You are so full of shit @corbe

Has this thread run it's course yet?

Big distributed power generation that isn't directly managed by a power company is a problem and can be unstable. Another problem is generation can change rapidly with clouds/storm moving in. Something has to take up the slack quickly or it fails.

Sure - But I'm talking grid connected. Primary power would come from local solar unless more power is needed and failover to grid.

However, with more and more solar there would come a tipping point where grid power would be hard to maintain - When the solar generated buy-back Exceeds the profitable margin to maintain grid networks.
It has problems.

But it is also kinda handy - grid failure is less troublesome if every house has a battery system to fall back on.
Probably  not enough for continual power without a jenny, but enough to keep the place running a day or two while the lines are getting fixed.

Not perfect, Not without it's problems. But it's worth a look.

I'm not against solar. I am a fan. Distributed solar makes sense to me, with buy-back deals with electric companies, the consumer level cost would be paid for in 10 years or so, and your average suburban or rural home could be nearly self-contained.

That's a big, robust, distributed system, with the lion's share of the energy already at the end-point... so less transmission and transmission loss. Hard to knock down. That's worth looking at.

But I am dead against big solar.

Big distributed power generation that isn't directly managed by a power company is a problem and can be unstable. Another problem is generation can change rapidly with clouds/storm moving in. Something has to take up the slack quickly or it fails.