This is misleading due to being framed based on decades of fossil fuel propaganda.<p>We have plenty of grid storage right now. Like in Australia they have hydro, which can be ramped up or down to compensate for the variability of supply and demand. The water that isn't used for power right now, is stored and then used later.<p>This is a very powerful factor in quickly introducing renewables and should not be ignored. In australia the rain is counter cyclical with the solar which is very helpful too.<p>But ... we have a much bigger source of power, that like hydro, can be turned off when renewables are strong, stored and used later. It's natural gas.<p>We want to use less fossil fuels in general and natural gas specifically. We already have plants that burn it, and if we don't build renewables, they will be used to burn it. Build the renewables instead, don't burn the expensive gas, and keep it stored in case you do need it.<p>There's no real need for storage on a big scale until fossil usage hits zero in a wide area. Even when you get to 100% clean electricity, you can further expand heat pumps and put the gas used for heating into this 'grid storage' system.<p>There's all sorts of cool technologies in grid storage, but the basic point is: build more renewables, burn less fossil fuels. This isn't rocket science.<p>We need some kind of storage in the future when we stop burning fossil fuels, personally I'm bullish on green hydrogen that is, like natural gas, stored but not used for electricity generation unless absolutely necessary. It's just there as a cheap insurance, and will be used for fertilizer and making steel anyway. In the meantime, the rollout of EVs will mean that lithium batteries will be added to the grid, not because we have a storage problem, but because it's cheaper than burning gas or upgrading transmission lines and solar plus batteries will be the cheapest option for 'baseload' across most of the planet.