Absolutely correct and it is frustrating as hell trying to explain it to them. When you hear people say that we don't need new coal and nuclear plants --- that we should build wind or solar instead, you know that they don't have a clue as to what the hell they are talking about.
All that these alternatives can do is decrease our reliance on cycling plants and gas fired peakers, which isn't necessarily a bad thing, but it has a cost that rate payers will have to absorb. But those alternatives can't replace the base load which is foundation for the entire system. If the base load collapses, it does not matter what other shiny new toys you have out there, the grid is going down and no one will get any power.
That's just basic physics and you can't change that with a million congressional resolutions.