[citation][nom]jellico[/nom]While I applaude their efforts, hydrogen production presently requires the use of traditional sources of energy. Every time you change one form of energy to another, you lose something. For example, a gasoline engine changes chemical energy into mechanical. An electric car that had to be plugged in and recharged, then, requires four energy conversions: chemical to mechanical to electrical to mechanical, and hence, is even less efficient. The hydrogen charger has the same problem. A regular charger would be chemical to mechanical to electrical. A hydrogen charger would be chemical to mechanical to electrical to chemical to electrical.[/citation]
While you are correct about electric cars require more conversions. I need to impress upon you that electric cars are still more energy efficient than internal combustion.
An internal combustion engine is typically 20-35% efficient. Extremely large diesel engines used in ships have reached 50% efficiency!
A coal powerplant is at worst 40% and when everything is working right 65% efficient. Some powerplants boast 75%! Power transmission loss is 7.5%. Battery charging and discharging is 85% efficient. Electric motors and circuitry are highly efficient, and we'll assume 90%. 0.650*0.925*0.850*0.850*0.900 = 39.1%
With better technology, that could be increased; i.e. smartgrids, newer nuclear PPs. Fact remains, even as an emerging technology, electric cars have better efficiency than internal combustion.
Lastly, hydrogen currently is a dead end. Hydrogen today is produced from hydrocarbons which still releases the same amount of CO2. Also, the process is highly inefficient(33%). Fuel cells have come a long way and perform quite well but at a high cost. Problem is the fuel.