In the end they did update their landing page, conclusions and interactive graphic, having been forced to admit to putting one thumb on the scales for green hydrogen.

They stated that due to 'interest' they had added an addendum, without acknowledging how substantive the changes are.

Another piece coming shortly lists all of the thumbs on the scale for hydrogen, and it' s big list. Another two pieces look at their aviation related material for maritime shipping and aviation, both transportation segments where they have even worse reports.

My hypothesis is not that they were suborned by oil and gas, but that they ignored electrification potential almost entirely for aviation and shipping, accepted absurd growth numbers for both aviation and shipping without looking at more realistic numbers, then found that with no batteries and massive growth, truly sustainable biofuel feedstocks would be inadequate.

This led to the requirement for something else, and as they've known since 2018 that hydrogen and e-fuels were absurdly expensive, they have taken to trying to justify hydrogen and e-fuels in the past couple of years. This has led to reports like the trucking one, and deep errors in the aviation and shipping ones.

They have to retrench and realign. That they did indeed change their report and conclusions in the end is a hopeful sign, but they have a lot of bad reports and hence a lot of crow to swallow. It's unclear how they will deal with this. It's an existential threat, with at least one of the most respected global transportation researchers concluding that nothing that they publish can be trusted.