Cuts, Controversy & Carbon: Why Hydrogen and CCS Still Matter

DOE's Proposed Funding Cuts: A Missed Opportunity for the Clean Energy Industry

Recent reports that the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) may cut funding for hydrogen hubs and carbon capture projects have sent ripples through the energy industry. Recent reports have highlighted several projects that may face funding cuts under the current Department of Energy considerations.But while these stories frame the funding reductions as either accidental wins or politically motivated blunders, the industry itself sees something else: missed opportunity, unnecessary risk, and a step backward in our climate goals.

Let’s be clear—hydrogen production, carbon capture, and direct air capture aren’t science experiments anymore. These are working technologies poised to reshape energy, agriculture, transportation, and manufacturing. And for companies actively building this future, slashing funding now feels like pulling the plug halfway through a breakthrough.

>> RELATED: Who's Buying the Carbon? Inside Q1 2025’s Biggest CDR Deals

Why Hydrogen Deserves the Support

There’s a lot of chatter around hydrogen being inefficient—especially when it comes to its use in transportation. Critics point to energy loss during conversion, compression, and storage. But the energy return conversation often leaves out the industries where hydrogen isn’t optional—it’s essential.

Projects like the Midwest Regional Hydrogen Hub are designed to decarbonize sectors that can’t easily electrify. Think fertilizer production, steel manufacturing, and chemical processing. The same goes for ARCHES in California, where hydrogen-powered transit can replace diesel fleets without waiting for battery infrastructure to catch up.

Hydrogen isn’t trying to replace batteries—it’s serving sectors where batteries just don’t work.

When the Department of Energy considers cutting funding to hubs like these, it ignores the fact that U.S. industry needs this infrastructure to compete globally. Other countries are moving fast—Canada, Germany, Japan. Backing out now means falling behind.

Real Value in Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)

The Project Cypress CCS initiative in Louisiana has drawn criticism for capturing emissions from blue hydrogen production using natural gas. But here’s the thing—blue hydrogen is not the enemy. It’s a critical bridge solution that enables infrastructure buildout and emissions reductions now, not decades from now.

Eric McAfee, CEO of Aemetis, put it clearly: “The significant 55% increase in monthly RNG production in March compared to February is on track with our 2025 production plan and generates proportionally larger LCFS and D3 RIN revenues, as well as Section 45Z sellable tax credits.” Aemetis is proving how biogas and carbon capture can scale, especially in states like California, where LCFS credits drive innovation.

What about direct air capture (DAC)? Critics call it a thermodynamic nightmare, but that ignores its purpose. DAC, like the South Texas hub currently under review, is about long-term, scalable carbon removal — not immediate payoff. It's expensive now, sure. So were solar panels in 2005. We funded them anyway. Look where that got us.

>> In Other News: Gevo and Future Energy Global Sign SAF Scope 1 and Scope 3 Voluntary Carbon Credit Offtake Agreement to Accelerate Book-and-Claim Market

Who Actually Benefits from These Cuts?

Some of the projects still slated for funding—like HyVelocity in Texas and Appalachian Hydrogen Hub—happen to be in red states. Critics are quick to label this favoritism. Maybe it is. But regardless of the political context, the work being done there matters.

These hubs focus on blue ammonia, low-carbon hydrogen, and carbon storage—all critical tools in lowering emissions from industrial sectors. The benefits extend well beyond the zip codes they’re built in.

And in the case of Dandelion Energy, a company driving geothermal deployment in the U.S., partnerships like the one with Lennar in Colorado prove that decarbonization can scale across residential sectors too. We need to support the full spectrum—from home heating to industrial hydrogen.

Private Sector Needs Public Partnership

The projects at risk—be it carbon capture pilots, hydrogen infrastructure, or battery storage—aren’t just science experiments. They are real business opportunities. They bring jobs, spur manufacturing, and reduce dependency on volatile fossil fuel imports.

Companies like GenH2, Bosch Rexroth, and Hyroad Energy are working on the bleeding edge of liquid hydrogen storage and zero-loss refueling. Their work could set the standard for hydrogen infrastructure worldwide. Without continued DOE support, it’s not just their projects at risk—it’s the entire ecosystem they’re helping build.

Greg Gosnell, CEO of GenH2, put it simply: “Our solution will eliminate the typical industry losses, revolutionizing liquid hydrogen storage and refueling operations.” That’s the kind of innovation that deserves a spotlight, not a budget cut.

A Better Way Forward

Sure, the DOE needs to make strategic choices. Not every project will pan out. Not every hub deserves billions. But blanket cuts based on political maps or short-term optics won’t get us to net-zero.

The industry understands the trade-offs. We know hydrogen isn’t for everything, and that CCS has its limits. But the reality is: without hydrogen and carbon capture, we won’t hit climate targets. And without federal support, these technologies won’t scale fast enough to matter.

We need policy that aligns with science, engineering, and economics—not just headlines and campaign trails.

Final Thoughts

The cleantech sector isn’t asking for handouts. It’s asking for consistency. Stability. Signals that match the urgency of the climate challenge and the scale of the opportunity.

If we want to lead the global energy transition—not just react to it—we need to back the companies building that future now.

And sometimes, that means funding the hydrogen hubs and CCS projects that critics love to hate—because they’re doing the hard work the planet actually needs.