I only see this route going if the power companies themselves are responsible enough to make the transition to renewable energy (I'm not sure they are, at least in any relatively quick timeframe). So if the case comes that fossil fuels become more and more expensive, then and only then will they really make an effort to transition to mostly renewable energy. And it'll happen at a slow and crippling pace for all us tree-huggers out there.
So storage still makes a lot of sense, because if I want to do anything about renewable energy, I unfortunately have to do it myself. Putting some sort of solar system on my house will cost ME money; either outright, leased, or through a home-improvement loan plan. Which is sad, but it is what it is (and kudos to what the government HAS done to bring down these costs). Since it's all on me to reduce my carbon footprint, that energy produced must be stored, and these home battery systems (Tesla or not, there's about 2 other choices though, it seems in my research with companies locally) are not all that expensive considering the cost and installation of a solar array, especially Tesla's pricier solar roof option. And that's giving you complete independence from the electric company.
I talked to a rep about a solar solution and he understood my concern for wanting to go "net zero" since it feels like locally, the power company is devaluing what you put back into the sub-system more and more. He explained that more and more people exploring their alternative energy solutions are interested in these battery/storage systems for the exact same reasons. With a minimum investment of about 30k or 40k for a whole-home solution, a lot of people don't trust that their power fed back into the grid won't be devalued over time (at least a rate higher than the natural decay of battery technology).