Totally agree, though I don’t know how wind performs in extended and deep subzero / heavy snow conditions. Hydropower is the traditional baseload for the Midwest, but it’s tough to square the destruction to natural beauty that entails in comparison with a remote nuclear set-up.
I grew up in Minnesota, but left before there was much wind farming in the SW part of the state. (I've been told, SW Minnesota is one of the best places for wind farming.) Wind farming does work well in SW Minnesota.
However, I also remember a news story about some used wind turbines relocated from California that had trouble due to inadequate heaters to keep the lubricant from getting too viscous.
What does the geothermal story look like? I expect it's expensive to first set up, but after that, maybe it's cost-effective and reliable? Asking because I genuinely don't know, but haven't seen it mentioned in this subthread.
Note that there are two common uses of "geothermal". One is for geothermal power generation, and but there's also an unfortunate use of the term in describing ground-loop heat pumps and similar technologies. Ground loop heat exchanges are a godsend for heat pump efficiency in the deep of the Minnesota winter, but it's very different from a source of heat that's practically exploitable for electricity generation.
From the context, I think your link is relevant to the GP's question.
However, if you search for "geothermal Minnesota", you'll get hits primarily related to ground-loop heat pumps.
Note that in the Minneapolis area, the ground will freeze down about 3 feet in winter, so you need to bury your ground loop deeper than that. The frost line is even deeper up in the Duluth area. (Also, you need to use an air compressor to purge the vast majority of water out of any in-ground sprinkler systems before the ground freezes.)
EDIT: It seems not too badly [1].
[1] https://empoweringmichigan.com/how-do-wind-turbines-work-in-...