Re: Green PR BS
In the short to mid-term, having gas plants spin up to take up the slack is a sound approach; when wind ramps up again, we get less CO2 output. In the long term, we need better energy storage, a more diverse set of renewable inputs and tight control of the power mix feeding the grid (and in the States, a _connected_ grid!). People are working on that, thank goodness. What are you doing? Yes, that's a "What did you in The Great Energy Transition, Grandad?" question.
Looks to me like wind is a worthwhile part of the energy mix. If you don't like it, invent, sell, and/or invest in, something better! For example, having the occasional wind turbine catch fire, or fall over, seems a better set of risks than the certainties of dealing with waste, long term, from existing fission reactor designs. I would be interested, however, in the prospect of 'fail-safe-ish' thorium reactors with much wider availability of fuel, reducing geopolitical distortions. And maybe, just maybe, someone surprises us with a economical, working, long-life fusion reactor - one of these years.
What is not an option is continuing to burn fossil fuels at an increasing rate. Every time we can expand renewable generation, and have sufficient control over its contribution to the grid, we chip away at the CO2 burden. [And if anyone here has any problem with the need to do that, go away and do some proper, disinterested reading outside your confirmation bias comfort zone. A year or so should do it.]