Methane pyrolysis (MP) is an emerging clean hydrogen production method that splits methane into hydrogen and solid carbon, avoiding direct carbon dioxide emissions. Unlike other hydrogen production methods, MP has potential to produce valuable carbon co-products, such as carbon black, substitutes for natural, or conventional synthetic graphite, or carbon nanotubes, creating opportunity for a dual-revenue model. This could improve economic resilience and scalability for clean hydrogen.

This report examines MP’s technology landscape, attributes and advantages, engineering challenges, and commercial status. It highlights a growing field of private-sector developers advancing systems capable of flexible deployment models suitable for distributed and on-site hydrogen creation, leveraging available infrastructure.

With public policy support, MP could play a significant role in accelerating clean hydrogen deployment. Targeted federal actions include:

• Research, development, demonstration, and deployment (RDD&D): Federal support through grants, prizes, and partnerships can accelerate innovations for operational performance and the quality of carbon products. Cost-sharing grants and loan support for new projects and domestic manufacturing facilities can help unlock private capital.
• Production tax credits: Production-based tax credits for clean hydrogen and/or MP-derived carbon products are a strong enabler of early technology implementation. Credits should be predictable and durable while also ensuring that resources (e.g., lifecycle methodologies) are updated to accommodate new technologies like MP.
• Support for domestic cleaner hydrogen and carbon products: Demand-side support, from carbon pricing to sector-specific incentives programs, strengthens markets for clean hydrogen and MP-derived carbon products by aligning with broader energy security and economic goals.
• Curbing methane emissions: Policies that reduce natural gas supply chain emissions—via standards, leak detection programs, or performance programs—maximize the value
  of MP.

Taking a Closer Look

Achieving net-zero emissions will require large-scale change across all sectors of the economy, and efforts to drive this transition are intensifying. Over the past several years, through the Net-Zero Pathways Initiative, the Center for Climate and Energy Solutions (C2ES) has engaged closely with leading companies across diverse sectors to examine challenges and solutions to decarbonizing the U.S. economy by 2050. As we laid out in Getting to Zero: A U.S. Climate Agenda, reaching net zero will require large-scale change, but it will also require us to address a number of discrete and urgent challenges. To inform policymakers considering these near- and long-term questions, C2ES launched a series of “Closer Look” briefs to investigate important facets of the decarbonization challenge, focusing on key technologies, critical policy instruments, and cross-sectoral challenges. These briefs explore policy implications and outline key steps needed to reach net zero by mid-century.

The post Methane Pyrolysis for Hydrogen Production appeared first on Center for Climate and Energy Solutions.

The proposed repeal hinges on a critical question: do emissions from U.S. power plants contribute “significantly” to the problem of climate change? To most scientists, economists and policymakers, the answer is an unequivocal “yes.”  

In its proposed repeal, EPA suggests that the U.S. power sector’s current 3 percent contribution of total greenhouse gas emissions “may not be a significant contribution to the GHG concentrations in the atmosphere.” The main rationale EPA offers for its judgment is that U.S. power sector emissions made up 5.5 percent of total global greenhouse gas emissions in 2005 and in 2022 comprised 3 percent of total global greenhouse gas emissions. EPA provides no evidence for its argument, which seems to rest solely on the observation that 3 is smaller than 5.5 and much smaller than 100. For context, 3 percent of U.S. GDP is $870 billion, hardly an insignificant dollar amount.  

Notably, while U.S. power sector emissions have fallen 36 percent (2005 – 2022), global emissions have grown by 30 percent over the same period. Therefore, 45 percent of the “decline” in U.S. power sector emissions relative to total global greenhouse gas emissions is due to the fact that global emissions have increased by 13.2 billion metric tons per year since 2005. 

Far from insignificant, the numbers are massive 

In 2024, the U.S. power sector emitted 1,427 million metric tons of carbon dioxide, the second largest U.S. source by sector. This amount exceeds the combined economywide emissions of Germany, France, and the United Kingdom. Indeed, if the U.S. power sector were its own country, it would be the sixth largest emitter of carbon pollution in the world, after only China, the rest of the U.S., India, the European Union, and Russia.   

Moreover, other sectors with smaller global shares—like aviation (1.6 percent), international shipping (1.9 percent), and aluminum production (1.9 percent)—are widely acknowledged as significant sources of climate pollution, with international efforts underway to reduce their emissions. Suggesting that 3 percent isn’t significant enough to warrant regulation sets a dangerously low bar. If we followed this logic, nearly every country and sector in the world would be excused from climate action. Climate change is a collective problem. Every meaningful source must be addressed—especially one as large and controllable as the U.S. power sector. 

