Sign In or Create an Account.

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

Economy

You’ve Seen Taylor Krause on ‘Love Is Blind.’ Now Read Her Policy Paper.

The RMI federal policy manager and reality show star has some considered opinions on hydrogen.

Taylor Krause.
Heatmap Illustration/Netflix, Getty Images

Millions of Americans first met Washington, D.C., resident Taylor Krause when she appeared on Netflix’s dating show “Love Is Blind.” The series frames getting engaged as a type of matching problem, where contestants talk to each other, fall in love, and get engaged before they meet each other in person.

But here at Heatmap, we know Krause’s work because of a different type of matching problem: how to match clean hydrogen makers with new sources of clean electricity.

Krause works on the problem of decarbonizing heavy industry for the climate policy think tank RMI. Her team is wrapped up in a sprawling fight over how to regulate the clean hydrogen industry, a fight Heatmap followed keenly. The battle could determine how the government spends up to an estimated $100 billion in tax credits to incentivize the production of green hydrogen.

Treasury recently told Heatmap those regulations will be finalized by the end of the year. Meanwhile, the newest salvo in that fight — this being D.C., it took the form of a policy memo — was released on Monday by RMI. The white paper, coauthored by Krause, explains how developers could actually build clean hydrogen projects that are connected to the power grid while meeting the government’s stringent proposed standards.

It emerged in part from RMI’s collaboration with a “working group spanning developers, registries, and electricity forecasting experts,” according to the paper, and it proposes a series of ways hydrogen developers can meet the stringent “three pillars” standards the government has proposed. These rules would require that any electricity used to electrolyze water and extract hydrogen itself be produced by new zero-carbon sources during the same time period it’s used, and on the same power grid as the electrolyzer.

This three-step approach aims to keep the generous hydrogen tax credit from creating higher electricity prices across the power grid and generating more emissions than the hydrogen produced will mitigate, but it has been criticized by some companies for being too arduous and complicated to comply with. (Some hydrogen makers, such as the industrial gas-making giant Air Products, support the three pillars approach.)

One of the biggest topics the new memo tackles is the problem of buying clean electricity. If America regulates the clean hydrogen industry as the Biden administration has proposed, then eventually hydrogen companies will need to buy electricity credits from a “registry” — a company that can guarantee the power the hydrogen companies bought actually complies with the rules.

Those registries don’t exist right now. Until they do, the new memo argues, hydrogen makers should go straight to the source and solve the “matching problem” by contracting directly with a newly built solar, wind, or zero-carbon power source, using a two-way deal like a power purchase agreement, Nathan Iyer, a senior associate at RMI and co-author of the paper, told me. (Krause didn’t have time to talk.)

In other words: If you’re a clean hydrogen maker trying to buy electricity to power your electrolyzer, then love — or at least your procurement budget — should not be blind. Good to know. The memo ticks through a few other myths about the new standards that Krause and Iyer want to debunk. It’s a good reminder that while there might be no rules in love and war, there are more than 100 pages of proposed rules for taking advantage of the Inflation Reduction Act’s clean hydrogen production tax credit.

Blue

You’re out of free articles.

Subscribe today to experience Heatmap’s expert analysis 
of climate change, clean energy, and sustainability.
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
Climate

Climate Change Won’t Make Winter Storms Less Deadly

In some ways, fossil fuels make snowstorms like the one currently bearing down on the U.S. even more dangerous.

A snowflake with a tombstone.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

The relationship between fossil fuels and severe weather is often presented as a cause-and-effect: Burning coal, oil, and gas for heat and energy forces carbon molecules into a reaction with oxygen in the air to form carbon dioxide, which in turn traps heat in the atmosphere and gradually warms our planet. That imbalance, in many cases, makes the weather more extreme.

But this relationship also goes the other way: We use fossil fuels to make ourselves more comfortable — and in some cases, keep us alive — during extreme weather events. Our dependence on oil and gas creates a grim ouroboros: As those events get more extreme, we need more fuel.

Keep reading...Show less
Blue
Spotlight

Secrecy Is Backfiring on Data Center Developers

The cloak-and-dagger approach is turning the business into a bogeyman.

A redacted data center.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

It’s time to call it like it is: Many data center developers seem to be moving too fast to build trust in the communities where they’re siting projects.

One of the chief complaints raised by data center opponents across the country is that companies aren’t transparent about their plans, which often becomes the original sin that makes winning debates over energy or water use near-impossible. In too many cases, towns and cities neighboring a proposed data center won’t know who will wind up using the project, either because a tech giant is behind it and keeping plans secret or a real estate firm refuses to disclose to them which company it’ll be sold to.

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow
Hotspots

Missouri Could Be First State to Ban Solar Construction

Plus more of the week’s biggest renewable energy fights.

The United States.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

Cole County, Missouri – The Show Me State may be on the precipice of enacting the first state-wide solar moratorium.

  • GOP legislation backed by Missouri Governor Mike Kehoe would institute a temporary ban on building any utility-scale solar projects in the state until at least the end of 2027, including those currently under construction. It threatens to derail development in a state ranked 12th in the nation for solar capacity growth.
  • The bill is quite broad, appearing to affect all solar projects – as in, going beyond the commercial and utility-scale facility bans we’ve previously covered at the local level. Any project that is under construction on the date of enactment would have to stop until the moratorium is lifted.
  • Under the legislation, the state would then issue rulemakings for specific environmental requirements on “construction, placement, and operation” of solar projects. If the environmental rules aren’t issued by the end of 2027, the ban will be extended indefinitely until such rules are in place.
  • Why might Missouri be the first state to ban solar? Heatmap Pro data indicates a proclivity towards the sort of culture war energy politics that define regions of the country like Missouri that flipped from blue to ruby red in the Trump era. Very few solar projects are being actively opposed in the state but more than 12 counties have some form of restrictive ordinance or ban on renewables or battery storage.

Clark County, Ohio – This county has now voted to oppose Invenergy’s Sloopy Solar facility, passing a resolution of disapproval that usually has at least some influence over state regulator decision-making.

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow