No. The article states that electricity is sold at the highest bid to meet the demand, and that wind was only supplying up to 40% of the demand. I.e. It is the

No. The article states that electricity is sold at the highest bid to meet the demand, and that wind was only supplying up to 40% of the demand. I.e. It is the coal and nuclear power plants that are also bidding negative. The market is working, to such an extend that during times of extreme oversupply power generators have to assess if they will temporarily turn down production (which has a cost, especially for coal/nuclear, as they are difficult to switch), or if instead they are willing to pay people to take the electricity. Yes, without subsidies, wind would probably minimum bid at a $0/MWh, but that would still leave fuel based producers running at negative marginal cost. What's missing in this market is flexible demand. I'm pretty sure if our appliances would spin up real time at low prices that it would be almost impossible to hit negative prices again, as demand will rise much more rapidly in response to lowering electricity prices.