"

 Electrolysis of water 

As the article stands now, there is only a single, two sentence line about electrolysis, and it is all the way down in the Laboratory Sytheses section.

""The electrolysis of water is a simple but expensive method of producing hydrogen. Typically the cathode electrode is made from platinum.""

1st of all, this method is not more expensive than digging up fossil fuels, refining them, and then extracting the hydrogen.  Currently, the amount of hydroxy gas (H H O) produced from water is very much relative to the set up of the system, the frequency used etc.  Various voltages, amperages and frequencies have been used to various degrees of effectiveness.  The cost is, of course, relative to the source of electricity used.  There are many people who claim to be getting extremely high (even over unity) returns by using the resonant frequency of water.  Regardless of whether these claims are true, this method should be given more than a cursory footnote, as it IS very simple.  

2nd, produced on a mass scale (an ocean based plant using salt water and solar power for example) this method could be very reasonable, low maintenance, and environmentally friendly.  Remember no greenhouse gasses are produced by electrolysis.  Oh, and the cathode doesn't have to be platinum... it can be made from stainless steel or a number of other cheaper metals.

I propose mentioning this method and its long and successful history in the opening blurb, and giving Elecrolysis its own section.  The article now makes it seem like hydrocracking is the only viable solution... and there are numerous problems with that method; not the least of which being the scarcity and growing expense of hydrocarbon fuels and the pollution associated with using them.  The current article paints electrolysis as economically unfeasible and basically dismisses it off hand."