The economic case: pollution isn’t free 

There’s also a compelling economic argument for keeping strong carbon standards in place. Every ton of carbon dioxide emitted into the atmosphere contributes to the rising costs of climate change—from damaged infrastructure and lost agricultural productivity to increased healthcare costs and disaster recovery. 

Economists use a measure called the Social Cost of Carbon (SCC) to quantify these damages. The latest estimate from leading experts puts the central value of the SCC at around $190 per ton of carbon dioxide. 

Using that value, the 1.4 billion tons of carbon dioxide emitted by the U.S. power sector in 2024 would result in more than $271 billion in annual economic damage. Even using a much lower SCC value of just $1 per ton—a figure used by the first Trump administration—the damages still exceed $1.4 billion per year. That’s seven times the threshold the federal government (i.e., Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs) uses to define a regulation as “economically significant.” 

According to the EPA’s own analysis, repealing the standards would increase annual emissions by 123 million tons in 2035. That translates to $23 billion in additional damages every year if the repeal goes forward. 

Over the past five decades, the U.S. power sector has released nearly 96 billion tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, much of which remains in the atmosphere today and is a significant contributor to climate and health impacts (e.g., more frequent and intense heatwaves, droughts, floods, wildfires, ecosystem disruption, sea level rise, ocean acidification, heat-related morbidity and mortality) that we are currently experiencing. 

Continued emission declines aren’t guaranteed 

Even with the welcome growth of clean electricity sources like wind and solar, today, more than 60 percent of U.S. electricity still comes from natural gas- and coal-fired power plants. And while emissions have declined in recent years due to coal plant retirements and a shift toward more natural gas and renewables, this trend is not guaranteed to continue. In fact, it may be reversing. 

For the first time in decades, electricity demand in the United States is rising. New data center growth driven by the rapid expansion of artificial intelligence, a manufacturing resurgence, and a growing number of electric vehicles are all pushing consumption higher. Experts project a 15–25 percent increase in electricity demand by 2030, and possibly 50–80 percent by mid-century.  

Solar power is being deployed at record levels, and mothballed nuclear power plants are being restarted on the positive side; however, increasing electricity demand is also putting pressure on utilities to keep older fossil fuel plants online longer and even build new ones. More than 4 gigawatts (GW) of new natural gas plants are under construction, with another 14 GW planned by 2028. A slate of coal plant retirements are being reconsidered, and in many cases are being postponed for years in light of growing demand. Without enforceable carbon standards, we risk a long-term increase in emissions just when we should be doing everything possible to reduce them. 

U.S. leadership matters—at home and abroad 

The United States has long been a global leader in energy innovation and environmental policy. Walking further away from that leadership now would send the wrong signal at a time when the rest of the world is watching—and many countries are stepping up their own climate ambitions.   

Strong domestic standards also help U.S. companies remain competitive in global markets. As more countries implement border carbon adjustments (BCAs)—tariffs on goods from countries with weaker climate policies—American industries could face trade disadvantages if our emissions rise. Since the industrial sector is the largest user of electricity, a higher carbon intensity in our power sector could make U.S. goods less attractive abroad in the long run. Conversely, a clean, reliable, and well-regulated power sector gives American businesses an edge—especially as the world pivots toward low-carbon technologies. 

Investors need predictability, not whiplash 

Energy infrastructure isn’t built overnight. Power plants cost hundreds of millions of dollars and operate for decades. Investors need clear, consistent policies to plan for the future. Repealing carbon standards creates uncertainty, raises risks, and undermines confidence in long-term investments in clean power. As C2ES notes, balanced regulations are not only essential for cutting emissions—they’re also vital for ensuring regulatory stability, market confidence, and energy sector resilience. 

A time to lead, not retreat 

EPA’s proposed repeal of the Carbon Pollution Standards is out of step with science, economics, and global trends. 

 The impacts of climate change are already costing Americans dearly. The tools to reduce emissions are available. And the responsibility—and opportunity—for the United States to lead has never been clearer. 

Reasonable, practical, and forward-looking policies are how we protect public health, preserve our economic edge, and ensure a sustainable energy future. That means strengthening our carbon standards—not dismantling them. 

Read the full comments from C2ES here. 

The post Far from insignificant: the miscalculation of power plant standards repeal appeared first on Center for Climate and Energy Solutions.

