> You know in places like Canada where the vast majority of our winters are overcast, same with the spring, fall is hit or miss.
You've clearly never actually bothered to look a solar resource map, have you?
Canada has some of the best solar resources for its latitude. Calgary, for instance, has a solar resource not much lower than Mohave. Compare to southern German or Switzerland and we're downright balmy.
> When windmills don't work because the winds are so high that they'd cause damage.
And again, you clearly don't have the slightest clue what you're on about.
Any power source, *any*, has downtime. We consider that in a figure known as the "capacity factor", or CF. Basically you take how much power actually comes out of the plant in a period of time, normally a year, and divide that by how much would have come out if it was running at perfect capacity 24/7. So that "too fast" gets lumped into the "too slow" and the "down for maintenance" and even the "tree fell on lines". All of that goes into the CF.
A typical reactor has a CF around 85 to 90%. A typical wind turbine has a CF around 30 to 35%. A reactor costs about $8 per watt peak, whereas a modern wind turbine is around $1.50/Wp. So even though you need three turbines to make the same amount of energy as that single reactor, those three turbines still cost you almost half as much. And that is precisely why no one is building reactors any more and turbines are sprouting up like weeds, yes, even here in Canada.
Don't worry, people who actually know what they are doing have the problem well in hand. As you can see, if you read the article.