Earlier this week, a spreadsheet prepared by the Department of Energy (DOE) which outlined which sets of hydrogen production hub projects would be slated for funding cuts was obtained by Politico. Among those labeled to be cut was the Alliance for Renewable Clean Hydrogen Energy Systems (ARCHES) hub in California.

Currently, the vast majority of U.S. hydrogen is produced using fossil fuels; most is used for petrochemical and chemical feedstock, oil refining, and metal processing. Instead of reducing climate emissions, hydrogen projects can increase emissions and extend the life of fossil fuel infrastructure.

Last year, ARCHES had received $30 million from the DOE under the Biden Administration and was anticipating receiving up to $1.2 billion in additional funds. As federal funding cuts loom for ARCHES, it raises questions about the financial viability of the project. If the ARCHES project is allowed to advance with this economic uncertainty, the people of California could be left making up the difference for this expensive boondoggle. 

Andrea Vega, Senior Southern California Organizer for Food & Water Watch said, “No amount of industry greenwashing can make a dirty project clean. Since it was first announced, we have strongly opposed ARCHES as an expensive scheme meant to further enrich fossil fuel interests and distract from the real and affordable clean energy solutions California needs. The possibility of a $1.2 billion cut in federal funding should raise alarm bells around the financial viability of the project, as well as serious questions about who will be stuck with the bill. Californians should not be stuck paying for this unnecessary and climate destroying project. Instead, the wasteful ARCHES project should be scrapped as a dirty expense we don’t need.”

Faith Myhra, Lead Organizer for Protect Playa Now said, “In our region, the Angeles Link Project, SoCalGas’s contribution to California’s ARCHES hydrogen hub, was never proven to be ratepayer-friendly or cost-effective. Green hydrogen is extremely expensive, and SoCalGas has yet to show how it will protect ratepayers from the costs. The Public Advocates Office warned early on: ‘SoCalGas must not seek cost recovery from ratepayers for speculative hydrogen pipeline projects before demonstrating need and benefits for core utility service customers.’ They also cautioned against moving forward with ‘unclear costs and benefits’ that could shift the burden onto ratepayers. If federal funding for the ARCHES hydrogen hub is cut, it’s hard to see how this doesn’t land on the backs of California families already struggling with high energy bills. Ratepayers should not be footing the bill for a false solution, especially a project that further locks us into fossil fuel infrastructure.”