If solar worked even close,it would already be on every house. It is a tax credit that runs some light bulbs is about it. Real horsepower still comes off the pole.
There was a self sufficient house experiment in the North East somewhere that got government grants to completely live off the grid and run everything, not just survival type appliances. He took $500k of our tax money and did it, but he had every square inch of roof covered and then went to the yard with more panels. I don't know if it was more than an acre, but it sure looked close. The upkeep on the batteries and converters was enormous. He did however create enough juice to turn the meter backwards much of the night which made him technically "off the grid". IN the real world, however, there was always the rainy overcast snowy days that made him sweat for a few sunny days. All for the low low price of $500K.
http://www.solarelectricalsystems.com/documents/kyocera-kd135gx-lp.pdf
The above panel (a quick Google search) has an area of about 1 meter squared (10.89 square feet) and produces 95W with 800W/m^2 of sunlight. So with 20 8 x 10 panels worth of area (1600 square feet) that would produce just under 14kW with typical direct sun light. To convert that to AC using a 96% efficient inverter the inverter would output about 13.4kW. And yes their are other losses, but you'd have to lose another 10% to get to 12kW AC. You don't need batteries if you don't go off grid.
A typical house can nearly zero out its electricity usage for about $40k of solar equipment. But that's only because of all the subsidies and tax giveaways. Typically those subsidies and tax giveaways amount to about 30% of the cost of the project...
Without those subsidies and tax giveaways the economics of it is very debatable.
“And yes their are” should be “And yes there are”...