being, you know,
    top of the field in looking at this. There are ways to monitor
    hydrogen leakage that are currently being developed and we will
    stay on top of those. We think it's a critical issue. We will
    stay on top of it. But it is also really critical that we think
    about hydrogen leakage holistically when we think about
    hydrogen leakage from every form of hydrogen production and
    don't get so focused on hydrogen leakage from this one element.
        Senator Heinrich. Yes, no, I agree with you wholeheartedly.
    I mean, this is something that we can get right from the start,
    which we didn't do with oil and gas.
        Mr. Johnson. Right.
        Senator Heinrich. And you know, there is an economic
    incentive in states like mine to capture methane because it is
    a product and it has got value. However, we have large
    numbers--you know, the majors have been very good at that, but
    as you go down to smaller and smaller producers, we still have
    huge problems with fugitive methane. So, if we can get this
    right out of the gate, we can avoid a lot of that.
        Mr. Johnson. Yes, we completely agree.
        Senator Heinrich. Chairman.
        The Chairman. Senator Hawley.
        Senator Hawley. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thanks to the
    witnesses for being here.
        Dr. Wang, if I could just start with you. I want to talk a
    little bit about the regional impact--potential regional
    impact--of some of what we have been discussing. Last year, the
    governor of my state, along with the governors of Nebraska and
    Iowa, signed a memorandum of understanding to work on a clean
    hydrogen hub. They are very interested in what this could do--
    potentially what this technology could do for the region. I
    wonder if you could just speak to the impact that this
    technology could have on the economies of Midwest states like
    Missouri, what we might see going forward. I mean, what do you
    assess as the possibilities there?
        Dr. Wang. Thank you, Senator Hawley, for that question. And
    certainly, right now we are at the very early stages of
    research and understanding how to stimulate and potentially
    extract hydrogen from the subsurface. And so, certainly, if
    there are rocks that are iron-rich in nature that we can
    stimulate, there could be many opportunities in your region and
    elsewhere to be able to use geologic hydrogen as a clean source
    of energy in the future.
        Senator Hawley. Very good. Let me just ask you about the
    potential effect here on farmers. Mr. Johnson has mentioned a
    couple times, I think, that one of the by-products of hydrogen
    is, hydrogen can be used to make ammonia. That is a key
    component, obviously, in the production of nitrogen
    fertilizers. That is of great interest to my state. We are a
    farming state. Of course, Russia's invasion of Ukraine severely
    disrupted the supply of fertilizer all across the globe, much
    to the detriment of farmers in Missouri and across the country.
    So, I am wondering if you can speak to the importance of
    hydrogen and these kinds of technologies to farmers, in
    particular--what sort of benefits might they see from this
    technology were it to come online more fully?
        Dr. Wang. Absolutely. So, we know that hydrogen is a great
    feedstock and it is used to create ammonia for fertilizer. If
    we could really stimulate and extract this hydrogen and produce
    very large quantities at very low cost, I think this could have
    significant implications to help and support the farmers.
        Senator Hawley. Yes, very good.
        Mr. Johnson, let me just ask you, speaking of farms and
    rural areas, you have said, I think in your written statement,
    that growing geologic hydrogen will create new domestic high-
    paying blue-and white-collar jobs, particularly in rural
    communities where the resource is discovered. I am interested
    in the blue-collar rural community part of that. Can you
    extrapolate there? Can you tell us more of what you think the
    potential might be?
        Mr. Johnson. Well, from a probability standpoint, this
    country is huge, and most of it is rural. So, when we find new
    hydrogen resources, they will generally be in rural
    communities. You know, cities have built up around energy
    resources, not the other way around. Our view is that the most
    likely commercial avenue for geologic hydrogen will be
    infrastructure that is built close to point of production. So,
    if you find a reservoir of hydrogen in a rural community,
    you'll probably follow that up with an ammonia production
    facility or a sustainable aviation fuel production facility.
        And so, drilling wells is a temporary effort, where you are
    drilling wells and you are going to hire local labor to do
    that. Those long-term operating plants create high-paying jobs
    that last forever, right? And everybody finances these plants
    based on 20 or 30 or lifetimes, but we all know they operate
    for 60 years and 70 years as the backbone of local economies.
