Environmental Justice Equity Principles for Green Hydrogen in California

We represent heavily polluted communities throughout the State of California. Our communities border oil refineries, gas-fired power plants, industrial farming operations, fossil fuel extraction facilities, waste processing centers, ports, transportation corridors, and other polluting operations. These cumulative sources of pollution cause a wide range of adverse health outcomes in working class communities of color. Our communities share a common fence with facilities and operations that emit toxins, foul smells, and noise and cause nuisance, impacting people’s quality of life at all hours of the day and night.

The State of California intends to expand the use of hydrogen as a fuel, and to this end, we offer these guiding principles, which are essential to respect and protect our communities. The following principles represent our collective values and positions to support communities as hydrogen energy is utilized across the state.

These principles were developed in ten workshops and learning sessions for environmental justice partners across California between March and September of 2023. The learning sessions examined the current science, including risks, benefits, and unknowns, and shed light on each stage of the hydrogen cycle, including production, delivery, storage, and use. The workshops allowed our organizations to discuss different perspectives,  build consensus, and reflect on how hydrogen may impact our communities. 

We adamantly oppose all non-green hydrogen proposals and projects. We insist that new projects protect communities first and do not perpetuate the injustices that polluting infrastructures impose on fence-line communities today. Each stage of the hydrogen life cycle—production, delivery, storage, and end use—can present unique risks and harms to environmental justice communities and to all Californians. Discussions about building new green hydrogen infrastructure must involve the community, and its members should be meaningfully engaged. Siting green hydrogen infrastructure should also take into account the cumulative impacts of environmental justice communities and the risks associated with hydrogen.

Read our Equity Principles for Hydrogen here or see below

WHO WE ARE

Asian Pacific Environmental Network (APEN)
California Environmental Justice Alliance (CEJA)
Center for Community Action and Environmental Justice (CCAEJ)
Center on Race, Poverty & The Environment (CPRE)
Communities for a Better Environment

Equity Principles for Hydrogen

Environmental Health Coalition
Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability
Pacoima Beautiful
Physicians for Social Responsibility Los Angeles (PSR-LA)

PRODUCTION

  • a. The hydrogen is made using electrolysis of water

    i. Where water used as feedstock is surplus and not diverted from sources which serve jurisdictions that
    are struggling or failing to meet clean drinking water needs.

    b. Electrolysis is powered only by electricity produced from new dedicated wind or solar power, and

    i. The facility generating the electricity used for the production of green hydrogen does not use
    tradable renewable energy credits.

    c. If any electrolysis facility is connected to the California electricity grid, it must honor the hourly use
    concept:

    i. The new renewable generation resource provided for in subsection b (i) above has a first point of
    interconnection to the California balancing authority in which the electrolytic hydrogen production
    facility is sited, and

    ii. The electrolytic hydrogen production facility must use the new renewable electricity in the same hour
    that the electricity is delivered to the grid.

    d. Green hydrogen is not defined according to pounds of CO2 equivalent.

    e. We oppose carbon capture in hydrogen production operations.

    f. The above conditions must be the starting point for informed community consent to hydrogen
    production projects. Though the specifics of a green hydrogen production project may be undefined at
    the outset of community engagement, the public should have faith that all the above conditions are
    met under any project permutation.

  • a. Projects must include EJ protections related to water use for production/desalination.

    b. Projects must not negatively impact California’s already stretched water supply.

    c. Projects must not use potable water when drinking water needs are not met.

  • a. State agencies must mandate any recipient of Federal or State level funding to undergo training on
    Tribal history, cultural sensitivity, and the significance of the Tribal consultation process for all
    recipient staff expecting to participate in any hydrogen or related project. This requires ongoing
    education to keep staff updated on evolving Tribal engagement practices. Educational material
    should be designed by California Native-led nonprofits or the California Native American Heritage
    Commission.

    b. All public agencies that have the principal responsibility for carrying out, approving, or expecting to
    participate in any hydrogen or related project must conduct extensive outreach to California Native
    American Tribe(s) to increase their sign-on to the Tribal notification list; each agency should have to
    complete the CEQA process as required by PRC 21080.3.1(b)(1). This should also include updating
    any outdated communication information to assure proper notification for California Native
    American Tribe(s) when an agency undertakes a hydrogen or hydrogen related project.

