I don't think we have the tech to deal with it optimally. But we could deal with it with the tech we have now if we wanted. The question is deploying it. We could even do it at a reasonable price though again with R&D we could make the price much better.

CSP can produce electricity at around 12 cents per kWH. With $40/per kWh for thermal storage and only 1% loss per day with thermal storage that could be pretty reliable.

Wind can produce electricity for 6 cents per kWh, but storage of electricity is cheaper than heat.

There are many other means that can supply small amounts without breakthrough, and quite big amounts with modest breakthroughs.  But overall todays technology can supply reliable electricity, at a multiple of current electricity prices. Efficiency improvements at low costs with existing technology can then produce more GDP per unit of electricity - thus keeping the overall cost of electricity within the economy (as opposed to per kWh) the same. And CSP and wind can supply many times current world consumption.

The same thing applies to solar and ground source heat pumps for low temperature heat, except that the price difference between them and conventional sources is much lower, and in many cases favorable to the solar and ground source heat pumps.  We will need to replace most liquid fuel with electricity. Depending on whether mass production alone could bring batter costs down we might do that at essentially a cost paid for by fuel savings, or we might have a real additional expense that is worthwhile compared to the environmental damage averted.

There is the usual list of where breakthroughs would be worthwhile - lower battery cost per cycle is one. Lowering solar thermal storage cost to $10  or $15 per kWh equivalent is another. Most experts think this pretty simple either immediately or int he very short run.) What would be very nice indeed would be flying energy generators or really cheap solar cells. There are a lots of storage methods that are cheap in capital expenditure but expensive in electricity losses that would become quite economical if we had extremely cheap electricity. For example, compressed air without using natural gas to reheat it can give back 40% of the electricity input.  That is impractical with any current electricity source, but quite practical if we could get generation costs low enough which I think flying energy generators might. If they really can provide 2 cents per kWh variable electricity, then a compressed air system would let them provide 6 cents per kWh fully dispatchabe system  - suitable for base, load following and peak. But as neat as this specuation is we have some good second best choices now. That means we could start now with the parts that are most mature and inexpensive, knowing that we can probably make breakthroughs happen, but also knowing that if the breakthroughs don't happen we have acceptable alternative we can deploy.