Look to the source, Matt, for where the money is going:

"One consortium will conduct R&D to achieve large-scale, affordable electrolyzers, which use electricity to split water into hydrogen and oxygen, and can be powered by various energy sources, including natural gas, nuclear, and renewables. This R&D will complement and help support large industry deployment by enabling more durable, efficient, and low-cost electrolyzers.

The other consortium will conduct R&D to accelerate development of fuel cells for heavy-duty vehicle applications, including long-haul trucks. This initiative will set a five-year goal to prove the ability to have a fully competitive heavy-duty fuel cell truck that can meet all of the durability, cost, and performance requirements of the trucking industry."

Consortium #1: Burning natural gas, to split water, to make hydrogen has to be the least-efficient, most-climate-damaging way to make hydrogen of all, even worse than steam-reforming methane. And it's no mistake natural gas is #1 on the list.

Consortium #2:  Not a word about whether heavy-vehicle applications will be powered by green or brown hydrogen. If by hydrogen, again, it would be far more efficient and cleaner to power trucks with natural gas fuel cells.

That oil majors are able to get funding for exploring even less-efficient, dirtier ways to use fossil fuel borders on criminal.