Sign In or Create an Account.

By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy

Economy

The Clean Hydrogen Rules Will Be Delayed Until at Least October

The Biden administration will miss a deadline in the Inflation Reduction Act, as it tries to regulate one of the climate law’s most generous —and contentious — tax credits.

Janet Yellen and hydrogen infrastructure.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

The Biden administration is planning to publish rules governing one of the most generous subsidies in its new climate law — a tax credit for clean hydrogen — no earlier than October, missing a key deadline inscribed in the law, according to a source familiar with the process.

The rules revolve around one of the most contentious questions that has emerged after the law’s passage: How do you know that your electricity is clean? The debate has divided climate activists, hydrogen companies, renewable developers, and nuclear-power plant owners.

The ultimate answer could — by one estimate — determine the flow of more than $100 billion in federal subsidies over the next two decades.

The new rules could come as late as December, the source said, missing the deadline by as much as four months. The climate law required the Treasury Department publish guidance about the hydrogen tax credit within one year of its passage. Because the law was signed on August 16, 2022, that deadline will arrive next week.

Get one great climate story in your inbox every day:

Hydrogen is key to the Biden administration’s climate strategy. The colorless, odorless gas has the potential to replace fossil fuels in industries that are otherwise difficult to make climate-friendly, including steelmaking, shipping, aviation, and fertilizer production. While hydrogen does not emit any carbon when burned, today most hydrogen is made from natural gas in a carbon-intensive process.

The new tax credit is designed to make cleaner production methods more competitive, and it offers the largest reward — $3 per kilogram of hydrogen — to companies that can make hydrogen without emitting almost any greenhouse gases at all.

The issue before the Treasury Department is how companies should calculate their greenhouse gas emissions when trying to qualify for this credit. But there’s no universally accepted way to do this accounting. That is an especially big problem for a method of producing hydrogen called electrolysis, which uses electricity to split water into its constituent hydrogen and oxygen atoms. The process is incredibly energy-intensive, but it can be emissions-free, as long as the electricity comes from a carbon-free source.

A major debate has erupted among energy companies, environmental groups, and academics over what should qualify as carbon-free electricity. Earlier this year, researchers from Princeton University’s ZERO Lab warned that the Treasury Department’s decision could risk a major increase in emissions, underwritten by billions of public dollars, if not crafted carefully. Most — but not all — of the nascent clean hydrogen industry has pushed back on their analysis, warning that onerous rules would “devastate the economics” of clean hydrogen.

As we’ve previously reported, the complicated tax credit could transform the nuclear power sector and America’s energy economy writ large. It could also drive the formation of a booming domestic clean-hydrogen industry — but only if the Biden administration gets it right.

Read more about the hydrogen rules:

The Green Hydrogen Debate Is Much Bigger Than Hydrogen

Yellow
🔒

You’ve reached your free article limit

Subscribe to Heatmap News for unlimited access to daily energy and climate coverage.
To continue reading
Create a free account or sign in to unlock more free articles.
or
Please enter an email address
By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy
Spotlight

A Giant Data Center Offers a Permitting Reform Test Case

What would happen to Project Jupiter if the Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act is passed?

Project Jupiter.
Heatmap Illustration/Project Jupiter, Library of Congress

One of the nation’s largest data centers is struggling under permitting woes. So let’s play a game: would the bipartisan permitting bill in Congress make the path easier, or might the federal legislation be irrelevant to large hyperscalers under development today?

Meet Project Jupiter, a mega project in southern New Mexico in Dona Ana County under development by Oracle and OpenAI, with financial backing from SoftBank and political support from the Trump administration for being a part of Stargate, a major Trump administration public-private initiative boosting AI development. Project Jupiter would be one of the largest data centers in the country if completed and currently is expected to run on a microgrid powered by fuel cells converting gas to electricity, which the developers claim will burn much cleaner than a typical off-grid gas turbine power plant.

