It really doesn't matter which way you slice it or fudge it... hydrogen is a dead loss as an energy transfer mechanism. The poor efficiency of hydrogen production, compression, and distribution, even when locally produced, means that it is too expensive in terms of capital infrastructure. Let's face it, the current net zero goals politicians espouse are simply not possible in any meaningful timeframe due to the amount of copper and nickel that needs to be mined to enable those lofty goals. Tripling or quadrupling the generating capacity to add hydrogen to the mix is just adding a dream to an impossibility.
For remote and regional Australia the options of solar and batteries or biofuel are net zero.
Enough from me... this is the humour forum after all!
