"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. "

Of course this also just refers to the local pollution. In order to make and transport the hydrogen, how much CO2 was generated? I just don't respect journalists much. They rarely seem intelligent enough to actually give useful information. They mostly want to either stir up controversey or print what somebody might want to read, within the medias prescribed agenda. As an engineer, I want to see the reality of the factual tradeoffs, not the fact that something can be subsidized or legislated into use.

If it wasn't so destructive, I would better be able to laugh at the downright fallacial conclusions and implications from "government studies" so consistently imposed on the public by the media.