Is the assertion laying new hydrogen pipes would be cheaper than expanding electrical lines?
Building pipes instead of wires is already 3 times less efficient per unit of energy. Moving around huge bombs that weigh more than their load is ridiculously ineficient. It's just unfathomable for the same reasons we don't move around compressed methane gas in tanker trucks - and hydrogen is even less dense. Gasoline, diesel and propane are very special cases of compact hydrocarbon fuel, you cannot replicate that for Hydrogen.
We do liquify natural gas, but that's not an option for Hydrogen, and even for gas, it's only an economic option where there are no pipes and when the energy to do it (gas price) is basically free. As an energy storage solution, it's abysmal.
Li-ion is a bridge to H2, an enabler.
H2 fuel pellets will be passed around like hard candy.
H2 production will be just as distributed, decentralized as our future energy generation.
Li-ion will peak ~2032, hitting yearly (battery) production of ~8T gw/h, and state of the art attaining a large fraction of theoretical max energy density.
Assuming H2 today is ~= Li-ion 2006, peak H2 would be ~2050. Assuming civilization lasts that long.
Hydrogen solidifies at an insanely low 14 Kelvin. Using an ideal Linde liquefaction cycle will waste you 30% of the energy contained in the fuel simply to perform this deep freeze. You get a relatively low density fuel, about 5 times less energy dense than gasoline, that you will need to protect with massive thermal insulation (think Space Shuttle external tank) otherwise it will outgas like crazy and be an imminent explosion risk. When you add the electrolysis and fuel cell loses, you get a bulky but inefficient vehicle.
Sorry, this will never happen, regardless of what some hard SF author converted to futurologist may have led you to believe.
Double or nothing?
High absorbency materials have been around for a while, but they failed commercially, they are typically more trouble then the equivalent high pressure COPV tank. Maybe a hype laden Wordpress template website will change it, but I wouldn't hold my breath.
What else am I wrong about?
As an inferior technology, Hydrogen stood a chance if it was able to quickly deploy a network of charging stations, locking in customers with a strong network effect. The opposite is true now, electric charging points are popping up everywhere, because it's so damn easy to do, every shopping mall can accommodate at least a handful using its existing electric cabling. Most everybody has a 3.7KW power outlet at home that delivers significant range for an overnight or over-weekend charge.
Meanwhile, Hydrogen needs a completely new pipeline distribution system, using special metals and seals because it's so agile and leaky. There is no point in investing in such a system, because battery electric has already won the race. And without this network, Hydrogen remains an oddity fuel relegated to specialty applications.
It was a dead-end anyway. You either get Hydrogen form natural gas, which is an environmental killer, or you get it from green energy with a 20-30% whole cycle efficiency. Why not use the energy directly with a 80-90% efficiency, and use that vehicle fleet to regulate the whole electric grid?