The problem with wind is it doesn't blow when it is needed, and it blows too much when it is not needed. In the latter case the turbines are just stopped but the opreators have still costs to cover.
In the first case its more difficult.
There are power stations which produce a so called base load, that covers the minimum the grid needs. These stations cannot be regulated easy (more or less power), large coal and atomic mostly, they must run a constant level.
So they are joined by peak load stations, which cover the peaks in the grid, what is needed above the base load. That can be hydro power, or diesel, or hydrogen and batteries. Hydrogen could solve most of that easily in any scale, while batteries are only good for very short peaks in not so big scale.
Unfortunately the current politics is not interested in hydrogen, they invested (dream of) only in batteries, technically wrong idea.
And where is wind in that? Somewhere between, a technical disturbing in the grid. The cheaper base load had to go down, and the more expensive peak load systems up to balance this wind disturbances.
Or, very often, buy or sell to other countries where the opposite effect is happening, hopefully. Expensive and with huge losses.
So for example Germany got the deadly idea to switch of atomic base load. They run now all by unreliable peak load cover, and lots of that from foreign countries to very high costs, and kidding me, lots of that is made by ... atomic stations elswhere. Hurray.
And when the wind blows too much, nobody wants this power (instead of making now free hydrogen), and when all over Europe the wind stops and the base load was already at peak ... prepare for the disaster:
Somewhere go the lights out.
