>Turning off production is only necessary if you cannot store more of it.
Storing is not cheap and batteries are also diry. not green.
My idea is that we need to work on all in parallel, solar, wind, research better and cleaner batteries, nuclear, fusion, invest in the grid and try to connect over larger distances. There will not be 1 solution that fits every place in the world.
True, however energy produced thanks to renewables already costs way less than its nuclear counterpart (and the gap is growing), offering a way to recoup investments (grid, storage...). Bonus: no risk of major accident, no fuel (uranium), no nuclear waster...
https://www.lazard.com/perspective/lcoe2020
Batteries aren't the sole way to store energy. Dams (potential energy), for example, are another one (already exploited and quite powerful and flexible).
There are many other ways: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_storage#Methods
"work on all in parallel" <=> (often massive) investments aiming at designing something isn't recouped as efficiently as possible (less units built).
"work on a single one" <=> bumping the probability of failure (all eggs in the same basket)
There is a middle ground to find!
Storing is not cheap and batteries are also diry. not green. My idea is that we need to work on all in parallel, solar, wind, research better and cleaner batteries, nuclear, fusion, invest in the grid and try to connect over larger distances. There will not be 1 solution that fits every place in the world.