According to Gasworld, Air Products announced the cancellation of three projects today (February 25), following Air Liquide’s reduction of its involvement in the $7 billion U.S. Hydrogen Hub program from six hubs to two.
We attempt to analyze the impact of the Trump 2.0 era on renewable energy investments, particularly in the hydrogen and clean energy sectors. Below is a summary and analysis of the key points:
Uncertainty from Federal Funding Freeze
The Trump administration’s decision to freeze federal funding for clean energy projects has directly triggered a review of the U.S. Hydrogen Hubs program. Originally designed to reduce costs and attract private investment through government support, the program now faces an uncertain funding outlook, forcing companies to reassess project risks. For example, Air Liquide’s CEO, François Jackow, stated that due to uncertainties surrounding policy reviews, final investment decisions (FID) for several projects are expected to be delayed until the second half of this year. This uncertainty compels companies to adopt cautious strategies, prioritizing “derisking.”
Impact: The pace of renewable energy projects, especially large-scale hydrogen hub initiatives requiring significant capital, may slow down in the short term, potentially facing stagnation or downsizing.
Corporate Strategy Shift: From Aggressive Expansion to Cautious Deployment
- Air Liquide: Reduced its participation from six hydrogen hubs to two, reflecting a cautious response to the uncertain environment. However, it has not fully withdrawn; instead, it is partnering with ExxonMobil on the Baytown project in Texas, investing up to $850 million to build a modular air separation unit for low-carbon hydrogen production. This “blue hydrogen” project (based on carbon capture) leverages existing energy infrastructure, tax incentives, and streamlined permitting processes, indicating a preference for lower-risk, more predictable projects amid policy ambiguity.
- Air Products: Canceled three clean energy projects, including the Massena green liquid hydrogen project, due to regulatory changes that disqualified existing hydropower from clean hydrogen production tax credits (45V) and the slow development of the regional hydrogen mobility market. Following a CEO change, the company has refocused on the Louisiana Clean Energy Complex and the NEOM project, while seeking equity partners to reduce its own capital expenditure.
Impact: Companies are shifting from pursuing green hydrogen (costly and reliant on renewable energy) to blue hydrogen (lower-cost and supported by existing technology), while mitigating risks through partnerships, signaling a pragmatic turn in the short term.
Real Challenges in the Clean Energy Market
- Cost Disparity: The production cost of green hydrogen ranges from $4-6 per kilogram, compared to $1.5-2 for blue hydrogen. This gap becomes more pronounced with reduced federal funding. The press release highlights cost as a major barrier to green hydrogen development, explaining the shift toward blue hydrogen.
- Insufficient Market Demand: The turbulence in the hydrogen truck industry during the first quarter further reveals weak market demand. For instance, Nikola’s bankruptcy, HVS’s pivot to technology licensing, and Hyzon’s significant cash reserve depletion indicate that hydrogen applications in transportation are not yet mature.
Impact: Tightened policies in the Trump 2.0 era may exacerbate this trend, potentially shelving green hydrogen projects in the short term, while blue hydrogen and carbon capture technologies could become mainstream during the transition phase.
Regional Advantages and Project Viability
Texas, with its mature energy infrastructure, tax incentives, and simplified permitting processes, has emerged as a focal point for continued investment, exemplified by Air Liquide’s Baytown project. In contrast, the Massena project was canceled due to regulatory and market challenges. This suggests that, in the absence of federal support, local policies and infrastructure conditions will be critical to project survival.
Impact: Renewable energy investments may become more concentrated in energy-rich or policy-friendly regions, while other areas could face project withdrawals or stagnation.
Long-term Outlook: Controlled Development Rather Than Full Retreat
Although Air Products’ cancellation of sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) and green liquid hydrogen projects may appear detrimental to clean energy development, the press release suggests that this strategic adjustment could lead to more manageable near-term growth rather than a complete retreat. By focusing on blue hydrogen and optimizing capital structures (e.g., seeking equity partners), companies are still striving to remain competitive in an uncertain environment.
Impact: The Trump 2.0 era may not entirely stifle renewable energy investments but will significantly alter their pace and direction, shifting from aggressive green innovation to more realistic transitional technologies.
Overall Conclusion
The Trump 2.0 era has introduced significant uncertainty to renewable energy investments through federal funding freezes and policy reviews. As a result, companies are reducing risk exposure and adjusting strategies: shifting from green to blue hydrogen, from large-scale expansion to regional deployment, and from solo investments to cost-sharing partnerships. In the short term, the pace of clean energy development will slow, particularly in green hydrogen and hydrogen transportation, but blue hydrogen and carbon capture projects may gain more attention due to cost advantages and existing infrastructure support. In the long run, renewable energy investments will not come to a complete halt but will increasingly depend on local policy support and the maturity of market demand.
More information, please review the below link
