Really? Because the installation of an AC and heat pump here is expensive, and the heat pump is wildly inefficient in the winter. It's good for the temperate season in the spring and fall, a total of about 3 months per year; there's 4-5 solid months where a heat pump trying to heat my house is either ineffective or a huge energy hog pulling in tons of electricity per unit heating. My most efficient option has been using a space heater in whatever room I'm in, keeping the rest of the house at 62F; otherwise I spend $300+ per month on natural gas at 1,400,000 BTU for my 1300sqft house.
You fail to mention how much of that solar thermal energy would simply be wasted (shoulder seasons, summer overheating) because you have no use for it.
I did mention the use of more efficient (20%-30% vs 14%-19%) sterling heat engines for power generation, but figure you'd use most of the heat directly and get little benefit. Sure, with a dT of 600C, you can pull 38% or even as high as 42% on a sterling engine; but at 300C vs 10C, you're going to get 20%, maybe 25%.
Solar hot water systems tend to heat the 150L tank to a maximum 190F before shutting down, in the first 2-3 hours of the day; a thermostatic mixing valve provides 120F-130F off the tank. This allows for less hot water usage when the water is hot, and stable temperature as the water cools, as people take showers at night or in the morning. Residential evacuated tubes have boiled coolant at temperatures as high as 350C in unusual conditions, but are commonly accepted to run as hot as 300C, and typically don't exceed 285C. It's considerable that a system running less than 5L of water in a loop can heat 150L to almost 90C from tap cold (10C) in under 4 hours.
In practice, people have a single 1.2m^2 panel here, running their hot water at 160F in the winter with short days, not quite enough to use hydronic heat. 2-4 panels would do it, at $500 each, with proper insulation.