.png)
With all the hype surrounding green hydrogen, you would think it is the second coming of the Enlightenment. Yet, veiled behind the banners of optimism, languishes a darker reality, a tale of how hubris, greed, and inequality simmer incessantly beneath the cauldron of today's Green Hydrogen projects.
Illustration By The Geostrata
There appears to be increased consensus about the fact that certain parts of the global population, in particularly indigenous communities, are disproportionately affected by the effects of climate change. It thus bears logical continuity that the remedy to such issues should also be extended foremost to these communities.
How paradoxical, how utterly unjust then, that in fact the universally vetted solution of "renewable energy" projects like hydrogen are in fact exacerbating the plight of indigenous communities. The explanations for this vary, from displacement and ecosystem damage to inequitable benefits. In many cases, the actions of those behind hydrogen projects have been extremely hypocritical, a stark contrast to the "progressive" and equitable philosophical ethos they so love to flaunt.
Case in question, NEOM. The Al Huwaitat tribe which had lived on the land for generations were faced with incessant threats, abductions and ultimately forced displacement if they opted not to accept the meagre 3,000 euro offers which were made to them.
What makes this situation really bizarre is a combination of two factors. Firstly, the claim that the whole NEOM project was built on unoccupied land was a blatant lie. Furthermore, those who validly oppose the process are often faced with an extremely harsh death sentence meted out by Saudi courts. Hubris and greed seem to be laced with sweetened narratives that are all too readily accepted as gospel amidst the frenzy of the hydrogen gold rush.
Hydrogen companies like Fortescue have sought to undertake massive projects in serene untouched expanses of nature, such as Sierra Grande in Argentina. As novel as such a mass-scale energy undertaking is for Argentina, the positives are minimal. Indigenous groups will likely be displaced, endangered species will have to leave their natural ecosystem, and massive artificial construction will obstruct beautiful landscapes. The worst part is that locals will not even avail the benefits of such projects since most of the energy will be exported.
TLDR, a lose-lose situation. Similarly in Chile, a World Bank-backed green hydrogen facility is slated to be immensely disruptive to local economic structures and is likely to have a negative impact on the local Chango community. In Uruguay, such projects plan to extract water from aquifers, which local indigenous communities believe would be disruptive to the natural ecosystem. Based in Tambores, the hydrogen undertaking is viewed as something which could alter the water system so radically that indigenous communities would have to shift.
In all these cases, the green hydrogen undertakings come dressed as knights in shining armour which can reinvigorating local economies by decarbonising industries and creating jobs. Strong PR in this form seems to garner them some pseudo-moral justification for the exploitation of natives.
It is not just corporate exploitation though, states use such projects as a deliberate political tool to displace minority communities. In Morocco for instance, a centralised hydrogen project has completely neglected local civic consultation, with some renewable energy projects perched on the land previously owned by pastoralist Berber tribes.
Needless to say, the commodification of the land has completely shackled the clans. This approach was then extended to the disputed western Sahara area, where local indigenous communities were driven out of their homes. Thus, the narrative of energy transition served as a smokescreen for political goals.
The fact is that one cannot force energy transitions down the throats of people unless they both understand and easily avail the benefits of these projects. A "Hydrogen village" in Redcar, England was planned to replace gas supplies with hydrogen energy. This came crashing down in a heap because locals were not fully onboard with the plan and felt that their energy bills were actually spiking further.
A lack of consultation in the spirit of immediate gratification has a one-way result: the eventual long-term dismantling of the entire project.
However, the issues are not merely domestic disparity. Rather the bleakest problem is a neo-colonial one. In centuries past, European colonisers had a simple economic formula: produce raw materials for cheap in Asia and Africa, then import the benefits to European markets.
The modern day hydrogen problem resembles such a structure. The now defunct Desertec industrial initiative was a prime example. Its seemingly altruistic motivation of providing clean energy to Europe, hid the plundering of resources, land, and water supplies in MENA, without even attempting to meet local needs. Caught in the crossfire once again were indigenous communities.
What everyone is missing however is that it is not impossible to make this process truly inclusive. In honesty, being respectful towards locals could actually massively benefit hydrogen projects. After all, indigenous technical knowledge could provide an extremely accurate analysis of hydrogen potential and its challenges in different areas. While AI is being hyped up as the big solution, the real one has been there all along, persisting in the synergistic understanding of nature that indigenous communities possess.
BY DHRUV BANERJEE
TEAM GEOSTRATA
Amazing work
Such an engaging piece! Exploitation disguised as development should always be called out.
Beautifully written!
Highly informative 👏
Great.... very informative...it's essential to know the perks and cons of every project, as it opens up the extent of net effect on our society and economy.