This passage for example:
But hydrogen is not a source of energy, something which hydrogen advocates either don't understand or refuse to acknowledge. Since hydrogen does not exist in geological reservoirs it must be extracted from fossil-fuel feedstocks or water. The process of extracting hydrogen uses energy, which means that using hydrogen is less efficient that burning fossil fuels.
His comments do not address his statement that "hydrogen is not a source of energy".
His comments addres the lack of hydrogen available, not whether or not if it were available would it be a viable energy source.
His comments are written to falsely that imply hydrogen is not efficent as a fuel. That sort of distortion is not appropriate.
Hydrogen is not a very efficient fuel. My text books are at work or I would quote exact values, but Hydrogens heating value per pound is just fractions of that for hydrocarbon fuels. So the tanks have to be rather large. That is the reason for that rusty abortion you see attached to every space shuttle. Use of hydrogen in the vapor phase would employ even larger tanks, proportionally.