Is it time to begin hydrogen commercialisation ? What more they need to study before beginning to sale to consumers some hydrogen. Petrol and ice engines is making a trillion dollars sale each year. Logically we can observe that there is a commercial opportunity in doing a product that compete gasoline-diesel. The economy is supposed to offer for sale products that are better so consumers will buy. If there is not yet any hydrogen products for sale anywhere the logical reason
is that hydrogen have been bought by ice and petrol cartel that do not want to lose money from their lucrative business. Also the few hydrogen proponents are already the ones that are doing ice and petrol business like honda with their clarity or many hydrogen fuelcell prototype from mercedes and gm, etc. And for the hydrogen fuel we have shell hydrogen and chevron hydrogen. To date any of these chaps just did some patents without any hint of a commercialisation. Logically we should have seen some commercialisation from commercial entities that are not doing petrol or ice commercialisation so they do not have incentives to not sale hydrogen products.

This study should help some business to begin to devellop this new promising business opportunity. What other reasons do they need. I said many time that im interrested to buy, so bring the product and put it for sale. What im looking for is a small hydrogen fuelcell car with a unit of production of hydrogen installed into the car so there is no need to have an external hydrogen pump for the car. Just put a small water electrolyzer into the car that do hydrogen from the water and the pure hydrogen gas is stocked into the hydrogen tank.

I'd like to see a comparison in purchase and operating cost between a 700-bar hydrogen FCEV and a 350-bar CNG ICEV.  The NGV is clean enough (except for tailpipe carbon emissions, which become irrelevant unless the H2 production system is sequestered) and there appears to be much less expense involved in the infrastructure.

Good point, E-P.
Just wait until the Toyota ft-bh hybrid come out with a NG version. At well over 100 mpg, it does not need such a big NG tank like converting existing ICEV would require. Now, if the car is designed with 600 mile range on CNG tank at 5000 psi, holding an equivalent of 5-6 gallons of gasoline, the tank size would still be practical to preserve internal space.

This 600-mi range on NG will allow 200-mi range on H2 when compressed to the same 5000 psi in the same tank. The car can be designed to run on both NG and H2 with direct fuel injection using the same injector and fuel system. I predict that eventually, renewable-energy H2 will be very cheap, much cheaper than synthetic methane. So, most people will fill up for daily commute on H2 to save money, while for long trips, they will tank up on more expensive CO2-neutral synthetic methane to get 600-mi per fill-up. The wealthy who are too lazy for frequent fill-ups with H2 will choose synthetic methane instead.

Oh, BTW, I also predict that with continual worsening of global warming and climate change, fossil fuels will one day be banned, just like CFC is banned today.

A carbon free fuel that is easier to store than hydrogen is ammonia. The volume energy density of hydrogen is one third that of natural gas methane at the same pressure. Hydrogen is so so attractive to people who refuse to learn of the high carbon cost of making it in large quantities and the cost of compression and tanks and the million dollar fuel cell.

Most travel by automobiles every day is limited to 40 miles or less on the average. This can be done with a cheap car with lead-acid batteries even, and a fuel powered range extender is always available but hardly used. All other travel can be done with "standard" high efficient ICE power with a gradual acceptance of hydraulic hybrids for double efficiency in city driving. Ian Wright says that only high mileage delivery vehicles are worth the expense of being plug in hybrids. This does not prevent wealthy people from purchasing high performance plug in hybrid electric automobiles from him as a version of performance art. ..HG..

@Henry,
Hydrogen is only advantageous when made from renewable energy, and only when fossil fuels are to be phased out or outright banned.
In the above scenario, then, synthetic methane or ammonia made from renewable energy are alternatives to H2, but are more expensive to make and less efficient to make. For example, to make ammonia from renewable-energy H2, the typical large-scale efficiency is around 50%. You lose 1/2 of the initial energy. Plus, you have to pay for the investment cost of the facility to make ammonia. Not cheap, and would add significantly to the cost of ammonia or synthetic methane!

The Stranded Wind project was working on an electrolytic cell to synthesize ammonia directly from water, nitrogen and electricity, at some energy savings over production of hydrogen (ammonia synthesis from H2 and H2 is exothermic).  I believe it's already been done in the lab.