It does something of a disservice to the subject in not identifying what might be termed "continuing misleading views and misconceptions" that need identification. No one need fear here that they are being called to account on ideas in their heads that may be wrong.

1. I noticed right away that the mass density of air was taken as somewhat trivial in comparison with that of water at the beginning of it when dealing with wind energy but it wasn't until later on and as an afterthought when dealing with aviation that it was admitted it really is much greater than ordinarily assumed.
2. He talks about how Denver would have had little wind energy production from its light winds during some months but never explains how Denver's weather could have changed during those times nor the weather of neighboring states by movement of air masses that extend over large regions.
3. There is, of course, an unforgivable absence of the use of energy weighted wind resource averaging in favor of what has always been recorded by the weather people - linear wind velocity averages. Everyone who knows me knows my urgent entreaties to even those in wind energy who should know better to sharpen their math enough to realize the importance of this insight that takes the wind beyond, for example, the comfort wind-chill indexes.
4. The idea that aircraft can benefit from propulsion that provides greater mass flow rather than velocity change and hence is physically more efficient, i.e. the use of longer propellers, is provided but lost in the detail of other points being made. The extra large rotors of the Osprey tilt-rotor military aircraft and the well-known extra range of it made available thereby is a concept foreign to most everyone.
5. He mentions air viscosity in critical terms but without the necessary elaboration. It is true that the viscosity of air is often taken for granted and to this day wind energy turbine designers have been guilty of not giving this factor its due in describing their products. It is the "kinematic" or specific viscosity of air that is greater than that of water by a large factor - its viscosity as a measured parameter divided by its mass density. Otherwise it is, of course, much less than that of water. This is why, for example, harnessing the power of flowing water with underwater "wind-style" turbines, both the horizontals and verticals, has been found to be so challenging.