Yah, but it's not worth it even with incentive. It's cool for geek factor / having a major UPS and I may go for it for that reason. I think batteries-- distri

Yah, but it's not worth it even with incentive. It's cool for geek factor / having a major UPS and I may go for it for that reason. I think batteries-- distributed or as part of utility-scale deployments-- can help a bit but are not economical enough to use to solve this problem. It's going to take more of everything-- more solar overprovisioning, a lot more wind power, a fair bit of battery, more load shedding and demand pricing, more DC interconnect allowing power to be shipped large distances... and other stuff, like gas-to-power-to-gas and/or more nuclear baseload... to really let us move to an overwhelmingly renewable grid and have stable power. The issue, IMO, is that there's many different timescales/types of shortfall (very cloudy couple weeks in winter with no wind vs. daily duck curve)... and then there's the 1 in 100 and 1 in 1000 events, too (heat wave in summer + overcast rolls in at 2:00PM trapping heat in all night with less insolation and little wind). Chemical storage can't blunt the longer timescale shortfalls much.