From your reported power usage, it sounds like you're probably single. If the rest of your figures are correct, we'd have roughly a refrigerator-sized stack of batteries per person. Inverters are 0% efficient at no load (they waste 20 watts idling) to 90% at full load, so figure around 75% average efficiency, so 16-18 batteries per person rather than 12. Batteries lose capacity as they age. You don't want to replace your batteries every two years, but rather continue using them as their capacity decreases over five years, so we better go with 21 of those batteries.
Incorrect, thrice. When I wasn't single and there were three people living in this house, my electricity bill didn't triple. It didn't even double. I'd have noticed a doubled power bill, and I never got one. But it was higher. Let's call it half again as much. That makes it 16-18 batteries total for a family of three. I gather you didn't look at that page. Inverter inefficiency is included, so no change there. Battery capacity does indeed change, but since that count of 16-18 is actually massively oversupplying my nighttime needs, they won't be cycled 50%, let alone the 75% that seriously degrades operational lifespans. Add a desulfating charge controller and some tender loving care and a battery bank that large can last 10 years. When they finally do degrade far enough that my five full days of storage is in jeopardy, I don't dispose of them. I recycle them. Yes it would take quite a lot of lead to provide storage for the whole world, but the lead exists. If I don't like all that toxic lead mining, I can go with nickel-iron batteries instead. That'll take three fridges worth of storage, rather than two, but I have plenty of space in the basement.
Very likely though all this talk about lead is irrelevant. Nobody is making a nice handy turnkey fridge-sized lead-acid home energy storage unit. Tesla Motors, on the other hand, is apparently quite serious about making a nice handy turnkey fridge-sized lithium-ion home energy storage unit. With lithium-ion, we're back down to a single fridge worth of space for a family of three, and might even add a day to the storage capacity. Tesla's massively-parallel cell design and accompanying very sophisticated charge controller is still too new to get a good estimate of operational lifespan, but it's unlikely to be worse that what is achievable with other chemistries.
If you go into flood simulator software that's been loaded with the actual topography of the US and start placing dams on actual rivers and let it calculate the flooding based on real topography, you end up with about 80% flooded.
I'd like to see that simulation. I suspect it takes a supercomputer to render accurately.
So you've more or less demonstrated that pumped storage is infeasible. Why even talk about it then? Batteries are feasible.
Still not impossible to be 100% solar. Just expensive.