In the US the term NetZero in the context of building science means that the structure essentially produces as much electricity as it consumes.
I fully understand that...it's the same as countries claiming net green energy exports, but being 100% reliant on their neighbours for half the time...your house isn't going to be charging your car...and you'll be using someone elses generator to charge your car...MORE EXPENSIVELY at night...which is what I've been saying.
In any case utilities are learning to manage the duck curve by upgrading their equipment, exploring utility scale storage, and converting existing capacity into fast responding NatGas peaker-plants.
Yes, I was in a meeting with one of the managers of teh Australian Energy Market the other day...they used to have to look forward to the weatehr to prdict demand, and now they have to look at it to predict supply as well...and those peakers are increasingly running in diesel, at 30 something percent efficiency...great outcome.
re utility scale storage...you are drinking the unicorn milk.
The biggest battery, the one installed in South Australia, by Tesla can store 3-5 minutes of the state's daily energy usage...they stopped using it for capacity, and are now sniping the frequency control market with it...ehich will likely shorten it's life to less than 10 years.
It "loses" 20% of the energy that goes into it (100MWh in, 80MWh out), and even if it's filled with "free" renewables, it needs 30c/KWh wholesale prices to cover it's capital cost.
A Tesla Power wall filled with free electricity from my roof similarly costs about 30c/KWh.
The idea of "utility" scale batteries storing sufficient energy to carry Ca through the night is laughable.
To replace 1,000MW of thermal, you need 4,000MW of solar cells...plus storage, which then means that you need 5,000MW of solar cells.
That's precisely why the time of use tarrifs are going to reverse....and absolute oversupply during the day, and negative prices (South Australia is already there, with -$1,000/MWh quite often offered during the day), and high prices at night...South Australia has the highest energy prices in Australia.
In the US at least the power companies actually prefer renewable such as Solar/Wind because it'll cost them less $$ to upgrade equipment to manage these additional sources of power rather than having to build out more generation capacity.
The ones who get in first, to install capacity get the wins...they get to pump energy into the grid, the grid that's already held up by thousands of tonnes of spinning equipment providing frequency control and inertia.
It's cheap...but only for the first few...than, as I say, you have to install 4-5 times the capacity (nameplate rating) and somewhere to store it...than it's REALLY expensive...more expensive than building a thermal.
Australia went that way, until frequency control became a basket case
Now, if you want to put in a wind or solar farm, you have to install frequency control (either run at 80% capacity and bump up to 100% for frequency events, or put in batteries), and install synchronous condensers (power factor correction and inertia).
Unicorn milk purveyors purposely refuse to acknowledge the elephants in the room, and that future green is incredibly expensive.