I agree with your basic premise, and I agree that there are areas we should look at using hydrogen, but I'm not sure I follow how it's being applied here. The hydrogen lifecycle would be

> power source > grid > hydrogen generation > truck > power

And the lifecycle in the article is

> power source > grid > truck > power

There are fewer energy conversions and it's hard to envision a system with fewer losses.

I'm not arguing against hydrogen. Just trying to understand why hydrogen would be considered superior to the article's method.