As I said in my opening remarks, Canada is blessed with hydroelectric resources. In four of our main provinces, we get more than 90% of our energy from hydro. Those provinces have clean grids, and that brings Canada's average emissions, when it comes to electricity, to a pretty competitive level—not to a deep decarbonization level but a pretty good level. We have outlying provinces that aren't as blessed with hydro resources. Those would be our prairie provinces like Alberta and Saskatchewan, and also Ontario. You wouldn't think so, because we have Niagara Falls, but we're a large economy and we have huge demand.
Ontario managed to achieve what is the gold standard of deep decarbonization, a grid of less than 50 grams of CO2 per kilowatt-hour. It did that with nuclear energy. Right now in this room, 61% of our power is coming from nuclear. We have other options, of course, as I mentioned in my opening remarks, wind, solar, and batteries. There are many modelling studies claiming that we'll be able to deliver a reliable decarbonized grid with these technologies.
I have to say that Germany, one of the richest and wealthiest countries, a real industrial hub, is nowhere close to leveraging these technologies after almost half a trillion euros spent, so Canada really needs to take a pause. We need to assess, in a technologically neutral manner, what is working and what has worked for Canada. We simply don't have enough rivers to dam. We need to double our electric grid, apparently, in order to achieve our net-zero goals. That's going to require the addition of something like 113 Site C dams or the equivalent of 96 large CANDU reactors.
We need to get building quickly. We need to do what works. We have a proven track record, and nuclear is that technology. There are other options, and other things that will complement that, but we're moving from a hydro phase toward a nuclear phase, if we are serious about achieving net zero.