I’m not sure if it’s a journalist’s speculation, government speculation of something with an actual plan, however the article certainly raised some debate in the comments.
Personally I don’t know why you would opt for solar without some level of batteries. It’s like having a phone solar charger that’s only a solar rather than a power brick with solar. Sure *in theory* it would work fine however without a battery to smooth your power a panel’s output is so variable during a day, with clouds, branches etc let alone movement for portable panels.
Also, without batteries a home solar setup still leaves you absolutely at the mercy of the grid operators and whatever charges they see fit to apply to you, to cover the fact that you use less of their power. The only viable reason for individuals not to have solar+batteries is cost.
Though I do wonder what safety/regulatory hurdles having a massive battery in the home may introduce? While the Tesla batteries et al imply that having a home battery setup would be easy and safe, I have to wonder if the government won’t soon introduce new safety hurdles/periodic costly testing for home batteries, to “ensure their continued safe operation”. Nevertheless it’s probably prudent for any home solar setup to also get batteries, lest our guv’ment soon decide to push for a ‘Murican style law against being disconnected from the grid.