If absorbing radiation were the problem to be solved, there would not be billions of dollars changing hands over the problem. But you knew that, and wrote what you did anyway.

Ordinary aluminum contains hydrogen without incident. And, as noted on Wikipedia, "coal gas, 50% hydrogen, was carried in cast iron pipes for a half century without any embrittlement problems".

The long-term problem is about politics and education, not engineering or technology. But you knew that, and wrote what you did anyways (the multiple accusations of bad faith are noted, and completely unwarranted by the way).

Carried and stored are different things, tho I'm not an expert on either. I'm getting my info from the US Department of Energy, who reports "Durability of hydrogen storage systems is inadequate. Materials and components are needed that allow hydrogen storage systems with a lifetime of 1500 cycles.". I'm not saying there aren't situations where hydrogen is valuable, but you still haven't demonstrated that we can go carbon-free without nuclear. No one has, because the math doesn't add up, at least not so far.

https://www.energy.gov/eere/fuelcells/hydrogen-storage-chall....

You reveal yourself a little more starkly than you probably intend.