They won't "have to". But the dynamic pricing will make them "want to" turn of their non-essential appliances when they don't need them. Would it be a big prob

They won't "have to". But the dynamic pricing will make them "want to" turn of their non-essential appliances when they don't need them. Would it be a big problem for you if energy was essentially free 12 hours a day and 10 times more expansive than it is right now in the other 12 hours? This is the only thing that we will need to change - granular, dynamic pricing to reflect the new constraints. The rest will be solved by consumers adapting to that pricing. It might be by shifting the usage of non-essential devices (does it matter to you to have your laundry done at night?). It will likely include some batteries. But for me the best option to me seems to be synthetic fuel production. Make hydrocarbons when there's too much solar and wind, and burn them again when there's not enough. The roundtrip efficiency is low (I think about 10% currently), but the capacity of such "battery" is effectively infinite and the investment is very cheap compared to regular batteries. The whole world already is adapted to burning hydrocarbons. So we wouldn't need to change much - just produce hydrocarbons in place instead of drilling for them in dictatorships all over the world. BTW the implications on world politics are Earth-shattering. The difference in available renewable power per square meter in best vs worst countries is about 3 to 1 - maybe 4 to 1. Imagine if the least fortunate country on Earth had 25% of the oil that OPEC countries have.