• Nuclear power is one of the few technologies that can economically and technologically meet the thermal needs of industrial process heat applications up to 950 degrees C (1,742 degrees F).
• Retrofitting facilities (e.g., manufacturing, universities, hospitals) currently utilizing natural gas-fired combined heat and power systems would reduce U.S. annual carbon dioxide emissions by at least 75 million metric tons per year.
• Small modular reactors can scale to fit a wide range of industrial needs; given their modularity and geographic independence, they will be capable of supplying safe, reliable thermal energy and electricity.
• Early projects, such as the X-energy and Dow partnership, have encouraged other companies to consider nuclear technology for their own facility needs.
• A thriving hydrogen market could help drive demand for nuclear combined heat and power applications, as production of hydrogen from nuclear plants becomes more cost-effective and usable due to increased hydrogen infrastructure.
• Continued public investments in development, deployment, and licensing of nuclear reactor technologies and fuel supply is essential to encourage private investments.
• Highly-scalable, zero-emission technologies like nuclear energy will be necessary to meet growing demand from electrification, artificial intelligence, and other new sources of electricity and heating demand. Encouraging advanced nuclear for process heat in these and similar applications could help (e.g., develop, scale, reduce costs) the technology, making nuclear more accessible for electricity generation.

Executive Summary

The industrial sector is responsible for about 30 percent of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions. Many of these emissions come from the heat needed for industrial processes in subsectors such as steel, concrete, chemicals, and glass production, since these subsectors typically rely on low-cost, high-emitting fossil fuels as their primary source for uninterrupted thermal energy. To reduce dependence on fossil fuels and achieve decarbonization targets, non-emitting heat sources that meet the unique challenges of powering the industrial sector must be further developed and deployed in the near future. Advanced nuclear technologies could play both direct and indirect roles in providing such heat, and their inherent safety, siting flexibility, modularity, and small land footprint could enable cost-effective deployment at a wide range of locations.

Existing nuclear power plants and new advanced nuclear reactors could directly provide heat at a range of temperatures and at the high capacity factors (i.e., almost always on availability) needed by many industrial users, which means nuclear reactors could effectively replace much of the heat currently generated by fossil fuels. In addition, electricity from advanced reactors could power electrified heat options (e.g., industrial heat pumps) and production of zero-carbon hydrogen, as well as carbon capture technology that could further decarbonize industry.

Accelerating the deployment of advanced nuclear reactors faces a range of challenges, including cost concerns, regulatory delays, supply chain risks, inadequate workforce, lack of a long-term plan for storage of nuclear waste, non-proliferation concerns, and opposition from some states and communities. Recent policy actions in Congress, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) have sought to mitigate some of these challenges, including through robust funding for nuclear deployments, support for boosting domestic nuclear fuel production, and development of new regulatory review pathways.

More is needed, however, to drive technological advancements and widespread deployment. Necessary policies include:

Additional financial and technical support: Additional public dollars for research, development, and deployment of advanced nuclear reactor technologies (inclusive of fuel and other supplies) and for workforce development, along with expanded technical support for industrial facilities looking to adopt advanced nuclear technologies, could help spur further private investment and develop an advanced nuclear market in the United States.

NRC action and support: Efforts to finalize new, more efficient licensing procedures for advanced nuclear reactors must continue, and the NRC needs additional staff and resources to handle the anticipated volume of applications for new reactors in the near future.

Carbon pricing: Market-based solutions to incentivize emissions reductions would encourage and improve the cost-competitiveness of industrial decarbonization efforts. A price on greenhouse gas emissions would reflect the true cost of emitting carbon (e.g., costs to society such as damage from more extreme weather); with a market-based incentive, businesses and consumers will take steps to decarbonize, including deploying innovative advanced nuclear technologies and fuels, to avoid increased costs and remain economically viable.

Industrial decarbonization is key to the United States achieving its 2050 net-zero climate target. Advanced nuclear technologies, if adequately supported and developed, could complement an array of other clean energy technologies in making such decarbonization a reality while supporting increased U.S. energy security and economic growth.

About Our Closer Looks

Achieving net-zero emissions will require large-scale change across all sectors of the economy, and efforts to drive this transition are intensifying. Over the past several years, through the Climate Innovation 2050 initiative, the Center for Climate and Energy Solutions (C2ES) has engaged closely with leading companies across diverse sectors to examine challenges and solutions to decarbonizing the U.S. economy by 2050. As we lay out in Getting to Zero: A U.S. Climate Agenda, reaching net zero will require large-scale change, but it will also require us to address a number of discrete and urgent challenges. To inform policymakers considering these near- and long-term questions, C2ES launched a series of “Closer Look” briefs to investigate important facets of the decarbonization challenge, focusing on key technologies, critical policy instruments, and cross-sectoral challenges. These briefs explore policy implications and outline key steps needed to reach net zero by mid-century.

The post Advanced Nuclear Process Heat for Industrial Decarbonization appeared first on Center for Climate and Energy Solutions.