There are many facets of “viability”: technical, economic, political. There is obviously some reason why new gas plants are being built instead of renewables with storage.

Yes, and I'm still interested in better understanding that reason. My previous response just noted that the explanation you gave seemed overly simplistic to me in that it did not address that renewable energy can be stored, making it less volatile.

I live near one of the world’s largest grid scale battery facilities. It was in the news last year for catching fire and filling the air with lithium. [0] So I’m aware of the technology’s existence. But I also know that it’s still a very young technology, with battery chemistry constantly improving. There are also inherent losses going to and from AC power, which is what the grid operates on and which most plants produce.

[0] https://www.readymontereycounty.org/emergency/2025-moss-land...

I think you overestimate the currently available storage technologies. Batteries are very limited in capacity and super expensive in large scale. Hydrogen or synthetic methane might work, but those are gases, if you were opposed to them.

> My question is about whether renewables with storage technologies are a viable replacement for the gas power plants.

I'm guessing probably not. If it was truly the no-brainer "cheap AND fast AND better" option everyone thinks it is, data centers would be rolling out renewables right now. They're not so dumb that they'd pass up on a superior, cheaper solution just because.