    And so, geologic hydrogen can really establish that kind of
    backbone in rural areas, and specifically about farming, right?
    We import 2.4 million tons of ammonia per year in the United
    States. You know, Missouri was impacted by the spike in ammonia
    prices, which had nothing to do with the cost of ammonia in the
    U.S., it was the cost people were paying for ammonia in Europe
    getting it from Russia, right? The U.S. is the largest net
    importer of ammonia today.
        Food security and energy security are both national
    security. So this can impact our ammonia and our farming and
    our food system in considerable ways.
        Senator Hawley. And what would be, when you talk about blue
    collar jobs, help me understand what the potential is there.
    What kind of jobs are we thinking might be associated with this
    technology? I mean, what kind of jobs might it create for blue
    collar workers, in particular?
        Mr. Johnson. Plant operators, facility operators, you know,
    outside operators, technicians, mechanics, all the people who
    work, you know, if you look at the workforce that operates
    chemical plants, refineries, ammonia facilities, liquefiers,
    the majority of those jobs are blue collar, you know, skilled
    craft jobs.
        Senator Hawley. Very good.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman. Thank you, Senator.
        We are going to go around real quick, if you have another
    question, Senator Hawley--if you have another one.
        Well, I have one. I think Senator Heinrich has one. If you
    have one, okay?
        Mine, very quickly, Dr. Ellis, this is for you. You
    mentioned that geologic hydrogen could be located offshore. Is
    that correct? Offshore? Does that mean that we are going to
    need to look at potential changes to the federal leasing
    programs to accommodate geologic hydrogen?
        Dr. Ellis. Thank you for that question, Chairman Manchin.
        As far as those sorts of regulatory issues, that is really
    not the purview of the USGS, so I think that that would have to
    be directed to other agencies as far as----
        The Chairman. Maybe I will go to the private sector. Mr.
    Johnson, what do you think? We wrote the bill and we're just a
    little bit concerned here.
        Mr. Johnson. Yes.
        The Chairman. We think we will have to make some
    adjustments, but----
        Mr. Johnson. Well, look, I would say Koloma is purely
    focused today on onshore resources----
        The Chairman. Yes.
        Mr. Johnson. Just because those are far less expensive to
    explore for today. But yes, I expect that we would have to
    update the way federal leasing programs are done in offshore if
    we see this as a new resource.
        The Chairman. Senator Heinrich.
        Senator Heinrich. It's probably a question we need to post
    to BOEM and Interior, I would think.
        The Chairman. Yes.
        Senator Heinrich. Dr. Ellis, I want to ask, and this isn't
    specific to geologic hydrogen, but given where we are with the
    hydrogen industry writ large right now, is USGS thinking
    through potential partnerships with national labs? I am
    thinking of Sandia, for example, that advises on the strategic
    petroleum reserve and does other subsurface repository science.
    Are you thinking through some of the partnerships that can help
    us characterize the potential for the sorts of reservoirs, post
    production, that Mr. Johnson was alluding to?
        Dr. Ellis. Yes, thank you for that question, Senator
    Heinrich.
        Yes, so we do have active collaborations with a number of
    the national labs. Not Sandia in particular at this time, but
    we are looking at--in addition to looking at geologic hydrogen
    as a resource--we also have another group looking at
    underground hydrogen storage. And so, we are in close
    communication with them and they are also working with the
    labs. And we do recognize, as Mr. Johnson has said, that these,
    you know, depleted hydrogen reservoirs would then, obviously,
    be great candidates for underground hydrogen storage. So----
        Senator Heinrich. Who is involved in that partnership right
    now? Who are some of your partners on that work?
        Dr. Ellis. So, on the geologic hydrogen side, we are
    working with Lawrence Berkeley Lab and Lawrence Livermore Lab
    and then Argonne Lab at this point. And I----
        Senator Heinrich. And on the repository science?
        Dr. Ellis. On the repository science I have to get back to
    you in our written response.
        Senator Heinrich. I look forward to that. Thank you.
        The Chairman. Senator Hawley.
        Senator Hawley. Mr. Johnson, since the Chairman gave me
    another opportunity to ask a question.
        The Chairman. Maybe that was a mistake.
        [Laughter.]
