Nothing on cost or conversion losses.  I suspect the price of convenience is going to be pretty high, much too high to make e.g. power-through-the-road a viable proposition.  Plugging in with a robot arm might be cheaper; it would certainly be more efficient.

With enough beluga caviar, world hunger is not a problem.

Exactly.  For the same reason that your own post is nonsense.

REs, mainly Solar and Wind are gaining ground at the rate of 15% to 25%/year and will soon require more and more storage.

Just because it's "required" doesn't mean it will exist, or even can exist.  Up to now, almost all the "storage" consisted of backing off the rate of fossil-fuel consumption in conventional power plants.  Now that peak generation is getting too high to be compatible with the must-run generators which provide essential grid services, there is a push to install a few hours of battery storage.  This will allow e.g. the noon-time PV peak to be time-shifted to the evening demand peak.

This has very hard limits.  Batteries which are affordable for a few hours of storage are prohibitive for the days and weeks that "renewables" (wind and solar) can go AWOL.

Many of the large batteries installed in current and future electrified vehicles will certainly become a very interesting source of energy storage if not the larger source of storage.

Two billion Tesla-class EVs can store barely 3 days of today's world-wide electric power consumption, probably more like 1 day's worth of a future, electric-dominant economy.  Harvey, you were schooled on this two weeks ago and reminded just two days ago.  If you cannot remember what happened 2 days ago, you need to go into Alzheimer's care.

You must/could start with the (40%) produced by the dirtiest CPPs.

That is not possible.  The coal power plants, along with large-reservoir hydro, have one of the few energy stockpiles required to fill in for unavailability of unreliable sources like solar and wind.  Without those energy stockpiles you have to go to blackouts for "demand-side management", and that is unacceptable.  This is why the "Energiewende" has completely failed to continue reductions in carbon emissions in Germany.

Secondly, no where near 100% of REs will have to be stored with water, H2, heat and/or batteries. Well managed grids could use a high percentage of the e-energy produced by REs directly on indirectly by shifting loads.

It is not possible to shift most loads.  Light, water and sewage treatment, sewage and stormwater lifting, most refrigeration and many industrial loads are impossible or prohibitively expensive to time-shift.  There are extreme limits on many of the rest, particularly heat.  The lower the density of the heat storage, the more costly it is to provide time-shifting.

In cold areas, the use of electricity for heating uses up to 50% of the consumption.

You cannot time-shift heating loads by much, especially when your heat is produced at low temperature and requires very large masses of storage material.  Overheating spaces in times of surplus does not make up for underheating at other times.  If you do this, people's health will suffer and some will die.

Most or all of that load can be shifted for many hours with heat retaining units.

Cycles of RE deficit/surplus extend from weeks to seasons.  Hours of shifting is useless for such unreliability, and that does not include the opposite phase of solar energy to heating load.

Future electrified vehicles (with much larger batteries) can and WILL be used to better manage supply and demand by shifting huge loads by many hours/days.

Harvey you nitwit, I have explained to you time and time again not just why they WILL NOT do that, but why they CANNOT do that.  Even if you had batteries with sufficient energy density, you would not carry more on the vehicle than it needs to do its job because carrying extra weight means more energy cost and more wear and tear on everything.

Despite this, you keep repeating your nonsense.  You are past the point at which this can be considered any kind of principled disagreement and are well into the troll zone.  "Big lie" techniques are the province of propaganda, not intellectual inquiry.

Affordable 24/7 REs with storage are coming regardless of E-P's opinions.

The materials alone for Li-ion batteries make them prohibitively expensive (in not just money, but energy) for "24/7" availability.  You can't make a battery cheaper than its raw materials.  You have been told this, but continue to claim the opposite.  Senility or barefaced lying?  Pick one.

I like E-P's politeness.

Politeness in the face of chronic trolling is a mistake.  It must be called out for what it is.