Just because I actually do want to hear what you have to say about it, I pulled the subs from the video. I'm skipping the beginning, where they talk more about the interconnections, and leaving in the rest, which focuses on weather and preparedness. The italicized parts are their expert speaking - a Princeton professor named Jesse Jenkins. Obviously some of it references visuals that you'll have to watch the video to get.
This is where they're playing tricks and number games
Some wind turbines stopped working in the freezing cold.
But the biggest failure, in terms of its magnitude and its impact, was the natural gas system.
My numbers aren't 100% accurate because I'm working from memory, but the point still stands. While it's true that in terms of absolute gigawatts NG lost the most, NG also makes up the biggest part of the supply. At it's lowest it bottomed out at around 70% operational. Wind makes up a smaller but very significant percentage, something around 20-25%, at it's lowest it bottomed out at around 2% operational (98% of the wind turbines were
not working) If the wind would have "only" bottomed out at the same percentage as NG (70%) they would have had another 15% of their capacity available. That's a very significant amount.
Clearly, you can run an energy system in cold temperatures. There are wind turbines operating in Antarctica, and gas plants in Alaska and Alberta. So, this is not a technology-specific issue. It was more a failure to anticipate that this is something that could even occur in Texas at this length and severity, and to prepare for extreme cold temperatures.
The particular vulnerability to the extreme cold may be a uniquely Texas thing. But I think what it shows, is you need to check your blind spots. And that applies everywhere.
This is overall the biggest culprit, the lack of preparation for such cold weather. Something they're not telling you is that this can (partially) be blamed on the fact that the CapEx for the power grid was spent on renewables instead of winterization.