For a small sized base of 1000 accumulators you get 60MW of drain, which in my experience at least doubles or triples a base's power usage
You won't need that many to cover energy spikes (big alien attacks)
Let me explain my idea a little bit:
Imagine we have no accumulators. Are solar panels still viable? Of course they are! They give energy for free, and that's the gift you cannot decline.
You can do steam(night) + solar(day). You are saving 70% fuel/boiler pollution already! Worth it? Yes.
Can you spend even less (almost up to full solar)? Yes! But your base will be idle 30% of the time. That's easily solvable by building more production (you have the space because you have freed a lot of it by removing accumulators)
That's not acceptable for defences, so we need better energy manipulation than we have now, so you can shutdown some production while leaving defences and something else, automated of course (daylight sensor?). You can use night times to back up conveyor lines, trains are working, essential production is working, steel furnaces are working if you wish to use them.
And you need accumulators to survive big attacks. You need more over time. That even makes laser turrets less of a no-brainer! (One of issues that is discussed in a nearby topic). So, you want easy-to-use laser turrets, but they need accumulators for large attacks, but accumulators are discarging, so you are paying for them with coal/fuel. If you build too much accumulators - you are losing resources, too few - large attacks can cause problems. This way, laser turrets have indirect maintenance and no longer fully obsoletes ammo turrets. They are better for places that are constantly attacked (ammo costs a lot)
So, going green is a logistical challenge (the whole game is about this). In return you have very little coal/fuel consumption. Efficiency modules also helping to achieve this. And this is entirely optional, you can go "easy way" (coal+solar) and still get a lot of net gain.