(http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2013/zev2013/zev201315daynotice.pdf). Analyzing both present technologies, I believe it is clearly true that hydrogen is a terrible way to go and battery electric vehicles are the only way to go. The reasons can be stated in top-ten lists.
Fundamentally, hydrogen is one of the most dangerous materials to handle as it is extremely combustible, and without scent or color and so its escape into the atmosphere is impossible to detect. Therefore, an ignition source may be unknowingly introduced to it. Because of its amazing combustibility, it will burn extremely quickly, with extreme heat, and therefore is extremely dangerous. While this danger can be mitigated, it is inherent, and should rule out the use of hydrogen on the broad consumer market.
Finally, consider that methane is extracted through the process of fracking (hydraulic fracturing of rock), which sadly results in the tremendous uncontained release of methane (a greenhouse gas over 20 times more potent than carbon dioxide) and the deadly polluting of water tables -- and, it is now recognized to be the cause of many earthquakes (http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/fracking-would-emit-methane/; http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2014/01/05/22190011-oil-and-gas-drilling-pollutes-well-water-states-confirm?lite; http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2013/03/does-fracking-cause-earthquakes-wastewater-dewatering).
8. Hydrogen From Water Is Very Inefficient.
The other significant way to produce hydrogen is by splitting water into oxygen and hydrogen (electrolysis). However, this electrolysis process is about 70% efficient (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrolysis_of_water#Thermodynamics). Because this process is so inefficient, it is rarely used.
Electric vehicles benefit the grid by charging at night, often when power plants are in effect simply idling and creating electricity that would otherwise go to waste. Further, the fact that electric vehicles charge at night enables the use of more wind power, which is often generated at night and therefore these turbines would be less likely to be built without nighttime electric vehicle charging demand. Lastly, in the near future it is expected that electric vehicles will bring greater efficiency to the grid and encourage more renewable energy by being able to store renewable energy, acting as electrical load levelers to smooth grid operations and helping grid managers balance electrical loads. All of these things will enable a cleaner environment.
10. Electric Vehicle Sales Competition Reduces The Need To Use Taxpayer Money.
Presently, electric vehicles receive federal tax credits and sometimes state rebates. However, the cost of these incentives is dwarfed by the cost of subsidies and other government policies that enable gasoline and are poised to support hydrogen. Given the better economics of electric vehicles, and given their natural compatibility with the commonplace electric grid (as well as compatibility with home renewable energy), there is no need for additional incentives. To the contrary, given the many tens of billions of dollars that have propped up gasoline sales (http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/the-real-deal-on-u.s.-subsidies-fossils-72b-renewable-energys-12b), and that have now been proposed to support hydrogen, the following proposal seems to make the most sense.
Stop all policies, incentives, credits, rebates, supports, absorbed costs, etc: make everything cost what it really costs. If this were to take place, three things would happen: first, some things would cost the consumer a bit more (ex: electricity), and some things would cost the consumer a lot more (ex: gasoline). Second, the amount of money that consumers pay in taxes to the federal government (money that is then disbursed in subsidies, etc.) would dramatically decline. Third, we would find that the environmentally smart things to do -- conserve energy, use renewable energy, reduce the consumption of fossil fuels -- would all suddenly be the single most cost-effective thing to do and this will result in a cleaner environment which will consequently save money down the road that would otherwise have to be spent dealing with global warming. In short, the smartest thing to do is also the cheapest, safest, and most environmentally-protective thing to do as well. However, here is the likely fly in the ointment: the smart thing to do will require less politics, and therefore it may be difficult for politicians themselves to accomplish as they will have less power and less opportunity to help their friends who paid to get them elected. Therefore, the most helpful thing you can do is pay attention to the politicians who seek your vote, and elect only those who understand and will implement this solution, and not simply perpetuate the existing system.