5k and 10k psi are somewhat standard for hydrogen refueling stations, at least as far as such things go.
Hydrogen has a ton of practical usability issues - but fundamentally, they're all range-extended EVs, similar to the Chevy Volt. So some problems they solve will help EVs, and some problems EVs solve will help Hydrogen vehicles.
Food for thought: a hypothetical Enertia 10.0 would weigh about 380 lbs, same as this prototype Burgman. It would have similar range, better performance (potentially much better), and can be refilled at home. The Enertia 10.0 would lose a percent or two of "fuel" every week, compared to 100% loss within a week for fuel cell vehicles. The FC vehicle can be recharged very quickly where stations exist, where even with a max-output J1772 connector the Enertia 10.0 would take an hour or two to charge. Home refueling (through electrolysis) is prohibitively expensive, both to install and per delivered unit energy to the bike.
Both vehicles would need to have the major expensive component replaced every 100k miles or so. In Brammo's case, the 10 kwh battery pack. In the FC vehicle's case, both the intermediate battery pack and the fuel cell would need to be replaced.
Hydrogen backers are pushing hard for 2015 to see a marketable hydrogen vehicle. The infrastructure will be available only in very limited areas at that point. They will be facing the first of the second generation of electric vehicles from manufacturers, and hopefully J1772 installations will be more widespread than they are today. I don't see 2015 being the year of the hydrogen vehicle, but maybe by 2030 they'll have the kinks worked out.
