Green H2 is inherently at a price disadvantage compared to green electricity.
Intermittent renewables are the cheapest. If you can consume electricity directly while it is produce, that is at cheapest rates. Batteries is one intermediate to get good power charge/discharge rates to absorb, even cheaper, surplus electricity that supports more renewables. H2 electrolysis is a way to absorb renewable production that would exceed 24 hour demand on some days, and allows for more renewables and batteries to keep the energy/batteries productive/monetized all of the time.
Even trucks and ships have a cost advantage in distributing H2 energy compared to electric wires. Pipelines even more. H2 distribution doubles as storage as well.
H2 is a few years ahead on horizon. Lowest hanging fruit is gasoline/diesel replacement, but alternative to electric grid expansion is real, with offshore wind the biggest gainer of going pure H2 electrolysis, and land based renewables expanding their footprints to have alternate sales options than an electric monopoly.
Fuel cell (Hydrogen consumption) technology is ahead of low cost mass electrolysis deployments (hydrogen production). Batteries are doing very well in China, and still finding a way to be cheaper in the west too. Batteries help produce more electrolysis from renewables.
Article is saying that batteries are important too. It is a bit misleading in saying that cobalt is needed though. Cobalt and Nickel are needed for highest performance old tech batteries. For race cars. The price revolution in batteries is most pronounced for long lasting LiFePo chemistry batteries which avoids both metals, and used in value EVs, and grid storage. Batteries are not enough alone to exterminate oil/NG use.