this post was submitted on 29 Mar 2026
95 points (99.0% liked)
CanadaPolitics
3206 readers
86 users here now
Placeholder for any r/CanadaPolitics refugees
Rules
- Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.
Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
To electrify nearly everything, Canada would need 1000 twh/year extra solar. 0.25-0.5% of your your 400tw potential. Hydrogen is a practical way of covering energy transport, heating needs, and storage.
More profitable is huge solar/battery systems meant to create $2/kg Hydrogen for use or export from Canada's long summer days, 24/7 availability, and still provide energy needs of winter, and Quebec level cheap electricity.
I'm not sure if most of the electricity generated needs to be converted into hydrogen.
Indeed, I'm not sure if some of the solar power even needs to be converted into electricity: how many millions, or at least 100 000s, of homes could make use of wp:solar water heating. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I think they covert a greater percentage of solar power/surface area than PVCs and might be less harmful to the environment. Their use would be limited given our climate, but not so much as to make it an impractical supplement.
Most of the electricity generated could be used as is, or stored in batteries or with pump storage hydroelectricity.
Presumably electric vehicles could (continue to) use batteries and railways be electrified.
Hydrogen, or something else fluidic that could be produced by electricity, might power aircraft.
Electricity could be exported to the US, as well as products that require a lot of electricity for manufacture, such as aluminum, cement, refined metals, maybe even compressed and/or liquefied gases such as helium;
and yes, I suppose hydrogen could also be exported.
Although lower tech, it is more expensive than PV, and electricity is worth more than heat. A good solar strategy for winter needs is to have 2000L of hot water and/or smaller amount of dirt, heated during the fall for distribution in winter.
A hydrogen economy is about being able to use all intermittent electricity with 4c/kwh monetization floor. It is suited to Canada due to very long summer days, but in most places in the world, this is profitable unlimited energy free of geopolitical extortion. H2 is cheaper to transport than electricity on wires, but local production is always better as primary energy source.
Obviously, there's no need to nuke all other energy from orbit. It is very low emissions to use them as backup.
Oh, okay.
Some more reading for me to do, I suppose.
wp:Hydrogen economy, wp:Green hydrogen, wp:Solar cell, and wp:Crystalline silicon (which apparantly has a 13.1% efficiency), and wp:Solar-cell efficiency.
commercial solar cells, at reasonable cost range from 20%-25% efficient. I didn't comment on your original 10% efficient "land availability" because some empty space should exist.
I thought I referred to 0.1%, but yes, let's leave some empty space (i.e. maybe ≥ 99.9%).
Again my concerns were/are efficiency and toxicity.
Glass tubes, painted black (or using a relatively non-toxic paint to decrease the albedo to, say, < 0.1), filled with water might have a high efficiency; are easily made (possibly 19th century technology); and with a relatively low impact on the environment.
PVCs other than silicon-based seem to require rare earths and other substances that are either toxic and/or are worse for the environment in mining and refining. Again, this is not to say to not use any, but not to when cheaper and/or environmentally better (or less bad) alternatives exist for particular uses.
The only toxic solar panels (cadmium) are US First Solar (company name) panels. Chinese panels are non-toxic. There are no rare earths in PV solar panels. Rare earths are in electric motors.