    c. When a public agency decides to undertake a hydrogen or related project, or decides an application
    for such a project is complete, this agency must begin the AB 52 Tribal Consultation process. A Tribal
    liaison must be appointed from the agency with extensive knowledge of the project and Tribal
    engagement practices to facilitate communication, answer questions, and address concerns from
    Tribal representatives.

    d. If California Native American Tribe(s) request consultation, a good faith and reasonable effort
    should be conducted with best practices that include establishing a formal process for meetings, site
    visits, and opportunities for collaborative discussions and allocating sufficient time for meaningful
    engagement and dialogue, allowing Tribes to provide input and voice concerns.

    e. Mandate cultural resource assessments for all projects that may impact Tribal resources to include
    Tribal experts in the assessment process to ensure accurate cultural insights.

    f. Provide consistent updates to Tribes throughout the project's lifecycle, informing them of any changes
    or developments.

    g. Seek feedback from Tribes on the agency's Tribal consultation process and continuously work to
    improve its effectiveness.

    h. Assure that any changes to a General Plan or adoption/changes to a Specific Plan in order to create
    a hydrogen or related project initiates the SB 18 Tribal consultation process in consultation with the
    Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC). Same practices for the AB 52 process should be
    followed in this procedure as well.

  • a. Informed community consent is necessary, and should be sought in addition to production conditions
    listed under #1 being met.

    b. Center community input, continue to elevate EJ voices, and ensure meaningful community
    participation is present for any hydrogen project. This includes providing language access such as
    interpretation and translation services for non-English speakers, depending on the common languages
    spoken in the particular community.

    c. When a public agency decides to undertake a hydrogen or related project, or decides an application
    for such a project is complete, this agency must begin the AB 52 Tribal Consultation process. A Tribal
    liaison must be appointed from the agency with extensive knowledge of the project and Tribal
    engagement practices to facilitate communication, answer questions, and address concerns from
    Tribal representatives.

  • a. Hydrogen produced using reformation or gasification is not green hydrogen.

    i. This includes hydrogen produced by reformation of municipal solid waste gas, livestock biogas
    (factory farm gas), biomass, lignite or coal, and

    ii. Hydrogen produced using any fossil fuel as a feedstock.

    b. Hydrogen produced from electrolysis, but powered by dirty electricity sources is not green hydrogen.

    i. Dirty electricity sources include but are not limited to:

    1. Energy produced from combustion of fossil gas, landfill gas, municipal solid waste gas, livestock
    biogas (factory farm gas), biomass, lignite or coal, and Electricity produced from nuclear fission
    or fossil, biogas, or landfill gas fuel cells.

    2. Electricity produced from nuclear fission or fossil, biogas, or landfill gas fuel cells.

    c. Hydrogen produced using carbon capture and sequestration in any point in its production is not green
    hydrogen.

    d. For existing hydrogen production, we support phasing out electrolysis powered by GHG emitting
    fuels or non-excess wind/solar.

  • a. Hydrogen production should be able to reduce current forms of energy production pollution.

  • a. All hydrogen production projects should be limited in size and scope to the maximum extent feasible.

    b. Public and community dollars that financially support hydrogen production should also be heavily
    regulated and available in public records.

STORAGE & DELIVERY

  • a. Every hydrogen pipeline and storage infrastructure project must be equipped with effective leak detection
    technology.

    b. Any proposed project to transport hydrogen must include a leak detection response protocol including an
    alert system to notify residents and workers of potential exposure, health risks, and a relocation plan until
    any leak is resolved.

    i. This program must include language access to all local populations and contact staff that can support
    coordination of leak response protocol.

  • a. All hydrogen transmission and storage infrastructure projects should be limited in size and scope and
    equipped with design features to:

    i. Avoid perpetuating the impacts of gas infrastructure on environmental justice communities,

    ii. Prevent leaks, spills, breaches, and explosions in or near environmental justice communities,
    environmentally sensitive areas, pollution burdened communities, Tribal land, or any residential areas.

    b. In considering new hydrogen transmission and storage infrastructure, the project should:

    i. Obtain prior and informed consent from every community and/or Tribe where hydrogen transmission
    infrastructure originate, pass by, or terminate,

    ii. Define who is responsible for managing infrastructure leaks throughout the lifecycle of design,
    implementation, and maintenance.

    iii. And should consider:

    1. Historic harms gas infrastructure has caused in project communities,

    2. Safe, reliable, and efficient alternative methods of energy delivery.

    c. Local and regional hydrogen distribution pipelines and storage/compressor facilities should be limited in
    size and scope to forward these objectives.

