Where do the massive upgrades to the distribution system required for this kind of setup come from?

We simultaneously hate utilities and want them to redesign and pay for a distribution system that was not intended for bidirectional load flow.

Our municipal distribution systems are barely adequate. Net metering produces essentially no revenue but imposes a huge load on that infra.

My understanding is there is less of a need for massive grid upgrades in this model due to the use of storage. Rather than having to be able to distribute peak loads from solar, requiring a larger connection, you can smooth out the supply and distribute an even amount throughout the day, using a smaller connection.

The section "1.1.3 Bringing large savings on grid expansions" [1] has a good explanation.

1. https://ember-energy.org/latest-insights/solar-electricity-e...

This is exactly wrong because transmission and distribution are different things. You can think of distribution as the 'last mile' infrastructure. It's not expensive in the way transmission is - individual services are relatively cheap. The reason it's expensive is that there are enormous amounts of it and municipal distribution systems can be wildly complex. Power flows in these systems are unidirectional. When you throw that assumption on its head you drastically change how these systems must be designed.

A major change like that would be astronomically expensive. The only reason it kinda works now is that very few people do grid connected generation after the meter. Once that becomes more widespread it's time for a huge investment, on the order of what the transmission system needs, but it all has to be paid for by local utilities, very few of which can get the capital together to do major projects like that.