Why not? Australia is going to be exporting its solar power to Indonesia through a 2,800 mile direct current cable[1]. Thats approximately the width of the mainland united states. It won't be as efficient as generating it nearby but if its already commercially viable then it will only become more viable as solar becomes cheaper and more abundant.
COuntries will be looking to become energy independent, especially with the russia fiasco Europe is facing. At the very least they will try to make sure a majority of their energy isn't imported from one country.
Furthermore, there is strictly negative benefit to siting solar farms in deserts. It makes them run hot, thus less efficiently, and shortens their lifetime.
Siting solar on farmland increases farm yield and cuts water loss.
There's a proposal to use solar power in the desert to create pure Hydrogen gas via electrolysis, then fill autonomous blimps with that hydrogen to ship it to where energy is needed. You wouldn't want to fly over populated areas, but otherwise seems like a feasible idea to transport that solar power.
For that you'd need to use kilotons of water a day, which is usually hard in a desert.
It could work on an arid sea shore though, say, in North or South Africa. But there seem to be closer-by large consumers, and maybe producing freshwater would bring more value than producing hydrogen.
There are currently experiments in europe, to combine the too. Turns out alot of plants just need 2 hrs of sun and shut down after too save on evoparation.
Meaning 35 % of the sunlight needed and the rest as solar seems feasable.
As a thought experiment I once imagined electric trains running between populated areas and desert solar farms. Maybe they carry "green hydrogen" or perhaps just big batteries. After a few minutes and a good chuckle I moved on.
We have these 'electricity trains' already in a sense, but they are tractor trailers containing fuel oil. It's not as crazy as it sounds, but there are better solutions available.
Usually, the issue with this kind of thing is that
* this is a form of energy transmission that requires labor for the actual transport (the train crew) and so is automatically much more expensive and difficult than a dumb pipeline or power line which requires much less staffing
* it's hard to create energy storage that isn't also a bomb in the wrong conditions, and train tracks pass through populated areas. Fuel already has restrictions on where it can be routed because there have been fuel train explosions.
There were huge projects started to site solar farms in Africa, serving Europe.
They collapsed. The reason they collapsed was that there turns out to be less than zero value in siting solar farms in the desert, and solar panels have got so cheap that you do better posting more of them nearby instead of paying for the long cable.
The reason solar farms in the desert have negative value, vs. siting nearby, is that panels in the desert get hotter, so run less efficiently than over water or plant life, and last many fewer years. Furthermore, panels in farmland improve yield and water demand.
The question was if it's technically possible - and it is.
Projects like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desertec were based on the cost estimates at the time. Now solar panels are much cheaper and it's a good thing.
Offshore cables exist, and if you want to go the route of producing it into some intermediate form, a good majority of heavily populated areas are also ports.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australia-Asia_Power_Link.