but the fact is that we do not have any technology that scales up to the amount of storage needed to balance a solar dominated grid.
Nor a wind dominated on either.
turning excess electrical energy into somethign that is storable, like hydrogen and synfuel,introduces a lot of losses into the system. If you want fuel for a vehicle, then fine. this is how it would have to be done for a low impact switchover from fossil fuels in transport, but turning that back into electricity for lamps and other uses introduce yet another level of massive losses. in the end you end up with a system that is productive only 20% of the time, and that stores the excess at a system level efficiency of less than 10%. in other words. you are just wasting energy for almost no gain.
I havent even mentioned just how incredibly large the land areas that have to be set aside for generating power has to be under this method.
compare this to the nuclear option. where you can make plenty of electricy and/or high grade process heat in a single pretty small construct. electricity to cleanly power our cities and futuristic EV's and what have you's. use the excess heat to make synfuel, desalinate water etc. (provided we go the route of Gen IV tec like MSR's who run at high temps)
We could ease the transition pain by making synthetic fuels compatible with our existing vehicle fleets. either by dedicated high temp reactors (this is more energy efficient than converting to electricity first, since it skips a step)
We could if we went this way become entirely independent of fossil fuels and still enjoy the benefits of a high energy society.
So remind me again. why should we waste time on solar? or wind for that matter? expensive storage schemes?