"If you don't have an aversion to numbers"
How droll. The reason I can do a projection through 2100 of hydrogen demand is because I've run the numbers. That you are clearly incompetent to do so due to cognitive biases isn't my problem.
I deal with engineers daily, including Paul Martin, and they agree completely that hydrogen is not fit for purpose as an energy carrier and that its concerns can't be engineered away. The laws of thermodynamics can't be cheated and the characteristics of the molecule make it very expensive to make, store and distribute. It leaks and it's a greenhouse gas, as we now have quantification for.
Since you refuse to internalize reality from a non-engineer who is respected, trusted and amplified by engineers, PhDs and scientists working in energy, how about if you read a few things from Paul Martin, a professional chemical processing engineer who has designed dozens of modular chemical processing plants for clients around the world and is a founding member of the Hydrogen Science Coalition with other engineers?
His distilled thoughts on hydrogen.
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/distilled-thoughts-hydrogen-paul-martin
You really should read the article on cognitive biases and step away from the computer for an extended period of time as you work on yours.
Bye.
