Ann: The Hydrogen Utility and Iron Road in Cape Hardy Development, page-4

It has taken me a while to get round to this (lots of other things on my plate). Yes, the document you cite does provide the answer to the question will the hydrogen facility be totally uneconomic? Its answer is Yes, it will be totally uneconomic.

They write all sorts of waffle about how good it's going to be in future, but their table of energy content gives the game away. They show Liquid Hydrogen (LH) having energy content 120 MJ/kg - way above the other fuels they cite. Yippee! LH is the winner! But LH has a specific gravity (sg) of only 0.07. LNG - next in their table at 54.4 MJ/kg - has a sg of nearly 0.5. So LNG is 3* as effective by volume as LH. And volume is a much better guide than weight to costs of transport and storage. The equations for other fuels is similar - petrol or diesel about 4*, coal (which they omitted from their table - I wonder why) about 9*.

Will the cost of producing a litre of LH be as little as 1/3 of the cost of producing a litre of LNG, 1/4 of petrol or diesel, or 1/9 of coal? I sincerely doubt it. It will only be viable with massive subsidy, and I suspect that long before this project gets seriously underway the public will have long tired of pouring vast amounts of their hard-earned taxes into green boondoggles.