You’re out of free articles.
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
Sign In or Create an Account.
By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy
Welcome to Heatmap
Thank you for registering with Heatmap. Climate change is one of the greatest challenges of our lives, a force reshaping our economy, our politics, and our culture. We hope to be your trusted, friendly, and insightful guide to that transformation. Please enjoy your free articles. You can check your profile here .
subscribe to get Unlimited access
Offer for a Heatmap News Unlimited Access subscription; please note that your subscription will renew automatically unless you cancel prior to renewal. Cancellation takes effect at the end of your current billing period. We will let you know in advance of any price changes. Taxes may apply. Offer terms are subject to change.
Subscribe to get unlimited Access
Hey, you are out of free articles but you are only a few clicks away from full access. Subscribe below and take advantage of our introductory offer.
subscribe to get Unlimited access
Offer for a Heatmap News Unlimited Access subscription; please note that your subscription will renew automatically unless you cancel prior to renewal. Cancellation takes effect at the end of your current billing period. We will let you know in advance of any price changes. Taxes may apply. Offer terms are subject to change.
Create Your Account
Please Enter Your Password
Forgot your password?
Please enter the email address you use for your account so we can send you a link to reset your password:
EVs might have killed the hydrogen car, but trucking is a different story.

The hydrogen car lost.
Not long ago, it seemed like hydrogen fuel cells would power the next generation of climate change-fighting vehicles. Instead, batteries won the future. Americans now buy hundreds of thousands of electric vehicles each year, while only a couple of mass market hydrogen fuel cell cars can be found, and only in a select few places with enough hydrogen stations to make them driveable. The 20-year-old dream of a “hydrogen highway” across California never quite materialized, and hydrogen’s ascent toward becoming the fuel of the future remains stuck in limbo.
Yet hydrogen just keeps humming in the background. Researchers are not giving up but plugging away, trying to refine the chemistry of producing commercial hydrogen to make it better and cheaper. Most of the attention it attracts goes to how it might be put to use in heavy industry, but there are glimmers of potential in transportation as well. Advocates plan for hydrogen to be used in places where it makes more sense than a battery-electric vehicle, from warehouse forklifts up to semi trucks.
It may be that hydrogen is not, as it was once hyped, the answer to everything. But it’s going to pop up in more places than you might think.
Here is a hydrogen fuel cell refresher: Like a battery, a fuel cell has two electrodes — a negatively charged anode and a positively charged cathode — plus an electrolyte, the electrically conducting medium. Each atom of hydrogen contains a single proton and electron. When the fuel cell separates those two components, electrons travel one way to create a flow of electricity, while the protons go another way to be reunited with oxygen in the air to create water and heat. Given that those are the fuel cell’s only byproducts, it has the potential to be a very clean energy source (depending upon how the hydrogen itself was created).
Hydrogen’s other strength is that it’s a fuel, one that, compared to charging a battery, more closely resembles our pump-and-go experience of the gas station. But there is a flip side to that feature. If America wanted to become a hydrogen economy, a new nationwide hydrogen infrastructure of pipelines and substations would be needed to create and distribute the stuff all around the country, which is even more ambitious than the current movement to fill the country with high-speed EV chargers.
That’s why hydrogen projects have gone local. In Northern California, a group of Hyundai XCIENT Fuel Cell semis — which the company claims to be “the world's first mass-produced, heavy-duty truck powered by hydrogen” — are about to begin an experiment in green trucking backed by the University of California, Berkeley, the Center for Transportation and the Environment (CTE), and state agencies including the California Air Resources Board (CARB). Later this year, the NorCAL Zero project will see 30 hydrogen semis moving goods between the Port of Oakland and inland destinations such as Sacramento, Stockton, Modesto, and Fresno.
There are battery-powered big rigs on the way, including Tesla’s much-ballyhooed semi. But there are several reasons to be gung-ho for hydrogen, says P.J. Callahan, CTE’s project manager for the NorCal Zero project. Battery semis, when weighed down with a full load of cargo, would deliver only 150 to 200 miles of range, he says. Hyundai’s hydrogen trucks already promise at least twice that much, and Callahan expects fuel cell trucking to reach much higher as the technology develops.
“The ultimate kind of range goal that we expect for these types of trucks is between 700 miles and a thousand miles,” he says. “That's extremely challenging with battery electric.”
Fuel-cell semis can also carry more volume because there aren’t batteries eating up cubic feet of space that would otherwise go to cargo, Callahan says. Hydrogen also has the potential to deliver minimal refueling times that clock-conscious truckers are accustomed to. Eventually. With today’s technology, he says, it might take a half-hour to fill a semi with hydrogen, but that’s because existing systems are slow and conservative, built with small passenger vehicles like the Toyota Mirai in mind. With standardized equipment made for trucking, he says, fill-up times could drop to five to ten minutes.
