You shout about misleading whilst misleading yourself Will, a little knowledge is dangerous in your hands. You say what you say as if by an expert to many tens of thousands of followers, it's actually pretty important you start getting things right.
The efficiencies of the hydrogen chain only matter when the energy is not from sunlight.
Sensible system solutions never suggest to use hydrogen generated from sources other than solar, so quoting the efficiencies in the hydrogen chain are almost pointless, it's a completely different outcome when done from solar.
Its really existentially important to get this drummed in;
All of energy lost in, or by, or from any chain of solar powered processes, regardless of efficiency can never be more than the worst case heating effect of the solar energy unused.
So the end result is that if you create a kg of hydrogen (about 33KWhrs of stored energy), regardless of efficiency, this is 33KWhrs of energy removed from the heating effect of the input sunlight.
There you have fuel, from sunlight, which cost nothing, and even had a negative planetary temperature cost, regardless of efficiency!
The sun delivered those KWhrs for free. You can scale up the facility and still more are free.
The facility isn't for free, granted, but the value of fuel yielded soon covers it, and it funds expansion and maintenance.
So any requirement for fuel can be met.
And look, it makes things fly 3x further, drive 3x further, sail 3x further, per kg, than fossil fuels ever did.
And look, the heat lost can still never be more than the worst case heating effect of the input sunlight that created it.
Compare that with nuclear!
Nuclear is extracted, solar is added.
Heat dissipated from Nuclear adds to heat of sunlight unused.
So it's a double whammy!
Nuclear is no brains, dude, you might as well irradiate your brain with it, maybe that would help drum in why source of energy is so important, existentially important.