For wind all those assumptions are wrong and thus won't work. You do not get a daily discharge where you can sell all the energy, you don't get a significant price change each day where you can utilize the price difference, and the capacity needed is a few orders of magnitude greater. Green hydrogen is one of the bigger bets people are hoping on, and right now it only cost several times more than nuclear. Except rather than using nuclear countries are burning fossil fuels because that is cheaper, and thus coal.
(And inter-season storage is too high a threshold: not many people are living in the artic/antarctic circles away from grids connecting them to places that still get some sun even in winter).
We need a PWh+ of storage, and we need it in the next decade, and we are nowhere near on schedule.
I wonder how much their power would cost if they were forced (for no reason at all) to store all that excess nuclear power and use it themselves rather than sell it to willing buyers. It would make nuclear look really uneconomic. Even more so than it already is.
So grid storage batteries, hydro and gas turbine (in order of fastest to slowest).
In that study you see there is overlap between coal and PV systems and batteries.