We do need an alternative, but this isn't it.
"25,000 homes"? No, the man said 15,000. But that's humbug too. 50 MW is what the turbines produce in the maximum wind they dare use, which is about 25 to 30 mph. At lesser speeds, the wind power drops according to a cube of the speed law. In general, you can expect the average of the highly variable output of wind turbines to be 25% of the MW rating. That would be 1.25 MW, which is 1250 kW (kilowatts). So the humbuggery lies in the probable fact that on average, each of these 15 thousand "homes" consumes 12.5/15 = 0.833 kilowatts. Put it another way, it's 0.833 kWh per hour.
Your electric bill probably tells you the total kWh for which you're being charged. BUT, when you turn on an electric kettle, or a microwave oven or stovetop component, you are asking for quite a lot more than a kilowatt. When I had a small window air conditioner and my laser printer (foolishly) on the same 15 Amp circuit, and turned the printer on while the A/C was running, I blew the fuse. No harm done, but note that 15A x 110V = 1650 Watts, i.e. 1.65 kW. That's a good deal more than my average consumption rate. So the fact that wind turbine electricity is fed into the grid, and that gas turbines also supply the grid with power, means that so long as the dispatchers can call upon a spinning gas turbine to adjust its fuel intake, they can handle the unpredictable supply of wind. But you'll never get rid of carbon burning that way. If it were 50% wind turbines, the madhouses would be full of grid dispatchers.
