[FredZarguna]

My point isn't to get into the semantics of "fuel" which some people seem to be hung up on. My point is that hydrogen technology is battery technology. On earth, we have energy stored in fossil fuels because solar energy was converted to binding energy by plants. This energy can be release when fossil fuels are burned. This isn't what we do with hydrogen, because there is no free hydrogen on earth. We have to manufacture free hydrogen: doing that takes energy. So when people call hydrogen an "energy source" they're being misleading (and, I would argue, often deliberately so). It isn't: it's a storage material for energy.

[GummyIII]

Oh, I agree 100% that hydrogen we intentionally produce for a fuel is a storage material for energy. However, so is anything we burn, actually. We may not have produced it, but that is what it is. "Energy can neither be created or destroyed"...etc...etc.... We know that there is never 100% conversion of energy from one source to another. Energy is lost somewhere (heat, etc.), so the use of hydrogen as an energy-saving means is definitely a myth. I didn't mean to nit-pick...was more for clarification. It isn't just semantics.