Yes-ish.

The three scenarios are as follows:

1: the Teralta model, where hydrogen displaces a quarter of the annual natural gas consumption for the pulp and paper mill.

2: electrifying the paper mill and venting the hydrogen

3: electrifying the paper mill and flaring the hydrogen (combusting it without using the heat)

The first reduces the pulp and paper mill's emissions by a quarter.

The second reduces pulp and paper mill emissions by 100% but leaves the 53,000 tons CO2e from hydrogen's indirect warming untouched.

The third eliminates all emissions.

Which is the best choice?

Personally, I'd go with the third. Every industrial product has waste products. Every industry tries to use them or sell them. The ones it can't use or sell it has to dispose of in the best possible way.

The best possible way to dispose of unusable, unmarketable hydrogen waste is to burn it.