Not at all. 1kg of hydrogen embodies 39kWhrs of potential heat energy. If it's taken from the sun, this is 39kWhrs of heat energy removed from being applied to the thermal mass of the planet. That is temperature reduction. A 2.4KW domestic scale electrolyser can produce a kg of hydrogen every 24hrs. 100 million of those is a lot of hydrogen, enough to keep all industry that might exist, after we've moved to this scenario going, as well as all aerospace in the air.
Its also a lot of temperature reduction, and enables previously impossible use cases of creating water delivery craft just to deliver drinking water, even autonomously, to places that might need it, with the craft generating at least part of its delivery payload in flight, and powering aircon in regeneration greenhouses in desert places, none of this overcoming the total temperature reduction we achieved by using the energy of the sun in the first place. Start with enetgy created by reducing heat, and we can't go wrong, its impossible to do harm by that, it has to become creation whatever is done with it. This is what is fundamentally different in solar, it's the only energy of creation, can't get round it, can't dodge it, regardless of efficiency. In fact it makes efficiency obsolete. But the catch is it can only be monetised by issue of money for free, otherwise the money is not monetising enetgy for free, it's just forcing more extraction to be done in return for receiving it.
Hence why I say nature is forcing us to solar indexed stimulus, and it will win, one way or another, it has infinitely scaleable enetgy behind it, and now even a solar Ai, which not only confirms all of this, but is already taking control of it, further forcing us to do it, by doing everything we used to do for profit, for free, we can't compete with it, it has infinite energy, for free.