OK, here's what you DON'T do. "straight substitution". Going "oh hey I don't like change so I'll just use all technology exactly as I'm accustomed to, except change this one thing and expect all that to work like magic".
In fact, we see anti-solar people take that attitude on purpose, to show how the new tech can't possibly work.
So you wouldn't just bolt-up solar to "old tech" electric resistance toaster heating. 20 years ago someone said to me "using solar to run a resistance heater isn't even stupid". Of course solar is much more efficient and cheap today, so maybe... but yeah lol... no.
NOT energy storage
One problem is that the solar doesn't run 24x7. To "time-shift" energy to when you need it, you need a storage method.
The prevalent storage method in use today is to sell your power to the electric company when the solar is running, then buy power back for your evening needs. Of course, that depends on the grid being up, doesn't it?
Here's the thing. At this point, solar is just a "bolt-on".
In fact, really, "selling power to the PoCo from your solar" is really a separate transaction from "buying power from the PoCo for household use". (except they may punish you on rates if you generate more power than you use, since rates like "net metering" are more of a courtesy).
So you don't really need to optimize anything else. If you have inefficient appliances, you don't need to care.
So you can separate it more. For instance, those panels would work much better in the Mojave Desert due to more solar hours... and electricity is worth more there. So yeah. You could actually stick the panels there, sell the power to PG&E, and use the dollars to buy power from Mass Electric.
Energy storage (grid-down capability)
The other storage option is, y'know, actual storage. The advantage here is it can stay up even with the grid down. Since most people don't have the facilities for pumped storage, "batteries" are usually it. That costs about $200 per kilowatt hour, using used Tesla Model S batteries, and that will usually end up costing more than the solar panels.
When trying to make a house work on batteries, i.e. being grid-down-impervious, the #1 goal is to reduce energy usage. It's much cheaper to invest in efficient appliances than to invest in additional battery and solar needed to sustain inefficient ones.
Now we get out the sharp pencil and start crunching on efficiency tech.
Empowering tech: Heat pump
Where electric really excels for heating is the use of heat pumps. They take 1 unit of energy to pump 4-5 units. So they're just stupidly efficient.
You can see where that's a nice multiplier with solar heat.
Now, they do have a problem running in the very cold. Older ones just shut off, but newer ones at least can "do a defrost cycle" and keep running at all temps (at much reduced efficiency). You can end up in "coffin corner" as the aviation people call it: as air temperature drops, you need more heat, but you have less available due to lowering efficiency interchanging with -20F air.
So don't. Interchange with deep ground water that is 50-60F. This "ground sourced" heat pump is quite efficient and stays that way in the bitterest cold, because it doesn't feel the cold.
Empowering tech: Passive solar
This, unfortunately, requires a house built from the ground up for that. However a great deal of HVAC load can be removed altogether by designing the house to catch full effect from the winter sun, and have a great deal of thermal "energy storage" built into its bones. So now the bulk of your heating comes from solar gain, and you only need the heat pump for small adjustments.
There are many more, but that's just a few.