That and nobody has ever suggested that we rely solely on solar for energy needs. Wind, for example, is cheaper than solar (though solar is catching up.)
Could you be more specific? Because battery energy storage barely works for houses and you can't build pump storage everywhere. Then there are few prototypes like Power-To-Gas which has promising prospect and rest is in level of sci-fi
These are old talking points. Solar plants with gigawatts of storage are being built right now, today. Costs for such large scale storage are dropping quickly and are estimated to cost half of what they do today in 2030. Nuclear proponents need to update their material with the times. They keep insisting that nuclear is "The Only Way" meanwhile, in reality, we're building renewables backed by storage at higher rates than ever before. Solar plus storage is cheaper and faster to build TODAY than nuclear has ever been.
Power to gas, as you mention, would be sufficient. There are also some interesting battery chemistries in the pipeline, like iron-air batteries. How about we keep building renewables at a rapid pace until we actually have enough to need storage? Until then we have time to improve storage technology and build some electrolyzers (we'll need lots of Hydrogen anyway for industrial purposes).
What's the risk? It's not like we run out of wind and sunshine anytime soon. Please don't answer that sometimes neither the sun shines nor the wind blows, because we already know that we'll need storage for a carbon free system.
