- Share via
- Four Republicans joined Democrats in signing a letter calling on Energy Secretary Wright to preserve federal funding for a hydrogen energy project they say can play “a critical role in securing American energy dominance.”
- The potential cuts come as the Trump administration continues to target environmental programs in California and across the country in what officials say is an effort to ease regulatory costs and lower taxes.
A bipartisan group of California lawmakers is calling on the Trump administration to preserve $1.2 billion in federal funds for a hydrogen energy project to help wean the state off planet-warming fossil fuels.
The action follows reports in The Times and other news organizations that the administration is poised to defund nearly 300 Department of Energy projects across the country, including four of seven nascent “hydrogen hubs.”
Among them is ARCHES, or California’s Alliance for Renewable Clean Hydrogen Energy Systems, which was awarded $1.2 billion in federal funds by the Biden administration as part of a nationwide effort to develop hydrogen energy. ARCHES also plans to bring in an additional $11.2 billion from private investors.
In a letter to Energy Secretary Chris Wright dated Monday, the lawmakers said ARCHES “plays a critical role in securing American energy dominance, advancing world-leading energy technology, creating new manufacturing jobs, and lowering energy costs for American families.”
A major national effort to develop clean hydrogen energy is facing funding cuts — but only in Democratic states.
The letter was signed by 47 of the state’s 52 congressional representatives, including four Republicans: Reps. Vince Fong (R-Bakersfield), David Valadao (R-Hanford), Jay Obernolte (R-Big Bear Lake) and Young Kim (R-Anaheim Hills). Several of the hub’s sites were planned for the state’s right-leaning Central Valley.
It was also signed by the state’s two Democratic U.S. senators, Adam Schiff and Alex Padilla.
The letter follows reports that ARCHES is on the Department of Energy’s budget-cut list along with hundreds of other projects geared toward climate-friendly initiatives.
In response to its disclosure, DOE said the agency was conducting a department-wide review and cautioned against “fake lists.” The Trump administration has generally favored development of fossil fuels over clean energy.
A draft of the list circulating on Capitol Hill and reviewed by The Times indicates that roughly 80% of the projects set to lose funding are in states that didn’t vote for Trump in the 2024 presidential election, including the four hydrogen hubs.
In addition to California, they include a Mid-Atlantic hub, a Pacific Northwest hub and Midwest hub, all of which span primarily “blue” states that tend to vote for Democrats. Three other hydrogen hubs in Republican-leaning red states and regions — Texas, Appalachia and a “heartland” hub in Minnesota, North Dakota and South Dakota — are safe, the list shows.
Hydrogen is a promising source of energy that produces water vapor instead of carbon dioxide as its byproduct, which proponents say could be used to power hard-to-decarbonize industries such as steel production, manufacturing and transportation.
In their letter, the lawmakers described ARCHES as a “strategic investment in American energy innovation” and noted that projects stemming from it would be dispersed across the state, including efforts to decarbonize the Ports of Long Beach, Los Angeles and Oakland by replacing diesel-powered cargo-handling equipment with hydrogen fuel cell equivalents.
“The investment is already being used to bring together private industry, local governments, and community organizations to collaborate and build a secure, American-made energy future,” the representatives wrote, adding that ARCHES anticipates the creation of 220,000 jobs.
In the race to decarbonize energy and fuel, the federal government is spending billions to create hydrogen economies. California will be one of several hydrogen hubs — here’s what that will mean.
The letter was spearheaded by Padilla and Reps. George Whitesides (D-Agua Dulce) and Mike Levin (D-San Juan Capistrano). Whiteside’s district includes Lancaster — the first city to join ARCHES when it was announced, with multiple projects planned in the area.
“The bipartisan support for ARCHES shown in this letter underscores its importance to California and the nation,” Whitesides wrote in a statement. “I urge the DOE to support this crucial program and preserve its funding, therefore expanding our workforce and economic opportunity.”
Padilla, who helped secure funding for ARCHES and other hydrogen hubs through Biden’s bipartisan infrastructure law, wrote in a statement that “kickstarting the market for hydrogen power in California will accelerate the creation of good-paying jobs while investing in key sectors across our economy.”
“Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle agree that California’s ARCHES hydrogen hub is essential for lowering fuel costs and promoting American energy dominance and security,” Padilla said.
The potential cuts come as the Trump administration continues to target environmental programs in California and across the country in what officials say is an effort to ease regulatory costs, lower taxes and “unleash American energy.”
However, Democratic insiders said the planned cuts appear to be partisan — particularly because California’s hub was the highest-scoring applicant among more than 30 projects considered for the $7 billion federal program. Its $1.2 billion award also matched that of Texas, a red state hub that was safe from the cuts.
The seven hydrogen hubs were collectively expected to produce 3 million metric tons of hydrogen annually and reduce 25 million metric tons of carbon dioxide emissions, an amount roughly equivalent to that of 5.5 million gas-powered cars.
“We view ARCHES as a strategic investment in American energy innovation, an all-of-the-above energy strategy, and energy independence and competitiveness,” the letter says. “With that, we respectfully request that you continue supporting ARCHES and provide time for the California hub and its member organizations to further justify their vital role in meeting the energy goals of the administration.”