There is still the issue of new hydrogen infrastructure. But running trucks on familiar paths between the Port of Oakland and popular inland destinations negates the need to build new refueling stations everywhere. “We are going to need a refueling network of stations, but … you can just be smarter about the way that we plan it,” Callahan says.
Plenty of other vehicles beyond big rigs have quietly turned to or experimented with hydrogen. Amazon now runs its small army of warehouse forklifts on fuel cells and has signed billion-dollar deals for the hydrogen supply. Establishing a green hydrogen pipeline for small uses like forklifts, as well as 800 heavy-duty trucks, is meant to help the company use hydrogen to meet its net-zero by 2040 goals.
Some U.S. cities run municipal buses on fuel cells. Hydrogen is considered a strong candidate to decarbonize the cargo shipping industry. Experiments have shown that it’s possible even to fly airplanes this way, though Hydrogen Airlines is a long way off.
Where hydrogen will continue to find a home depends a lot on how it will be made in the future. Nearly all the commercial hydrogen used in America today is created via the process called steam methane reformation, in which the methane in natural gas is subjected to high-temperature steam. The conversion creates free hydrogen but also the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide as a byproduct. That’s why scientists are racing to find ways to bring down the cost of green hydrogen solutions such as electrolyzers. They apply current to water to separate it into its component elements of hydrogen and oxygen, but they remain more expensive than current technology.
“It's a major goal of the state of California. It's a major goal of the federal government through the Department of Energy. Their hydrogen hub initiative wants to reduce the carbon impact of hydrogen and to get to green electrolyzed hydrogen from renewable resources so that there's no carbon involved in any part of the value chain,” Callahan says.
If such a goal could be achieved, hydrogen fuel could be used for a lot more than moving vehicles. For instance: One of the problems of a power grid running mostly on renewables is the need to store solar or wind energy when it’s available to use when it’s not. We could give old EV batteries a second life as energy storage for the grid, but it’s possible to imagine using liquid hydrogen to do the same job.
Perhaps the fuel of the future is still the fuel of the future.
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
The movement against data centers is raising up a raison d'etre of the anti-renewables movement: protecting would-be farmland.
Farm owners and operators across the U.S. are winning national headlines almost every week for rejecting big dollar offers from data center developers. In Hanover County, Virginia, protestors are chanting “Grow Tomatoes, Not Data Centers.” In Pennsylvania and elsewhere, Republican legislators are mulling proposals to block the sale of so-called “prime farmland” for data center development. In Texas, the fight over data center development has engulfed the race for the state’s ag commissioner seat. In the Midwest, where agriculture reigns supreme, statewide races and congressional campaigns are slowly but surely being defined by the issue. Like in Nebraska where Austin Ahlman, an independent candidate running for Congress in Nebraska’s first district, told me he believes the data center backlash is reflective of a populist politics that broadly criticize elites and top-down control of the economy: “I think sometimes people misunderstand the anxieties of rural Americans when it comes to these data centers because a lot of their fears are about control long term.”
Unlike the farmland backlash around renewable energy development, the loudest critics are on the anti-monopolist left. On Wednesday, the prominent opposition group Food and Water Watch signaled farmland could soon be a watchword in the national data center debate – in a fashion analogous to what we’ve seen with renewable energy. The organization’s blog post entitled “The AI Data Center Boom Is Coming for Farmers” declared data centers verboten because of the threat they posed to “small and midsized family farmers.” Mitch Jones, deputy director of the campaign outfit, said he believes the threat to farmland is “a compelling reason to oppose data center development” but that his organization’s fight is primarily focused on protecting small business owners and an anti-monopoly sentiment.
“If data centers are coming into their areas, this puts even more pressure on them. It drives up the cost of their electricity, just as it does anyone else. It competes with them for water for crops, and it affects the value of their land in a perverse way,” Jones told me.
None of this should be surprising. An agricultural workforce has always been a good barometer for figuring out if a community will accept new infrastructure of any kind. We’ve seen as much time and time again with renewable energy, carbon capture, fossil energy and mining, just to name a few industries.
This same rule is true with data centers. In April, county commissioners in Kosciusko County, Indiana, unanimously rejected a Prologis data center; nearly 90% of acreage in Kosciusko County is being actively farmed, according to the Heatmap Pro database. Linn County, Iowa, in February enacted a rule severely restricting data center development in unincorporated areas; almost three-fourths of the land is used by the ag sector. A potential Amazon facility is causing heartburn in Clinton County, Ohio; nearly all land in the county is used for farming and utility-scale solar development has a recent history of conflict with landowners.
To be candid, I’m struck by the similarity in the backlash over siting data centers on farmland – a resemblance so close that some counties are starting to restrict renewable energy and data center development on farmland at the same time. This week, Eau Claire County, Wisconsin created a new “farmland preservation plan” discouraging utility-scale solar energy and data centers on any potential farmland. (More than 40% of land in this county is currently being used for farmland, according to Heatmap Pro.)
