The article referenced here is written about Iceland - a nation rich in geothermal energy but very poor in oil and gas. For them, hydrogen has some definite advantages, if they can make it work.

There are some issues though - I'm a little concerned about the "spin" in this article.

<a href="http://www.theage.com.au/news/environment/benvironmentb-iceland-aims-to-be-free-of-fossil-fuels/2008/01/25/1201157669193.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1"http://www.theage.com.au/news/environment/benvironmentb-iceland-aims-to-be-free-of-fossil-fuels/2008/01/25/1201157669193.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1

It starts off talking about a "hydrogen-equipped" cruise boat (and the casual reader will likely take this to mean "Hydrogen-powered"), but the article then admits that the Hydrogen is only fuelling a backup electric generator for when the engine is off. There's a world of difference for an always-on prime energy source for the main engines.

later, it commits a gross error of simplification - a Lie, if you like:-

Since hydrogen can be made from plain water and produces only electricity and water vapour when burned, its backers see it as a prime candidate.

The "simplification" here is that whilst there is no CO2 in the output of a hydrogen engine (or at least, no more than in the input air supply) there IS an issue with NOx generation in the high-temperature hydrogen flame. Hydrogen engines are NOT totally non-polluting. They may be orders of magnitude better than a hydrocarbon burner with its output of unburned and partially-burned hydrocarbons and various complexed carbon-based things like "soot" and "tholins" and Cyanide etc, but they are not uniquely and totally clean.

later again:-

Jon Bjorn Skulason, head of Icelandic New Energy, the venture between companies, academia and the government shepherding the process, said, ---snip--- customer feedback had been positive.

but this is immediately followed by:-

Margret Lindal Steinthorsdottir, marketing manager of Hertz in Iceland, said she has had queries about the rentals from all over the world, although few have led to bookings so far.

"But we remain optimistic. The weather has been awful, the tourist season has not begun and the cars are expensive to rent," she said.

So there has been "positive feedback" (people say they like the idea) but when it comes to choosing between a low-performance limited-range high-=cost vehicle tied to only one filling station, on an island with large distances, hostile climate, and remote locations where a breakdown or fuel shortage could lead to you being stranded, then customers are voting with their feet and wallets.

Maybe if they make it compulsory, people will "choose" to use it?