Hydrogen Refinery Impacts

The hydrogen refinery at the heart of the Pronghorn H2 Project is a high-risk industrial facility disguised as a green innovation. Its explosive materials, excessive water consumption, continuous emissions, and unproven economic model make it a serious concern for residents, landowners, environmental stewards, and emergency responders alike. 

The Pronghorn H2 facility plans to produce green hydrogen by using electrolysis powered by wind and solar energy. This hydrogen would then be combined with carbon dioxide to create synthetic aviation fuel intended for use at Denver International Airport.

While the idea sounds futuristic and green, the technology involved is still relatively new, inefficient, and unproven at scale. Producing SAF through this method requires advanced infrastructure, high energy inputs, and strict environmental controls — all of which introduce considerable risk and uncertainty.

Hydrogen is highly flammable, and its production, storage, and transportation pose significant safety risks. While carbon dioxide is non-flammable, it can be dangerous in high concentrations, especially in enclosed or low-lying areas.

The hydrogen industry acknowledges that 4–9% of hydrogen is lost during production and handling — not through rare leaks, but as a routine byproduct of the process. While hydrogen itself may dissipate quickly, the climate impact is not negligible; this leakage can be up to 10 times more damaging than carbon dioxide emissions when measured in greenhouse gas effect.

Residents are rightly concerned about what this means for air quality, explosion risk, and safety in nearby neighborhoods and workplaces. With the refinery operating 24/7, these risks are not theoretical — they are persistent.

Perhaps the most alarming aspect of the hydrogen facility is its enormous water demand. According to available literature, the project may require upwards of 500 acre-feet of water annually — equivalent to 163 million gallons.

The proposed water sources include the North Platte River and potentially deep groundwater aquifers such as the Madison Formation, both of which are already under environmental and agricultural pressure. Additionally:

• Up to 33% of water drawn will be lost to evaporation and deep well injection. 
• High salinity wastewater, if improperly treated, could pollute soil and water systems. 
• Water withdrawals and discharges risk disrupting flow patterns and harming aquatic life downstream.

These practices pose a real threat to local agriculture, the municipal water supply of Glenrock, and the broader sustainability of regional water resources.

Refinery operations involve constant industrial activity — compressors, pumps, fans, cooling systems, and heavy maintenance traffic. Residents and wildlife will be subjected to round-the-clock noise pollution, which studies have linked to sleep disturbance, stress, and altered migration behaviors in animals.

Additionally, bright lighting from perimeter security, floodlights, and flashing beacons will contribute to widespread light pollution, affecting natural circadian rhythms and eliminating dark skies across large distances.

While marketed as an economic boon, the hydrogen plant’s financial outlook depends heavily on federal tax credits and subsidies, including the Section 45V Clean Hydrogen Production Credit, Section 48 investment credits, and possible funding through hydrogen hub grants.

Critics question whether this project can be profitable without massive taxpayer support, and whether the economic benefits promised to the local community will ever materialize. Even more ironically, the production of so-called “green” hydrogen may introduce greater climate and ecological harm due to emissions, habitat destruction, and water use than the fuels it’s meant to replace.