[jakub_h]

> When clouds roll in, people are not OK with their TVs turning off. So you'd always need the traditional grid in place, even if it's for a few days a year.

Sounds like a great argument for municipal generation and storage. If nothing else, it's both cheaper than "everyone on his own" and could lesser the strain for long-distance infrastructure (which could still be nice for geographic smoothing).

> So, yes, a huge amount of solar can figuratively blow up the electrical grid.

Demand-controlled EVs could take a lot of the load. In fact, it's probably one of the sanest applications of massive solar installations (beyond the potential of future power-to-gas tech).

[astrodust]

There's a lot of ways to store energy if you're basically getting it for free, and these are generally more efficient at scale. It would be great if a utility could help buffer this for you.

[jakub_h]

Yes, that's another reason why a municipal grid would be useful: city-wide storage could work better than each house having a small battery (but the roofs are still useful for panels, of course). But it may not need to be a utility in the traditional sense (unless the US meaning of that word is different from what I understand it to be). Just some local company with a contract. Or a few of them.

[astrodust]

Here the power company was split up into a generation unit and a distribution unit. What you're talking about is having a third type, a storage unit, to help manage demand.

If you can pull power off the grid very cheaply, even get paid to "dispose" of it, then later return it at a profit, you could arbitrage solar capacity.