        Senator Hawley. Let me just ask you just a quick question
    about the ARPA-E grant that your company has received. I think
    the announcement said it was $900,000. Does that sound right to
    you? That is correct?
        Mr. Johnson. That's right.
        Senator Hawley. So, can I just--can you give us a sense of
    how you are going to use the money, and here is why I am
    asking--it looks like you are an awfully well-capitalized
    company. According to your SEC filings, you just completed a
    $245.7 million financing round. You are getting money from
    Amazon. You are getting money from Bill Gates. Forbes reports
    that Gates and others have given you $100 million. That's
    great--I mean, I am happy for you. But I am just wondering, you
    are getting now money on top of that from the government--
    $900,000 of taxpayer money. So, can you just--I am sure you
    have a good plan to use it well. I am just wondering what it
    is.
        Mr. Johnson. Yes, I mean, clearly that is a different
    amount of money than what we have been raising in the private
    sector. The investment into Koloma is based on Koloma using its
    data advantage and technology advantage to find existing
    natural hydrogen reservoirs. And that's our focus. And so, when
    the investors, when our shareholders look at it, they are
    investing because we are going for that near-term opportunity.
    Stimulation for hydrogen--this works. We are doing it today in
    our lab. The big question is, can you produce enough gas
    quickly enough out of a well for the economics to work? The
    science of it is real. It will probably take five to seven
    years for us to really know if that works. Our shareholders
    don't want to fund that. The direction they gave us is focus
    purely on near-term hydrogen exploration. You know, if you want
    to do this, you have to go find partners, academic partners.
        So we are participating in a larger academic group. That
    $900,000 goes to work that we are doing alongside universities
    and supporting them with data and work, but it's not--that
    $900,000 will not be used exclusively by us. That's to fund a
    partnership and a consortium.
        Senator Hawley. So okay, so it sounds like then you are
    partnering with universities--so some of this will redound to
    the public, I mean, if the universities get some of this
    information, the technology, the benefit of this, then that is
    going to be more broadly available. Does that----
        Mr. Johnson. Yes, absolutely. Our in-kind contribution on
    this is a lot of the data that we have already assembled that
    can help move this further along. I mean, we are a small part
    of a much broader program.
        Senator Hawley. Got it. Okay. Fair enough.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman. Thank you.
        Well, let me thank all of you for being here and sharing
    your knowledge with us, which we appreciate, it helps us
    immensely.
        When we did the Bipartisan Infrastructure bill, we thought
    that hydrogen was a real player because we knew it was proven
    technology and we just knew it never had the investments made
    to mature it. And so, when we chose that as one of the ones
    that we would have tax credits and incentives for, it was
    because we thought the private sector could bring it to market
    once the public sector identified where we could and how we
    could minimize the risk you are taking. And I think in any good
    partnership, and I think the government is your partner, not
    your provider, we take some of that risk factor because we want
    you to succeed.
        What you are telling me here, Mr. Johnson--and what all of
    you have confirmed--is that we have a cache of reserves that
    now we have proven, correct? And we just haven't tapped them
    yet? Is that what we are saying, Mr. Johnson?
        Mr. Johnson. I don't think we have proven the volume of
    reserves yet. We know it's there.
        The Chairman. We know it is there.
        Mr. Johnson. We do not know how much. That's still a
    question that needs to be answered. And so, when you say proven
    reserves, that is a very charged term in the resource space, so
    I have to be careful there.
        The Chairman. Because at one time we were importing natural
    gas to our country because we needed the energy.
        Mr. Johnson. Yes.
        The Chairman. And then we found out that we had trapped gas
    in our shale and were able to unleash that, which gave us a
    tremendous boom as far as our economy and our self-reliance. I
    just think that the ability, and what you have told me, we gave
    credits, as you know, in different categories about the
    emissions of hydrogen, and gas is the easiest of all the ways
    that we can produce hydrogen, as I see it, except if it's
    already produced. That's the difference. So, it is exciting
    what you are saying here.
        So we look forward to exploring this even more, and we have
    until the end of tomorrow for any of the members to provide any
    questions they might have.
        And with that, let me say thank you, again, to all of you
    for being here, and the Committee is adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 11:01 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]

                          APPENDIX MATERIAL SUBMITTED

                                  ----------

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                       [all]