CHARTS: Renewables in Bed With Natural Gas?

[Yo_Mama]

3. Well, what alternatives are possible?

The new NG plants are capable of spinning up and down very quickly, which is necessary to integrate highly variable renewable power sources into the grid.

You can do it with coal, but that is a much dirtier source of power. Nuclear plants are very poorly suited for that purpose. Hydro works well with highly variable power sources, but is limited in most areas.

If you look at Germany's experience, it's clear that fossil fuel plants will be very necessary for any realistic switch to substantial renewable (non-hydro) integration. And most have built out their standard hydro already.

DENA is struggling to come up with an economically viable German plan, but in the end, it's going to be either coal or NG that secures the grid supply. If you have to choose one, it's obvious why you choose NG over coal:
http://www.germanenergyblog.de/?p=10156

1. 2050: Total installed capacity of 240 GW with 170 GW renewable energy und 61 GW conventional, conventional plants provide 60% secure capacity

The study concludes that installed power capacity in Germany will amount to 240 GW in 2050 in total, with 170 GW provided by renewable power plants and 61 GW provided by conventional fossil-fueled power plants. This means that conventional capacity will only decrease by 37% compared with 2010, the reason being the need for secure capacity that is available at all times to ensure the security of supply. By 2050 efficient gas and coal-fired power plants will provide roughly 60% of secure supply capacity, whereas renewable power plants deliver 24%, dena estimates.

That's the results they are getting, and I don't think wind will work differently in the US based on the figures I have seen.