Jones at Food and Water Watch said his organization taking on the “protect farmland” mantle had nothing to do with the success this argument has had against renewable energy. “That thought never entered my head,” he told me, adding that if communities respond to the data center backlash by taking steps that short-circuit solar and wind too, that’s “a coincidence.”
I kept pressing. What if the pivot to farmland protection leads to more communities restricting renewable energy along with the data centers? “If you’re looking for a reason to oppose solar and wind, you can come up with that without having to attach data centers to it,” Jones said. “We’ve seen rural communities oppose solar and wind before data centers blew up across the country. It’s nothing new.”
And more of the week’s top news around project fights.
1. Virginia Beach, Virginia – The right-wing interest group lawsuit against Dominion Energy’s Coastal Virginia offshore wind is now dead, concluding one of the wackier tales of the Trump 2.0 energy era.
2. Box Elder County, Utah – Call it the Box Elder County massacre.
3. Davidson County, Tennessee – We have the latest updates in the Nashville Zoo data center drama and they’re a doozy and a half.
4. Clark County, Ohio – Yet another utility-scale solar farm is in the Ohio state permitting graveyard.
A conversation with Hanson Wood of RWE
This week’s conversation is with Hanson Wood, chief development officer for solar developer RWE. Wood’s perspective felt crucial at a moment when the data center boom is leading to so much deal volume – even after the repeal of the Inflation Reduction Act. So I reached out to his team to see if we could talk about how he’s evaluating all things Fight-related, including the impacts of the data center backlash on solar itself. The following conversation was lightly edited for clarity.
How is solar finding opportunities in the data center development space? I know there’s conversations about speed-to-power and some deal volume, but help us get a better sense of the level of capacity being sought versus fossil or other forms of energy.
Great question. To contextualize, I think it just makes sense to talk about energy demand overall. Solar is filling the base of where the majority of load growth and generation is coming from and going to be served.
Over the last decade, the cost of solar has gone down dramatically. It’s become a very modular technology being deployed in a variety of locations. It can be deployed very quickly at low cost. It can ramp to meet short-term demand needs. And within the space of just energy demand, across utilities and large industrial data center companies, the reality is no single technology is going to be able to serve overall demand. Everything from solar to onshore wind and geothermal and other forms of flexible generation are needed.
What this speaks to is how our grid is pretty finite. We have to be able to mix and match a variety of products to be able to meet an ever-growing reliability need. To make it simple, I think solar’s going to serve the largest base of growing demand because it's cheap and it's available. But it’s not going to be the only technology. We need to be able to serve this load growth reliably. And we know this is going to require a diversity of technologies.
From a social license perspective, does solar power for a data center make it more acceptable for a community? Less acceptable? More friendly?
One thing I want to be clear about: I don’t develop data centers. So I’m looking at it through the same view many people in the industry and the public see it.
I think there’s manifold reasons why people have concerns about data centers, overall. I can’t speak for all of them. But what solar does address is, we don’t want to see large price spikes in the short term and solar can really help in that regard. It can provide near-term generation immediately in a lot of instances at one of the lowest costs in the market.
Whether the broader public makes that connection, it’s probably too early to see. There’s probably a lot of anxiety that has to be addressed by that [data center] community.
When it comes to the state of solar development, have the feelings around data center infrastructure we’ve seen in various places impacted solar projects?
Solar is more often in what we consider rural areas where there’s more of a conservative viewpoint generally.
Where I think we stand in the solar industry is that in the 2010s we were looked at as a one-off, and now what we see as the challenge is that as solar scales, communities are looking at the scale and potential of what solar will be bringing. A lot of the conversations we have with [them] are, is this changing the local character? How is this impacting our way of life?
And the way we try to approach that is to highlight a lot of the public benefits. Renewables are generating significant jobs, locally as well as through funding local services. Farmers setting aside land for renewables are also funding their farms and way of life. I’ve heard testimonials from farmers who’ve said they wouldn’t be able to continue on without the revenue from solar or BESS projects.
The broader community is concerned solar is displacing rural farming, but what we hear from rural landowners is that these projects are allowing them to keep their farms.
Most people when they start looking at renewables, they don’t make that connection. They’re primed to ask, what’s the downside here? But it’s nothing in terms of physical land while the economic value it brings is long-term. It’s 30 years — at a time when the American public is seeing lots of headwinds.
I know at a broader level, you’re addressing the conflicts in solar energy. Do you think the solar industry offers any lessons for the folks now trying to get data centers built?
Anyone who is building large infrastructure projects can’t ignore early community engagement. One of the things people should be thinking about as they’re developing projects is these things are going to be here 20, 30 years, right? When we develop those projects we are trying to build relationships in a sustainable fashion.
We really take into consideration the concerns we hear. Again, people are primed to see the downside in any development, and without that early engagement – genuinely – you risk whether other people come along and hear the benefits or feel like their voice mattered in the process of development.