"Liquid Organic Hydrogen Carrier". In other words, a hydrocarbon! Does not sound as wholesome without the word "organic".

I just checked and Toyota's Mirai fuel cell vehicle has a range of about 300 miles, or about 450 km, similar to the Model S.

So if Toyota's fuel cell car requires about 5 Kg of hydrogen to travel about 600 km, then this would require 220 kWh of energy to produce this hydrogen. If a Tesla model S with the 85 kWh pack requires about 100 kWh to charge the pack (assuming a 15%) loss, to travel about 450 km, then would it not make sense to use electrical energy in a BEV instead of using it to make hydrogen? Please comment, perhaps I am missing something.

@Davemart: You are inserting an oxygen atom between a carbon atom and hydrogen atom to make an alcohol. You do not need carbon, only oxygen. On another note, thallium is extremely toxic and trifluoroacetic acid is extremely corrosive, so this process is not likely scalable.

NaClO4 (sodium perchlorate) is actually far more stable than one would think. And when it does act as an oxidizer, it transfers its oxygen and the other product is sodium chloride (i.e. salt). It does not release toxic chlorine gas.

NP, if it makes you feel better, the Alberta Tarsands are loaded with vanadium. When they process the stuff, the petroleum coke fly ash has lots of it. Mining of the tarsands is not slowing down, so maybe we can use the vanadium in the meantime to transition to a greener future!