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow
Hotspots

The Trump Administration Is Still Messing with Offshore Wind Farms

And more of the week’s top news around project fights.

The United States.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

1. New England (and Maryland) – The Trump administration is still messing with offshore wind farms, even while trying to pass a permitting reform deal. Examining the court filings reveals why they may feel empowered to do it — and I’m not sure how this ends.

  • Last Friday, in a legal case brought by anti-wind activists, the Justice Department submitted a motion in federal court to send the construction and operations plan for Orsted’s Revolution Wind project in New England back to the Interior Department for more analysis. On Wednesday, the DOJ entered a similar motion in another case challenging the construction and operations plan for U.S. Wind’s MarWin project off the coast of Maryland in a lawsuit brought by the state’s coastal community of Ocean City.
  • Trump’s actions led some to question whether the president was sabotaging the deal, and others to claim the media coverage itself was an attempt to kill it. Going further, supporters of the bipartisan bill claimed the DOJ's motions were precisely why the bill should become law, implying it would guard offshore wind farms against this sort of maneuver.
  • However, for the bill’s backers, it’s worth considering why the Trump administration believes it has the legal authority to do this. It’s also time to ask whether the bill would actually protect these wind farms against this tactic.
  • To answer those questions, you have to rewind. On May 1, 2025, the Interior Department withdrew a Biden solicitor’s opinion instructing the agency to “strike a rational balance” between wind power and fishing interests. This revocation document is technically not in effect at the moment; one year later, a federal court ruled the opinion was potentially illegal as a part of a preliminary injunction on five anti-renewables actions requested by solar and wind trade groups. The Trump administration is contesting that ruling, and the administration has filed a notice of appeal.
  • In August, despite that opinion being in doubt, a federal judge granted Trump permission under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act to remand the construction and operations plan for the now-defunct Atlantic Shores offshore wind farm in the waters of New Jersey. U.S. District Judge Jia Cobb specifically wrote that Atlantic Shores failed to demonstrate the federal government had limitations under OSCLA on revisiting these plans and that the injunction from the litigation on appeal “did not prohibit all reevaluation of agency action.”
  • In the recent Revolution and MarWin filings, Trump’s Justice Department argues the construction and operations plans should be remanded under OSCLA without being vacated. The DOJ motions include claims that previous decision documents did not adequately explain impacts to commercial fishing and other industries that use OSCLA waters. It’s not clear if the administration will win these motions.
  • The bipartisan permitting bill would bar the Interior Department and other federal agencies from taking “any new action that would revoke, rescind, withdraw, terminate, suspend, amend, or alter a federal authorization or permit in effect on or after September 16, 2026,” or “any other action to interfere with or prevent the construction or operation at full capacity of a project that has secured all necessary federal authorizations and permits.” The restriction exempts cases where “the agency is required to take such action by order of a court.” As I wrote in our lengthy piece explaining the bill, this provision has a damages component that allows companies impacted by violations to pursue financial compensation.
  • Here’s the billion-dollar question I expect we won’t have answered unless the bill language is enacted and then litigated: Would the court order exception apply to rulings that grant these motions? Or would the developers be able to sue for damages?

2. Columbia County, N.Y. – New York’s renewable energy permitting office has rejected an upstate solar farm on farmland as a House Democrat representing the area joined hands with the Trump administration in publicly railing against the project.

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow
Politics

Climate Races to Watch This November

These seven elections could change state energy policy.

Watching voting.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

No matter how well Democrats do in the House and Senate in November, it’s unlikely to mean anything new on climate policy in Washington, D.C., for as long as Donald Trump remains in the White House.

That is not true when it comes to the other elections this year.

Several states are on the verge of a possible Democratic trifecta, meaning unified control of both chambers of the state legislature and the governor’s mansion. It’s a position that could enable such states to either top off existing climate and energy policies passed in the last decade or to make the first real run at climate legislation in recent history.

Keep reading...Show less
Blue