Oncor solicited a study that showed that a mass install of Tesla Powerwall devices would be an economic solution to this problem [1], at which point all the generators lost their minds and lobbied the PUCT to prevent Oncor from destroying their market [2] (because of their position as a Transmission & Distribution Service Provider in the market, it would require a change in law for Oncor to be able to implement the project).
[0] Work for a multinational in their energy & utilities consulting practice; above comment is my own.
It's interesting to see the stark contrast between the naysayers that don't have information to back their claims (such as comments sibling to yours), and the people who have looked at current tech and made realistic assessments like Oncor and Brattle.
A lot of people are willing to make confident, but very wrong, statements based on out of date information. It serves to protect entrenched interests and stop competition, but I have a feeling that disruption is far closer than anybody is publicly saying.
Thanks. But it's not realistic and smart because of that, it's realistic and smart because it examines the facts at hand and makes plans instead of handwaving. This is an important distinction.
[0] Work for a multinational in their energy & utilities consulting practice; above comment is my own.
[1] http://www.brattle.com/system/news/pdfs/000/000/749/original...
[2] https://www.texastribune.org/2014/12/15/state-law-could-shor...