[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]