Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Clean Hydrogen topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
House hearing backs smaller, regional hydrogen credits to expand production across Pennsylvania
Summary
House Bill 500 would retool the EDGE clean hydrogen hubs credit by lowering investment and job thresholds, splitting credits into smaller awards across regions, and allowing multiple small-scale hydrogen producers to qualify, with supporters saying this would grow permanent and construction jobs statewide.
The House Finance Committee considered a restructured clean hydrogen hubs tax credit in House Bill 500 that would break a previously large, single award into smaller regional credits to encourage multiple sites and firms to enter hydrogen production.
Rob Baer, president of the Pennsylvania State Building and Construction Trades Council, testified that the 2022 structure concentrated credits on a few large projects and limited broader industry development. Under the HB 500 proposal discussed in committee, the minimum capital investment for hydrogen projects would be lowered from $500 million to $100 million and the permanent job threshold would fall from 1,200 to 200. Instead of one $50 million annual award, the program could provide up to $7 million per site, potentially enabling as many as seven projects statewide.
Baer said smaller regional projects would spur both construction and permanent jobs and enable private investment to finance projects. He also pointed to practical siting advantages — locating production near off-takers and Brownfield redevelopment sites — and said, “We would be remiss in Pennsylvania if we weren't taking the lead on this.”
Representative Samuelson and other committee members questioned whether the 200-job permanent threshold and the number of potential sites would be sufficient and discussed how the program could spread jobs across the Commonwealth rather than concentrate them in one area. Representative Waxman asked Baer to describe the types of permanent and construction jobs expected; Baer replied they would be “good paying jobs with health care, with retirements, family sustaining jobs.”
Discussion vs. decision: testimony and member questions were recorded; no formal action was taken. The committee signaled additional review and potential amendments before a vote scheduled for May 7.
Next steps: committee consideration, possible amendments, and continued stakeholder engagement ahead of potential committee action.
