Hydrogen has an efficiency problem. You need to convert other forms of energy to hydrogen at a loss. Then you need to store it and transport it, which is costly and may impose quite some energy cost for cooling or compression. Then you need to convert it back to electricity, also at a loss. If you start at electricity, the electrical grid and batteries would be much more efficient. If you start at oil or gas, you cou…
Many of the things you're saying aren't correct, see my other comment (sibling to yours) for references. Nuclear is not cheap compared to photovoltaics, wind and hydro. Since the former two are bursty, overcapacity in them leads to cheap excess energy at times, which needs to be stored. Which storage method is the best depends on multiple factors, particularly on the duration of storage, capacity required and frequen…
Not necessarily, at least not always. It needs to be used and this can be made possible by expanding the high voltage networks.
This would be especially effective in the east-west direction because then areas with sun could supply areas where it is dark. This reduces the need for storage while also making the system more robust.
If we add more north-south interconnects we can use some of the Scandinavian hydro plants as batteries (I agree that pumped storage can never be as extensive as one would like and is not as easily achieved as some people think) and North Africa for solar power.
What is most lacking is not new technology but political will to interconnect the electrical supply network so that energy can flow more easily from where it is produced to where it is needed.