  • a. Hydrogen should not be transported in existing methane gas systems.

    b. Hydrogen should never be blended into existing methane pipelines or storage containers.

  • a. Research into hydrogen pipeline and delivery infrastructure should focus on data gaps including, but not
    limited to

    i. Leakage;

    ii. Appropriate safety testing standards for dedicated hydrogen pipelines;

    iii. Hydrogen gas impacts on humans, ecosystems, and the climate;

    iv. Risks and challenges of different hydrogen storage options such as

    1. Storage in liquid state,

    2. Low temperature storage,

    3. Ammonia

    4. Methanol, and

    v. Further exploration of data gaps in hydrogen transmission and storage.

  • a. All hydrogen delivery projects should obtain prior and informed consent required for communities where
    pipelines or delivery infrastructure are built or hydrogen is introduced.

    b. Hydrogen delivery projects should fully consider and respect

    i. Historic harms gas infrastructure has caused in project communities,

    ii. Community expertise of their experience, and

    iii. Safe, reliable, and efficient alternative methods of energy delivery.

  • a. Pipeline infrastructure presents a cost issue for ratepayers, given how expensive it is to site and build.

END-USES

  • a. Electrification

    i. If the end-use can be electrified, green hydrogen should not be used.

    ii. Electrification should always be prioritized over the use of green hydrogen, including the consideration
    of rapid advancement in electrification technologies.

    iii. Emerging electrification technologies should be pursued before considering hydrogen for the end-use.

    vi. Electrification research and development should be prioritized above hydrogen research and
    development.

    v. Hydrogen should only be considered when there is a technical or practical constraint to electrification.

    b. Harmful end-uses

    i. Harmful end-uses should be reduced or phased out altogether, such as excessive fertilizer use, where
    possible.

    ii. Using hydrogen to improve a feedstock for an industry that is a harmful industry shouldn’t justify the
    continued operation of that industry.

    iii. Potential end-uses should use the Precautionary Principle to first prove that using hydrogen in that
    context isn’t harmful.

    c. Community voice and environmental impacts

    i. The cost of using green hydrogen in any end-use should not disproportionately impact EJ communities
    and ratepayers from lower income families.

    ii. Public funds should be prioritized for advancing electrification over hydrogen.

    iii. All life-cycle impacts, including financial impacts and health and environmental impacts, should be
    transparently considered.

    iv. Any end-use should reduce local and regional pollutants.

    v. Informed local communities should have veto power over any hydrogen end-use in their communities.

    vi. EJ communities should have a governing voice in end-use decision-making.

    vii. Environmental and EJ impact review processes must be thorough and should never be fast-tracked.

  • a. Direct electrification with renewable energy is cheaper, safer and more efficient than producing green
    hydrogen, and therefore should be prioritized.

    b. Green hydrogen should be considered only for necessary end-uses that cannot be supported by
    electrification or phased out by alternatives.

    c. Hydrogen gas should not be used in residential and commercial buildings because direct electrification
    with renewable energy is safer and more efficient.

    d. Hydrogen should not be used in transportation methods that can easily be electrified, including passenger
    cars, light-duty trucking, main line rail, and drayage trucking.

    e. Hydrogen should not be combusted in gas-fired generating units to produce electricity.

    f. Hydrogen should not be blended into the fossil gas system in pursuit of decarbonization.

    h. We may support the use of hydrogen in fuel cells to power niche applications such as back-up power for
    Public Safety Power Shutoff (PSPS) events as long as the high-level principles mentioned above are also
    followed.

  • a. We agree that the principles outlined at the start of this section and elsewhere throughout the document
    should determine whether hydrogen should be used in any of these applications.

    b. We agree that more research is needed on green hydrogen in fertilizer but oppose any end-use that is
    used to greenwash or justify the continued over-application of fertilizer in rural communities who are
    forced to live with contaminated drinking water as a result.